Food writers and the state of the oceans

Note: We ask republishing partners to include a pixel to help us measure story reach. The only information this tracker gathers is the publication domain and date, and view counts. For questions, email syndication@grist.org

HTML

PLAIN TEXT

<h1>Food writers and the state of the oceans</h1>
 
 "This story was originally published by <a href="https://grist.org" title="Grist">Grist</a>. Sign up for Grist's <a href="https://go.grist.org/signup/weekly/partner?utm_campaign=republish-content&utm_medium=syndication&utm_source=partner" title="Weekly newsletter">weekly newsletter here</a>."
 
 Yesterday, I <a href="../../article/2009-04-07-bittman-bite-ocean">criticized</a> New York Times food columnist Mark Bittman, a writer I admire, for calling for red snapper in a recipe, without noting that red snapper is severely overfished. Today, Bittman responded. Below find Mark’s response, with mine underneath.
<blockquote>
In short, this was a screw-up, and for that I apologize, and thankful for the wake-up call. I’m (obviously, in general, I hope) committed to sustainability, but these things will happen despite my intentions and efforts – it’s a complicated situation, and I’m human.
For those who are interested in more of my thinking on this subject:
I do believe that there is a way in which we can achieve decent management systems and establish sustainable fisheries, and that’s happening in isolated places throughout the world (as I noted in this <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/16/weekinreview/16bittman.html?scp=2&sq=bittman%20alaska%20fish&st=cse">piece</a> in the Times a few months ago), but obviously that day is not here. Right now we have to be careful about what fish we chose, and in this piece I was not. (I thank Mr. Philpott for the gentle and even encouraging way in which he pointed this out.)
Seafood Watch, however, is managed by scientists – not cooks. (I use it, I recommend it, I even like it, but it has very definite limits.) If you look at “best choices” column on <a href="http://www.montereybayaquarium.org/cr/SeafoodWatch/web/sfw_regional.aspx">their site</a> much of the fish is farm-raised, and much of the remainder is impossible to find in the real world. (Imagine: “Is that cod Pacific line caught?” What would the fishmonger respond? If he even knew the answer, would he be likely to say “No, it’s from the Atlantic, caught off Iceland by trawler?”)
In the recipe in question, the most viable alternative fish on that list – for my taste – is mackerel. Though I like mackerel, many people do not. Furthermore, it’s sometimes high in mercury, so there, perhaps, is a reason it’s not overfished, and a good reason not to recommend it. If I were to use that list as a guidepost to suggesting the best possible fish at every turn, there would be a rotation of something like mackerel, sardines, herring, anchovies, squid (I do not think either tuna or swordfish is sustainable at present, even though many people do) … and repeat.
But if enough people were to heed that advice, even those fish might soon be in short supply. I remember the disappearance of redfish, orange roughy, haddock and cod of course, and every other fish which was in “abundant” supply 20 years ago. There is not enough fish to go around without good management practices. (Striped bass was “lucky” enough to be contaminated by PCBs, so there was a near-complete ban fishing for a while, or it would have been endangered or even extinct by now.)
Equally important is the suggestion on the part of many that we choose farm-raised alternatives. But currently most of the aquaculture of fish and shrimp (not mollusks, however, in general) has nearly every disadvantage of industrially-raised chicken: it’s cruel, it fouls the environment, it gobbles up resources better used elsewhere, it does not have as good a nutritional profile as the wild stuff (not that there is wild chicken, but there are wild birds), and, relatively speaking, it tastes lousy. I’d rather eat tofu than tilapia, and I practice that. I’m also trying not to use farmed fish in any recipe I write.
None of this addresses my error; it merely reinforces that there is very little fish that is a) safe, b) worth eating, c) in currently adequate supply (which does not imply that that supply will be adequate a year from now).
It’s not simple. I write mainly about cooking. On the one hand I encourage people to cook at home, to use simple ingredients, to make conscious choices. On the other, I usually note – or try to – which choices are best from not only the flavor but the environmental perspective. Still, I no longer write “1 chicken, preferably free-range,” because I hope that most readers have gotten that message or can figure that out without me. Nor do I feel it’s up to me to tell people that there’s mercury in tuna. Some responsibility for sustainability and health – general “goodness” – must rest with the individual.
Again,this is not to excuse what happened in my column this week. I’m happy to be called out for that kind of sloppiness, I realize people take my words seriously, I’m glad they do, and I have to write as if that matters.
Look for a bigger piece in the Times addressing these issues in the not-too-distant future.
-Mark Bittman
</blockquote>
Dear Mark,
Thanks for the thoughtful response. I think we’re pretty much on the same wavelength here: In an age of collapsing fisheries, consciously cooking with fish is tricky and requires lots of thought. That’s precisely the message I’d like to see high-profile food writers get across to the public. I understand your concern about restricting seafood recipes to “mackerel, sardines, herring, anchovies, squid.” I think one answer is the message that Sam Sifton almost — <a href="../../article/2009-03-25why-the-foodie-press-needs-to">but not quite</a> — got across in his recent piece on fish tacos: buy what your nearby fishermen are bringing in on their boats, since small-scale fishing communities tend to <a href="../../article/Big-fish-little-fish">take much better care</a> of the oceans than industrial fleets. To extend that message to folks who lives far from coasts: get to know a quality-obsessed fish-monger who has direct relationships with coastal fishermen — and learn to see fresh seafood as an occasional treat. A filet of Atlantic cod bought from an artisanal fisherman has a much smaller footprint than one bought at a supermarket counter sourced from a fleet. Moreover, I think there’s plenty more good work to be done teaching U.S. consumers that so-called “trash fish” — anchovies, sardines, etc. — are not only delicious, but also nutritionally desirable as well: virtually free of mercury and high in omega-3 fatty acids. They reproduce rapidly and stay small, resisting overfishing. It’s a mystery to me why so many folks find these treats unappetizing. And it’s nothing short of a crime that we’re feeding so much of this grand culinary resource to factory-farmed livestock, pets, and the insipid factory-farmed salmon that we both despise. You’re right that we potentially risk depleting “trash fish” stocks — but overfishing wouldn’t likely be a factor if the fish meal/fish oil industry could be reined in.
With best wishes,
Tom

