Eater-based conservation

[dockhl]

Interesting article in the NY Times about “Renewing America’s Food Traditions: Saving and Savoring the Continent’s Most Endangered Foods” Gary Paul Nabhan

An Unlikely Way to Save a Species: Serve It for Dinner

He has spent most of the past four years compiling a list of endangered plants and animals that were once fairly commonplace in American kitchens but are now threatened, endangered or essentially extinct in the marketplace. He has set out to save them, which often involves urging people to eat them.

[Chris Hughes]

It is often said that the best way to preserve a species is to make it valuable. Creating a viable market for endangered plants and animals should encourage landowners to produce more of those "products."

Ideally, a successful market is self-regulating/self-preserving. For plants/animals the grower will not sell ALL of his stock, but will save enough to grow more the next year. As long as it is profitable to do so the species will be preserved. In a best case, the population will steadily grow since then the producers will then have more to sell. American bison and alligator are a couple of success stories here. I’m sure Rancho Gordo will have something to say here, as well.

The flip-side is a situation where the market is completely banned. If you are banned from selling products from endangered species then they have no (monetary) value to the landowner. If they have no value then the landowner is not motivated to preserve them - he will direct his time, money, efforts elsewhere. The species will be killed off to use the land for other purposes or just allowed to die off on its own. Any demand for the species’ products will just move underground long enough for the animal to become extinct. Think of the rhino here. Limited monetary value to the landowner since all rhino products are banned. Some tourism dollars, but it must pale in comparison to what the poachers are making from illegal ivory sales. Throw in the added effort/money spent to enforce a ban and it becomes an inefficient proposition real fast.

Don't get me wrong here... the Endangered Species Act certainly has its place and every effort should be made to preserve our Earth’s remaining species – including regulation if necessary. I'm just saying that one approach actively promotes the independent growth of a species by making it valuable to have around. The other approach forces the species to fight for its survival based mainly on its nostalgic value.

[SuzySushi]

Not that new a theory. I remember reading an essay at least 15 years ago in the Utne Reader, an alternative magazine, that said to the effect "If it weren't for people eating them, chickens would all be out of jobs."

[prasantrin]

Don't get me wrong here... the Endangered Species Act certainly has its place and every effort should be made to preserve our Earth’s remaining species – including regulation if necessary.  I'm just saying that one approach actively promotes the independent growth of a species by making it valuable to have around.  The other approach forces the species to fight for its survival based mainly on its nostalgic value.

←

How does the former approach work with a species like bluefin tuna?

[Chris Hughes]

I think the theory works best when decisions can be made by property owners based on how to most efficiently use their property. It seems to break down a bit when the species is on communal property, like the oceans. There is no one "in charge" to make a decision based on individual profit. Fishermen should realize that over fishing is not in their best long-term interest - and I think that many responsible fishermen do realize that. Unfortunately it does not take many uncontrolled, short-sighted outfits to deplete a limited supply. The only way to combat that problem is to control demand. Tough job when you consider how tasty bluefin tuna is! There are many sustainable seafood organizations out there trying to educate the public on “good” seafood vs. “bad” seafood, which is a start.

[nakji]

I think the theory works best when decisions can be made by property owners based on how to most efficiently use their property. It seems to break down a bit when the species is on communal property, like the oceans.  There is no one "in charge" to make a decision based on individual profit.  Fishermen should realize that over fishing is not in their best long-term interest - and I think that many responsible fishermen do realize that.  Unfortunately it does not take many uncontrolled, short-sighted outfits to deplete a limited supply.  The only way to combat that problem is to control demand.  Tough job when you consider how tasty bluefin tuna is!  There are many sustainable seafood organizations out there trying to educate the public on “good” seafood vs. “bad” seafood, which is a start.

←

The "tragedy of the commons" effect, isn't it?

Exactly how endangered is the bluefin tuna? I grew up through the cod collapse on the East coast of Canada, and I always worry about our global fisheries. In fact; I feel guilty every time I eat fish, and it's another reason why I almost never cook it at home, except for the odd piece of farmed salmon (which has issues of its own, I know).

[docsconz]

This speaks to a conversation I ahd the other night with a friend about how PETA is promoting the possibility of in vitro meat production, which may actually be a reality not too far down the pike. While that might actually, if it ever becomes popular, allow for eating meat products without having to kill a living single animal, it would likely ultimately do so at the expense of any number of breeds and species, wiping them out should they no longer be economically viable..

[dockhl]

John~

I think that is exactly them point that is being made by the article (and by the Slow Food movement).

Chris~

I appreciate your perspective on this far more after visiting your website and understanding your business a bit better. (I love profiles !) It nauseates me to think of eating 'farmed' venison, just wrong on so many levels to a Penna girl who grew up on what her Dad and brother brought home !

[maggiethecat]

I grew up through the cod collapse on the East coast of Canada, and I always worry about our global fisheries. In fact; I feel guilty every time I eat fish, and it's another reason why I almost never cook it at home, except for the odd piece of farmed salmon (which has issues of its own, I know).

I lived through it too, nakji, and I share your fish-eating guilt. We've sullied our fresh water lakes and rivers and overfished our oceans. Our greed is swimming back to haunt us.

The article in the Times has a great interactive map -- click away and see what we have to eat to keep alive. I'll volunteer for everything.