Friday, June 15, 2018

Something's Fishy

I probably shouldn’t have found the story out of New York regarding a seafood company’s claims of using “local” fish failing to pass the “sniff test” as amusing as I did. After all, mislabeling any food product is a crime, and misrepresenting the source of seafood products is a Federal offense. That doesn’t even consider the fact that telling people you purchase your fish from “traditional fishing communities” in their area, when you actually outsource the fishing to providers on the other side of the world, is considered fraud in most jurisdictions in the United States. It’s just that in this case, in addition to the usual schadenfreude of someone using purple prose to describe something they don’t (and can’t) actually supply, there’s something funny about a company insisting that they have “locally” sourced species of fish that are not found within 3,000 miles of where you live…

You can pick up the New York Post story if you’d like to see more of the company’s rather florid marketing language, but the basic idea is that a company calling itself “Sea to Table” has been claiming to have caught fish that are native to the Central Pacific and Indian Oceans in Long Island Sound, to have harvested Red Abalone (which have been a protected species for decades now) on the wrong coast of North America, and to have just had boats arrive with a new catch when satellite imagery demonstrates that they didn’t have anybody at sea that day. To me the question isn’t even whether the “farm to table” movement has finally jumped the shark (so to speak) as how it took them this long to get caught…

Now, I want to emphasize that this story isn’t about an atrocity; no one is claiming that the company sold anything that was past its sell-by date or otherwise unsafe to eat. I’m also not saying that there is anything with importing fish from where the species your customers want to purchase actually live, or that there is anything wrong with farm-raised shellfish or crustaceans. I do believe that basing your business model on the concept of offering a higher-quality product than you can actually provide is not a particularly smart or ethical idea, and doing so in flowery language playing up what good and responsible people you are is just asking for trouble…

I’m also not willing to state that anyone who cooks, processes, or re-sells seafood should also be required to hold credentials as an ichthyologist; if I’m paying someone to make my dinner I’m really more concerned with the dish tasting good (and being safe to eat, of course) than I am in knowing the exact species names of the fishes involved. And frankly, I think blaming the company for the working conditions and pay scales of the companies from whom they have been buying the outsourced fish, as the Post article also does, isn’t really fair. A small company operating in Brooklyn does not have the resources of a firm like Nike or Apple, and can’t very well travel the world assuring that both the fish and the fishermen involved with their products are being ethically treated. Although, again, it would probably be better not to brag about how much you love and respect fishing communities and fishermen, just in case…

No comments: