This is really just an annotated bookmark.
On a recent podcast from the BBC Food Programme I heard an interesting report on the Seafood Summit http://www.seafoodchoices.org/seafoodsummit/presentations.php held in Paris earlier this year.
Nice conclusion from artist Jake Tilson, who covered the conference and did the interviews: sustainable seafood is about much more than interrogating waiters and ragging on your friends about their buying and eating habits It means influencing through lobbying efforts, and through understanding what happens in the world of seafood wholesalers.
After listening to this I wanted to move to Britain or Maine and help the coastal fisheries thrive. Except I like the weather here...
There's also an interesting little conversation about tinned fish - and sustainability and quality going hand in hand.
There's not a lot that's new here, but it's put together well, hitting the major points
It's the April 11 programme podcast:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qnx3
Showing posts with label seafood. Show all posts
Showing posts with label seafood. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Seafood Update
Greenpeace is particularly concerned with the oceans' health and they've just published an update of their report on seafood retailers.
http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/usa/press-center/reports4/carting-away-the-oceans.pdf
There are some things that may surprise you here: Target has passed Whole Foods in the rankings, WalMart is making progress, and Trader Joe's is in the basement due to a lack of transparency and blatant greenwashing. (I find I am going to TJ's less often these days, and being much more selective about what I buy. They still have some good deals - but it just ain't the same since going national under international ownership.)
Since we don't have a Target with fresh food in this area, it looks like the best bets are local stores or Safeway (groan). I think it's time to tell Raley's, our regional chain, they need to at least get out the red, yellow and green labels and stop selling red snapper and a few other things. Oliver's labels, and says they are cutting down on red items, but you couldn't prove it by me.
I note that in Massachusetts the best bet is Stop and Shop - and of course, local outlets where people will talk to you. But curiously Stop and Shop does not include the red/yellow/green in their ads - you have to go into the store.
Okay - my only question of Greenpeace is what in #*@#!! are "ocean quahogs"? The quahog, Venus mercenaria, is an intertidal species.
Okay - I checked on this. It's another genus (Artica islandica), hardshelled bivalve mollusc, that looks like a quahog, and lives on the North Atlantic sea floor. It is not a sea clam (Spisula solidissima). Apparently the issue is not its rarity, but that it must be taken by the most destructive kind of trawling.
Meanwhile, I am going to spend the rest of the day reciting those Genus species names of the East Coast clams. Aren't they great? And don't forget Mya arenaria the softshell clam (steamers).
http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/usa/press-center/reports4/carting-away-the-oceans.pdf
There are some things that may surprise you here: Target has passed Whole Foods in the rankings, WalMart is making progress, and Trader Joe's is in the basement due to a lack of transparency and blatant greenwashing. (I find I am going to TJ's less often these days, and being much more selective about what I buy. They still have some good deals - but it just ain't the same since going national under international ownership.)
Since we don't have a Target with fresh food in this area, it looks like the best bets are local stores or Safeway (groan). I think it's time to tell Raley's, our regional chain, they need to at least get out the red, yellow and green labels and stop selling red snapper and a few other things. Oliver's labels, and says they are cutting down on red items, but you couldn't prove it by me.
I note that in Massachusetts the best bet is Stop and Shop - and of course, local outlets where people will talk to you. But curiously Stop and Shop does not include the red/yellow/green in their ads - you have to go into the store.
Okay - my only question of Greenpeace is what in #*@#!! are "ocean quahogs"? The quahog, Venus mercenaria, is an intertidal species.
Okay - I checked on this. It's another genus (Artica islandica), hardshelled bivalve mollusc, that looks like a quahog, and lives on the North Atlantic sea floor. It is not a sea clam (Spisula solidissima). Apparently the issue is not its rarity, but that it must be taken by the most destructive kind of trawling.
Meanwhile, I am going to spend the rest of the day reciting those Genus species names of the East Coast clams. Aren't they great? And don't forget Mya arenaria the softshell clam (steamers).
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Climate Change Exhibit at AMNH
While in New York City I took a few hours for a mad dash to the American Museum of Natural History to check out their Climate Change exhibit. http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/climatechange/
I have to say it was fairly disappointing from a foodie perspective.
But the exhibit is reasonably interactive and quite informative from a fossil fuel, CO2 perspective. I was particularly interested in the part about climate change and the oceans, something I think we don't hear enough about. Sometimes all we hear is how people expect the oceans to provide the solution (we've dumped everything else there, why not more CO2?). But ocean acidification is a major problem which will affect many organisms, particularly the calcifying ones, and thus impact some things we enjoy eating, and others which make up their food or substrate. At one point in the exhibit one finds this statement:
"How the ocean will respond to rising CO2 levels is uncertain."
Scary. We know that as well as rising from ice melt, the oceans are getting warmer, too. Most marine organisms have a pretty narrow range of tolerance in the heat-cold dimension. And water expands as it warms, another contribution to flooding and possibly storm generation and intensification.
It's a terrible thing to think that what we haven't done to the oceans with habitat destruction, overfishing, and agricultural run-offs, we will do with increased greenhouse gases.
