My Foodprint

The New York Times posited a readers’ poll today, on a similar subject to one of my previous postings. The topic is endangered foods. The statement for comment: “Saving plants and animals that were once fairly commonplace in America and are now threatened or endangered often involves urging people to eat them. What endangered foods do you think should be saved?”

This is one of the oddest statements I have ever read. It is true to some extent, sure if the demand for a food product rises, then the supply does its best to meet that demand. The statement’s oddity however lies in the its reliance on the fact that we as humans must eat everything, and that is the best way to bring a plant or animal back from endangerment. This idea that an animal or plant will survive extinction if humans create a demand for it only applies to plants or animals under some kind of regulation or monitoring. This does not apply to wild game and that should be noted. One cannot just willy nilly eat wild game and vegetables (such as forest mushrooms) and expect the species to be abundant. In fact the opposite happens, as we have seen in throughout history. Eating more salmon isn’t going to bring them back until we clean up the ocean, or establish safe, environmentally sound fish farming techniques.

But another concern: Do we really need to eat these animals in order to bring them back in thriving numbers? Can’t we just stop killing/harvesting them for our own gustatory enjoyment? I am as big a fan as the next person of eating a variety of items, and even exotic items, but why are our mouths the arbiters of what survives and what doesn’t? Can’t we use our brains to decide we need a variety of food items on the planet for biodiversity, not just for stuffing ourselves with?

What about endangered plants? A few examples are Elephant Heart Plums and Bronx Grapes (no, that is not a typo, only two vines still exist according to Ark of Taste). Now if the demand for Bronx Grapes goes through the roof, how does this assure a bright future for the grape? The small group of growers who could supply the grape would be overwhelmed by the demand. Where would more growers come from? Other farmers would start to grow the grape on larger cuts of land. The grape would then inevitably be engineered for long travel and high production yields, and before you know it, the Bronx Grape is the next Florida orange. I understand this is an exaggeration, but it is merely to point out that often foods that exist in the margins will require a lot of work to produce on a large scale, if the demand existed. A retooling of the entire system would have to take place to do it correctly. Look at soy beans, a product that has taken over U.S farms but is also one of the most bio-engineered legumes out there. Americans in particular have a trend of irresponsibility when it comes to demand. We want something until it is either no more, or until we can create a new version that often doesn’t resemble the original. Look at the tomato.

I think the most important thing to do for endangered plants and animals, the heirloom and heritage species, that we enjoy as food is to support them with government subsidies, and landsharing deals. Get involved in a local farm or take part in Community Supported Agriculture (CSA). But don’t think just because we eat it, a food is guaranteed a rosy future.

–Nick