The Latest

APRIL 29, 2007 Yesterday we appeared on a talk radio program in Toronto, Ontario, and were challenged by one caller. "If I had to eat locally," he said, "I sure couldn't eat what I'm planning for dinner, could I? Sea bass." He was making an argument for consumer choice. He picked a lousy example, of course. His "sea bass" was probably "Chilean sea bass," the name marketers gave to Patagoniantoothfish in order to turn it into a seafood trend. In that case, the man was - unknowingly, I suspect - about to eat from one of the most abused fish stocks on the planet, one that many experts warn is in danger of commercial extinction. His example only helps to make the point that we are typically far too distant from our food sources to understand the consequences of our consumer choices. I didn't get into any of that, though, because I knew what the man was really trying to say: "How nice for you on the West Coast to eat all that local seafood while I'd have to go without." I didn't really have an answer to that. There's no denying that Toronto is a long way from any ocean. Then I got back to the hotel room, looked out the window . . . and felt like an idiot. Of course! The Great Lakes! It's amazingly easy to forget that Toronto sits at the edge of the lakes that hold about one-fifth of the world's fresh water. But this is exactly why seeing the world with 100-mile eyes is so valuable. The Great Lakes seem empty now - but that's only because the recent human occupants on the shorelines have made no effort to live within ecological limits. I didn't have to do much research to discover that the lakes were once teeming - an old saying declares that, once upon a time, fishing the Great Lakes meant going down and beating the surface of the water with an axe handle. There is still a much reduced fishery - the story now heard around the world - but the loss is enormous. Most startling is the damage done to biodiversity. The variety of Great Lakes fish species was once among the richest in North America; today, an estimated 90 to 99 percent of the fish biomass in the lower lakes consists of introduced species. Some native species, such as the deepwater ciscoes, are gone from the face of the Earth. So yes, a person in Toronto (or Chicago, Detroit, Buffalo, etc.) could have had "seafood" - with plenty of choice and variety. Even now, the Great Lakes Fish Poster shows 35 species, including many I've never heard of: bloater, drum, pumpkinseed, goby, ruffe. In its time, I imagine a Great Lakes fish barbecue would have been among the more interesting feasts on the planet. During a visit to Toronto's famous St. Lawrence Market this morning, I asked at a popular fish shop if any truly local fish were available. Of the endless displays of seafood - many of them from my home waters of the West Coast - only one local fish was on offer: Lake Erie perch. I'm not sure how that would compare to "sea bass" for flavour - but I do know how much I hope the Patagonian toothfish doesn't go the way of the Great Lakes fish stocks.-JBM

« Back