Since I mentioned agriculture, back to that topic.
Seemed like every time the exhibit descriptions mentioned climate change's impact on agriculture - drought, flood and warming - the proposed solution was genetically engineered seeds. That's where my real disappointment came from. I suppose I could make a case for genetic engineering of seeds for climates that are changing too rapidly for traditional hybridizing methods to work - but only if the artificially introduced genes are from a closely related plant, and not patented by a corporation or other profit making entity. Even then, the danger of backcrossing is real, and with it the driving out of diversity in traditional seed stock and wild relatives. Seems like we should begin now searching folklore and uncommon seed varieties to develop and disseminate seeds with tolerance for a wider range of climatic conditions.
Finally, one more footnote. Farming in the Andes is going to get more challenging as glaciers, a usual source of summer irrigation water, shrink, and there is less of them to melt. I hope somebody is working on those hundreds of varieties of potatoes, searching for varieties that work well in drought.
I have to say it was fairly disappointing from a foodie perspective.
But the exhibit is reasonably interactive and quite informative from a fossil fuel, CO2 perspective. I was particularly interested in the part about climate change and the oceans, something I think we don't hear enough about. Sometimes all we hear is how people expect the oceans to provide the solution (we've dumped everything else there, why not more CO2?). But ocean acidification is a major problem which will affect many organisms, particularly the calcifying ones, and thus impact some things we enjoy eating, and others which make up their food or substrate. At one point in the exhibit one finds this statement:
"How the ocean will respond to rising CO2 levels is uncertain."
Scary. We know that as well as rising from ice melt, the oceans are getting warmer, too. Most marine organisms have a pretty narrow range of tolerance in the heat-cold dimension. And water expands as it warms, another contribution to flooding and possibly storm generation and intensification.
It's a terrible thing to think that what we haven't done to the oceans with habitat destruction, overfishing, and agricultural run-offs, we will do with increased greenhouse gases.
Since I mentioned agriculture, back to that topic.
Seemed like every time the exhibit descriptions mentioned climate change's impact on agriculture - drought, flood and warming - the proposed solution was genetically engineered seeds. That's where my real disappointment came from. I suppose I could make a case for genetic engineering of seeds for climates that are changing too rapidly for traditional hybridizing methods to work - but only if the artificially introduced genes are from a closely related plant, and not patented by a corporation or other profit making entity. Even then, the danger of backcrossing is real, and with it the driving out of diversity in traditional seed stock and wild relatives. Seems like we should begin now searching folklore and uncommon seed varieties to develop and disseminate seeds with tolerance for a wider range of climatic conditions.
Finally, one more footnote. Farming in the Andes is going to get more challenging as glaciers, a usual source of summer irrigation water, shrink, and there is less of them to melt. I hope somebody is working on those hundreds of varieties of potatoes, searching for varieties that work well in drought.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Book Reviews
I want to give a thumbs up to one book I read a few weeks ago, and a shaky horizontal thumb to two I am trying to read.
The Unnatural History of the Sea by Callum Roberts was a very interesting read for me. Some reviewers seemed to find it tedious, but hey, I'm the person who enjoyed the cetology in Moby Dick. Roberts shows how the decimation of fishing stocks is not just a result of 20th century factory fishing, but of the whole progress of how humans have regarded the sea and its creatures. The extent of habitat destruction from trawling over the last couple of centuries is a real eye opener. But this book isn't just a lament. Roberts offers stories of the sea's resiliency and many suggestions for what might be done. Most are international restrictions of one sort or another, not out and out bans, even on trawling. I took this book back to the library, but I am going to buy a copy when the paperback comes out later this month.
Now for the two I'm having a hard time with. It's not a problem with readability, but with scientific inaccuracy and sloppiness as well as a tendency to screediness. (I hope I've just coined a new word there.) I found myself wondering if people write non-fiction books these days as though they were blogging. Is there creeping blogitis?
One of these books is The End of Food by Paul Roberts. There are lots of interesting bits in this book. But once I find an inaccuracy, or flippant disregard for distinctions, I find it hard to trust other statements from the author. There's a bit early in the book, where Roberts refers to the energy inputs needed to produce a pound of cattle (the ratio is roughly 10:1, plants:flesh) and then says it's about the same for hogs and poultry. Now anybody who has read anything about the challenge of feeding lots of meat to all on the planet knows that is not true. Even the author knows it is not true, as he gives the full information elsewhere. But I find myself losing confidence in an author who is flippant, lazy, or dumbing down.
Another is Uncertain Peril: Genetic Engineering and the Future of Seeds by Claire Hope Cummings. I was looking forward to reading this after hearing the author on the radio one morning. She apparently lives somewhere near here - Napa County, I think they said - and is a journalist and farmer. Again, there are many interesting things here. But she really isn't clear - or couldn't be bothered to take the time to be clear - about the species concept. She refers to species before GM as having "strong biological boundaries". She writes of "natural genes" being "governed by biological rules". Genes introduced in the lab are still genes, seems to me. And I want to know what these rules are. She reports many cases of crosses and backcrosses of GM crops with wild and weedy relatives, across species, but does not explain how this happens. I really don't think she's got much of a concept of genetics in the flowering plants.
