Caviar was a free bar snack • Hacker News Board

Re: Caviar was a free bar snack

#41

Post by mytailorisrich » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 2:07 PM UTC

Nursie wrote: post #37

mytailorisrich wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is as sustainable as fishing any other species of fish. Whether caught for meat or eggs the result is the same. What matters is the quantity fished. Many luxury foods became so because of culture/fashion trends, btw. For example, lobster used to be used to fertilise fields and to feed prisoners and servants in the American North-East.

> It is as sustainable as fishing any other species of fish. With such a long generational gap, of 20 years, that seems unlikely.

It all boils down to the quantity fished, as said. It may take 20 years for a female to mature but that still means that a number of females mature every year. Fishing them is sustainable as long as the quantity fished remains under a certain threshold.

Re: Caviar was a free bar snack

#42

Post by mkl » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 2:11 PM UTC

buildzr wrote: post #24

mkl wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that's why I don't buy fish.

Even the farmed ones? Do you eat meat at all?

Unfortunately, fish farming is currently not generally sustainable either, for other reasons, e.g. https://modernfarmer.com/2015/03/dear-modern-farmer-is-fish-...

Yes, I eat some meat, but fish is a special case as it's the only major source of meat that's from wild sources, and those sources are being exploited beyond sustainable limits much of the time: https://www.worldwildlife.org/threats/overfishing

Farmed meat on land can have major environmental costs in terms of resources, but at least we can see what those costs are. With fish, we're destroying ecosystems we don't even understand.

Re: Caviar was a free bar snack

#43

Post by Flavius » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 2:12 PM UTC

oneshot9999 wrote: post #12

randomer666 wrote: post #5

What's interesting about beluga caviar is that it taste varies a lot. I've tried illegally caught Russian caviar and then I've tried some caviar from a sustainable farm and the former was way better for some reason.

I eat about a half kilo of poached caviar every year and I would agree. I've only had the legal stuff once or twice and it's not as nice. I'm guessing because wild caught must taste nicer than farmed?

You gotta pump those numbers up. The poaching industry is dying if we don't buy their caviar.

Re: Caviar was a free bar snack

#44

Post by mamon » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 2:13 PM UTC

m-p-3 wrote: post #28

And lobster wasn't a fancy meal until early 20th century https://www.history.com/news/a-taste-of-lobster-history "lobsters were routinely fed to prisoners, apprentices, slaves and children during the colonial era and beyond"

Makes sense: lobsters are essentially insects, and eating insects, such as cockroaches is disgusting for most people. I still refuse to eat lobsters and shrimps for this exact reason: I'm not eating any insects, ever.

Re: Caviar was a free bar snack

#45

Post by MadWombat » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

robert_foss wrote: post #18

L_226 wrote: post #10

I enjoy beluga caviar - very expensive for what it is though. A much cheaper alternatve is (homemade) black olive tapenade - almost as good for similar usages, and far more sustainable. But I suspect the consumption of caviar is more about signalling than actual taste anyway.

A more comparable sustainable alternative is seaweed caviar. It looks, feels and tastes pretty much the same as any caviar.

"pretty much the same as any caviar"

Considering that there are a few types of caviar and they all taste, smell and look different...

Re: Caviar was a free bar snack

#46

Post by peteradio » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 2:16 PM UTC

mamon wrote: post #44

m-p-3 wrote: post #28

And lobster wasn't a fancy meal until early 20th century https://www.history.com/news/a-taste-of-lobster-history "lobsters were routinely fed to prisoners, apprentices, slaves and children during the colonial era and beyond"

Makes sense: lobsters are essentially insects, and eating insects, such as cockroaches is disgusting for most people. I still refuse to eat lobsters and shrimps for this exact reason: I'm not eating any insects, ever.

More insects for me!

Re: Caviar was a free bar snack

#47

Post by mkl » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 2:16 PM UTC

gwbas1c wrote: post #29

mkl wrote: post #2

"It takes twenty years for a female beluga to mature, and at that point she can weigh as much as 1,800 pounds [...]. Such a fish could yield twenty pounds of eggs [when killed]." That's got to be one of the least sustainable things I've ever heard of. I tried caviar once. It didn't taste like much, and I didn't see the point.

I'd think that the fish meat is also valuable? That's a lot of meat.

Yes, but that length of time to mature means population growth can only be slow, even in ideal, unfished circumstances, and as the article explains, sturgeon have been overfished everywhere.

Re: Caviar was a free bar snack

#48

Post by teekert » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 2:24 PM UTC

mamon wrote: post #44

m-p-3 wrote: post #28

And lobster wasn't a fancy meal until early 20th century https://www.history.com/news/a-taste-of-lobster-history "lobsters were routinely fed to prisoners, apprentices, slaves and children during the colonial era and beyond"

Makes sense: lobsters are essentially insects, and eating insects, such as cockroaches is disgusting for most people. I still refuse to eat lobsters and shrimps for this exact reason: I'm not eating any insects, ever.

Some human puts some species under some label.

You: I'm not eating anything under this label as it must be alike!

But in this case insects a lobsters are not even close in the tree of life. Maybe they indeed look alike a bit. Do you eat feces because it does look a bit like chocolate?

Re: Caviar was a free bar snack

#49

Post by simonh » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 2:28 PM UTC

adrianN wrote: post #25

huhtenberg wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They no longer kill the fish to extract the caviar. They can now drain the caviar through a form of cesarean, basically, and release the fish back.

Interesting. I wonder whether they have data on the survival and procreation rate of fish treated in that manner.

I’d be astounded if the didn’t. They just need to tag the fish and check caught fish for older tags.

Re: Caviar was a free bar snack

#50

Post by thrownblown » Fri, Aug 23, 2019, 2:29 PM UTC

mytailorisrich wrote: post #41

Nursie wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is as sustainable as fishing any other species of fish. With such a long generational gap, of 20 years, that seems unlikely.

It all boils down to the quantity fished, as said. It may take 20 years for a female to mature but that still means that a number of females mature every year. Fishing them is sustainable as long as the quantity fished remains under a certain threshold.

Also the sturgeon is an invasive species in many environments, like in SF we're poisoning our lakes to remove them.