Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Lorna Sass

GET UPDATES FROM Lorna Sass
 

The Hidden Cost of Being 100% Locavore

Posted: 12/28/09 12:20 AM ET

I went to a press event at E.A.T. on Madison Avenue a few weeks ago and had a sampling of exquisite smoked fish. The white fish--a kind of chub--was caught in the Yukon by the Yapik Eskimos and smoked at Acme Smoked Fish Corp, an old-fashioned, family-run business in Greenpoint, Brooklyn.

"Wow," I thought, "this is ridiculous," and couldn't understand the point of importing fish from Alaska to be smoked in Brooklyn. The whole idea seemed frivolous and very-well-Madison Avenue.

But then I started talking with Ruth Carter, the Sales Manager of Kwik'Pak Fisheries, who explained to me that selling fish (primarily salmon) is the primary source of income for the Yupik Eskimos, a group scattered across the southwestern coast of Alaska into the Bering Sea-a group that, despite the sale of fish, still lives way below poverty level.

If fine restaurants in New York City and throughout the lower 48 were not creating a demand for the high quality salmon from this part of the world, one wonders how much worse off the Yupik would be.

This "aha" moment brought to mind my trip to witness the quinoa harvest in Ecuador about five years ago.

I was privileged to accompany the founders of Inca Organics who, several decades ago, organized a co-operative of farmers to grow organic heirloom quinoa and then created a marketing and distribution system in America for their imported product.

Much of the quinoa farming is done by Quechua women whose husbands have been forced to leave Ecuador to find work. Most of the women and children wore tattered clothes, had poor teeth, and seemed very poor and uneducated--but they would be poorer still if the U.S. weren't creating a market for this marvelous, quick-cooking seed-grain, a complete source of protein.

Eating locally grown food makes sense for many reasons, not least of which is that we need to be conscious of lowering our carbon footprint however we can.

But to be a strict locavore has consequences that may cause untold suffering to the family of man beyond the hundred-mile locavore limit.


 

Follow Lorna Sass on Twitter: www.twitter.com/LornaSass

 
 
  • Comments
  • 4
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
07:43 PM on 01/05/2010
Don't you think the global farmers are hurt more by US taxpayer subsidies to BigAg? Guess where 50,000 out-of-work Mexican corn farmers ended up? Know why they're out of work? Mexico can't compete with the price of US subsidized corn.

It's not small, family farms getting that subsidy money either.

It's BigAg. It's even your Senators and Congress critters. If we would stop tilting the playing field, people in other countries would stand a chance. And we could eat local food!
03:26 PM on 12/30/2009
Thank you for helping us to look beneath the surface. All actions have consequences, and the ones we haven't considered are perhaps the most powerful, with the most serious repercussions. Eating locally, commendable an idea as it is, isn't so simple in the complex economy we have now.

And, on a more hedonistic note, I'll look for this delicious smoked fish!
02:59 PM on 12/29/2009
Lorna,
Thanks for this post. This is a hard concept for many people. I completely agree with you.

I suggest that people eat as much locally grown produce as possible and buy other foods that must be shipped, and help support others around the world, Trade has been taking place for thousands of years. And there's no reason to give up coffee, tea, sugar, spices, quinoa, and more, especially if you buy them Fair Trade.

Keep spreading the word. The food system needs to change, and we don't need to be locavores all the time. It doesn't make sense.
03:29 PM on 12/29/2009
TX Veggie Queen. Good to hear from you. We share many of the same enthusiasms.