So, even though I was fascinated to learn about the seed bank in Iraq that we destroyed, taking with it a whole history of adaptation and cultivation from one of the places where agriculture began; and even though I appreciated being reminded of all the havoc being wreaked in Hawaii from the agrochemical companies operating there; and even though I liked the caricature of James Watson, whom I have never admired - I don't quite trust this book. I would want to call to the attention of anyone reading it that this is for the most part a tertiary account - the author is summarizing or synthesizing the work of historians and sociologists of science and technology. She is clear in the notes and introduction that she has overgeneralized in places, and that her values do come into play. For this honesty we can all be thankful.
I'm going to keep trying with these latter two books until they are due back at the library. Or I may just read the bibliographies and see if there is anything in them on which I want to follow up. Meanwhile, the Roberts book goes on the book list to the right.
The Unnatural History of the Sea by Callum Roberts was a very interesting read for me. Some reviewers seemed to find it tedious, but hey, I'm the person who enjoyed the cetology in Moby Dick. Roberts shows how the decimation of fishing stocks is not just a result of 20th century factory fishing, but of the whole progress of how humans have regarded the sea and its creatures. The extent of habitat destruction from trawling over the last couple of centuries is a real eye opener. But this book isn't just a lament. Roberts offers stories of the sea's resiliency and many suggestions for what might be done. Most are international restrictions of one sort or another, not out and out bans, even on trawling. I took this book back to the library, but I am going to buy a copy when the paperback comes out later this month.
Now for the two I'm having a hard time with. It's not a problem with readability, but with scientific inaccuracy and sloppiness as well as a tendency to screediness. (I hope I've just coined a new word there.) I found myself wondering if people write non-fiction books these days as though they were blogging. Is there creeping blogitis?
One of these books is The End of Food by Paul Roberts. There are lots of interesting bits in this book. But once I find an inaccuracy, or flippant disregard for distinctions, I find it hard to trust other statements from the author. There's a bit early in the book, where Roberts refers to the energy inputs needed to produce a pound of cattle (the ratio is roughly 10:1, plants:flesh) and then says it's about the same for hogs and poultry. Now anybody who has read anything about the challenge of feeding lots of meat to all on the planet knows that is not true. Even the author knows it is not true, as he gives the full information elsewhere. But I find myself losing confidence in an author who is flippant, lazy, or dumbing down.
Another is Uncertain Peril: Genetic Engineering and the Future of Seeds by Claire Hope Cummings. I was looking forward to reading this after hearing the author on the radio one morning. She apparently lives somewhere near here - Napa County, I think they said - and is a journalist and farmer. Again, there are many interesting things here. But she really isn't clear - or couldn't be bothered to take the time to be clear - about the species concept. She refers to species before GM as having "strong biological boundaries". She writes of "natural genes" being "governed by biological rules". Genes introduced in the lab are still genes, seems to me. And I want to know what these rules are. She reports many cases of crosses and backcrosses of GM crops with wild and weedy relatives, across species, but does not explain how this happens. I really don't think she's got much of a concept of genetics in the flowering plants.
So, even though I was fascinated to learn about the seed bank in Iraq that we destroyed, taking with it a whole history of adaptation and cultivation from one of the places where agriculture began; and even though I appreciated being reminded of all the havoc being wreaked in Hawaii from the agrochemical companies operating there; and even though I liked the caricature of James Watson, whom I have never admired - I don't quite trust this book. I would want to call to the attention of anyone reading it that this is for the most part a tertiary account - the author is summarizing or synthesizing the work of historians and sociologists of science and technology. She is clear in the notes and introduction that she has overgeneralized in places, and that her values do come into play. For this honesty we can all be thankful.
I'm going to keep trying with these latter two books until they are due back at the library. Or I may just read the bibliographies and see if there is anything in them on which I want to follow up. Meanwhile, the Roberts book goes on the book list to the right.
Friday, May 4, 2007
Seafood Guidelines
I realize that I still have lots of material to post here - I just keep getting caught up with new information.
So - I've added two links on seafood choices. One from World Watch is very simple - just 3 rules of thumb to help in choosing which fish to eat and how much.
The second is probably the best and most comprehensive resource for such information, the Seafood Watch of the Monterey Bay Aquarium. Here you can get all kinds of information about an array of species, and download and print one of the regional guides, handy for pocket or purse when you go shopping. The information here is updated regularly, so be sure to check back from time to time. It's a great place and a great sight.
So - I've added two links on seafood choices. One from World Watch is very simple - just 3 rules of thumb to help in choosing which fish to eat and how much.
The second is probably the best and most comprehensive resource for such information, the Seafood Watch of the Monterey Bay Aquarium. Here you can get all kinds of information about an array of species, and download and print one of the regional guides, handy for pocket or purse when you go shopping. The information here is updated regularly, so be sure to check back from time to time. It's a great place and a great sight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)