This article originally appeared in <a href="https://grist.org/">Grist</a> at <a href="https://grist.org/article/2009-food-writers-and-the-state-of-the-ocean/">https://grist.org/article/2009-food-writers-and-the-state-of-the-ocean/</a>.
 <link href="https://grist.org/article/2009-food-writers-and-the-state-of-the-ocean/" rel="canonical"/>
 Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Learn more at <a href="https://grist.org/">Grist.org</a>
 <script id="grist-syndication-pixel" async src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id=GTM-TG2PKBX" data-source="repub" data-canonical="https://grist.org/article/2009-food-writers-and-the-state-of-the-ocean/" data-title="Food writers and the state of the oceans" crossorigin="anonymous"/>

Our goal at Grist is to tell stories about climate solutions and a just future. That means we love when other outlets share our work. If you’re interested in republishing this story online or in print, we just have a few requirements:

Credit us.

For the byline, we prefer Author Name, Grist. At the top of our stories, if on the web, please include this text and link: “This story was originally published by Grist. Sign up for Grist’s weekly newsletter here.”

Check the image requirements.

Photos sourced from Getty Images in our pieces can be republished as long as you credit both Getty and Grist in the caption. Outside of this, you can’t republish photographs or illustrations without written permission from Grist and/or the photographer.

Don’t change anything significant.

You can change the headline and/or subheading, but articles must be republished in their entirety. It’s ok to change references to time (“yesterday” to “today”) or location (“Iowa City, IA” to “here”). If you really think changing the story with additional localized copy would help, please contact us directly and we can discuss the change. We must approve the change before it goes live.

Don’t sell our stories.

We also ask that you don’t sell ads specifically meant to be placed in our stories. If you already have ads populating on your site, that’s completely fine.

Keep in contact.

Let us know if you republish our content! As a nonprofit news site, tracking the impact of our reporting and analysis is crucial. We’d love to hear more about how the work was useful to you and your outlet. And on the off chance that we ask you to remove the story from your site or apply a correction, please do so.

Use best practices for sharing.

If you do share the story on your social media accounts, we’d love it if you tagged Grist’s accounts:

Twitter: @Grist
Facebook: @Grist.org
Instagram: @Grist

Get your weekly dose of good climate news to your inbox

Get your weekly dose of good climate news to your inbox

Republish this article | See instructions below: