Bittman Off More Than He Could Chew?

When food writer Mark Bittman submitted a recipe for his New York Times column The Minimalist recently, he most likely could not have predicted that so many people would see red. Red snapper, that is, the fish of choice to compliment the Maya citrus salsa. Sounds yummy, except that red snapper is a fish that has suffered serious population declines due to its popularity as food for us, and has been severely overfished. It's also caught accidentally as juveniles in a number of other fisheries.

Bittman's choice has sparked a flurry of activity, both in the mainstream media and the blogosphere, especially after Grist magazine's Tom Phillpot noted that Bittman's books caution against use of endangered fish species in recipes, and recommend the Monterey Bay Aquarium's Seafood Watch guides to find sustainable alternatives.

Somewhat surprisingly, perhaps, the mea culpa did not come forth. Instead Bittman replied that Seafood Watch is published by scientists, and not cooks. Well, no one wants to dispute that. Especially not us! Our Seafood Watch program's credibility and authority comes from the fact that a team of in-house scientists independently assesses each species to arrive at a recommendation based entirely on science! (That said, we also work with many celebrated chefs who find delicious (and sustainable!) ways to serve seafood.)

A quick Google search today shows numerous blogs and writers - food and enviros alike - weighing in on this issue. So I guess we owe a thanks to Mr. Bittman, and the NYT for letting the snapper slip through the cracks, and helping to raise awareness of this issue!

Oh, and today's letter to the editor in the Food section of the Times? Yes, folks are still snapping!

Comments

[Term papers]

I'm sure you had fun writing this article. Excellent entry!

[Mark Powell]

Fair enough, Ken, but I think there's something missing. Red snapper is a fishery in transition, with strong management action in place and catch and bycatch levels coming down, according to a science-based rebuilding plan, backed-up by enforcable federal regulations. This deserves some kind of recognition and reward, don't you think?
Mark

[Ken Peterson]

Monterey Bay Aquarium's Seafood Watch program does reward progress -- after there’s a documented change on the water.

Because our seafood rankings are based on solid science, we make a change when the science says fish stocks have improved.

One example: Improvements in the status of Atlantic swordfish as a result of the "Give Swordfish a Break" campaign.

We applaud efforts to improve fisheries -- and wait until those improvements are documented before we give a green light to seafood consumers.

[Mark Powell]

Gulf of Mexico red snapper is on the road to recovery, thanks to a new science-based rebuilding plan.

I think it's time to recognize red snapper as a good choice, to support the productive rebuilding action by fishermen, managers, seafood buyers, and conservationists.

After all, the ultimate goal is fixing bad fisheries, right? Shouldn't we reward progress?

Mark Powell