I Don't Think You Really Understood The Reference, Did You?

People have joked that I will become the Lord of the Flies,' Knight laughs.

Who he? Oh, sorry:

The 120,000 sq ft facility, based in Lincolnshire, is aiming to breed millions of larvae to feed British livestock and, eventually, humans. The £1.5 million farm, which has its own chief scientist, aims to produce 3,500 tons of insect protein a year using the black soldier fly, a South American species that is the star of insect farming due to its high protein content and ability to compost waste. The harvested protein will go into pet food and this year, thanks to a change in UK law, feed British pigs and poultry. It will also be utilised to produce oils, fertilisers and other products that can be used in cosmetics and medical products. The facility, owned by group Fairman Knight & Sons, aims to feed the flies and their larvae using vast amounts of food waste produced by UK agriculture.It is the brainchild of Julian Knight, a former City financier, and William Fairman, who has been farming for more than 35 years.

Maybe you should have Googled who the 'Lord of the Flies really is, chum. Certainly seems appropriate for someone pushing this slop...

I Find These Immigrants Very Palatable...

They have scuttled through Scandinavian waters and muscled their way into Britain.

...which is something I don't often say about a threat to our native population, I'll admit! 

The species, which are native to North America, came to Russia in the 1960s after scientists aimed to introduce a new, lucrative market.

The king crabs then headed to Norway, spiking a fishing industry boom before finding their way to Britain.

Despite fears for the native population, the invaders have proved a winner with London restaurants so far with many snapping up the haul for their menus.

We will fight them on the dining table! Increase production of brown bread and butter. It's for the nation! 

Because Some People Can Convince Themselves Of Anything…

Contrary to stereotypes, not all those planning to go will be Muslim by faith: there is a small but expanding group of people who opt for halal much as they might choose free-range or organic meat.

Wha..? Is it me, or are they very, very different things?

Simon Teal, 32, a scientist at Pfizer who lives in Wimbledon, London, explains why. "The meat has more flavour, and cuts that you flash fry or grill, like lamb chops, are more tender than non-halal meat. Plus buying halal gives me more confidence about where the meat has come from in the same way that buying something that is organic or free-range does."

Really? I mean, really..? And you're a scientist?

Restaurant chains that are changing their menus include Pizza Express, which uses only halal chicken. One in five branches of Nando's serves halal-certified chicken, and KFC is running a halal trial in about 100 of its outlets.

They’ve trialed it to death, haven’t they? And it often hasn't worked out as they think...

The issue can be incendiary, however, on both faith and animal welfare grounds. Dr Kausar admitted he is braced for protests.

"An element of society will use this to express their anti-Islamic sentiments," he said.

Yeah. Sure. That's all it is. Of course.

Fish Are Friends Endangered Species, Not Food!

George Monbiot goes on a rant about….fish:

The Guardian wouldn't publish recipes for golden eagle or nightjar or wildcat. So why is it considered acceptable to publish recipes for equally endangered creatures of the sea?

Because golden eagles, nightjars and wildcats are all protected species. Monkfish, John Dory and halibut aren’t. Next question?

I ask this because recently I had a very short discussion with the eminent chef Angela Hartnett, after reading her recipe for a monkfish (or John Dory or halibut) stew. I tweeted her as follows:

To @angelahartnett: Love your work, but please stop publishing recipes for endangered species. Thank you. — GeorgeMonbiot (@GeorgeMonbiot) October 17, 2012

No wonder it was a ‘short discussion’! I suspect if it had been her mentor, Gordon Ramsay, it’d have been even shorter!

Someone else replied, saying: "would that not be censorship? Surely Guardian readers have the nous to apply a bit of common sense?"

Oh, hardly!

Angela picked up this response, and wrote: "agree Guardian readers are savvy buy from a sustainable source like @fishforthought".

But George wasn’t happy with that. What a shocker, eh?

…here's why I believe it is inadequate:

Take a deep breath…

If she wants people to buy from Fish for Thought (a Cornish supplier that tries, when it can, to sell what it calls "sustainable" fish), why doesn't she say so when she publishes her recipes?

Ummm, because it’s advertising, George? And most publications have to be careful about that?

I contacted Fish for Thought and asked them whether the monkfish they sell has been certified by the Marine Stewardship Council. (This is the only guarantee of anything approaching "sustainable"). They told me: "No – our monkfish is not MSC-certified. I don't know whether there is any MSC monkfish anywhere to be honest."

Clearly, since there’s no shortage of monkfish, George is the only person in the UK worried about this!

As Fish for Thought freely admits, buying from this company is no guarantee of sustainability. I noticed, for example, that they're promoting scallops on their website. They told me that the scallops are caught by dredging. This is one of the most damaging of all kinds of fishing…

But they taste so good pan-fried with bacon and black pudding!

The Good Fish Guide says the following about monkfish: "Scientists say they have such poor data about the number of fish that are caught that it is impossible to produce accurate advice on the status of the stocks, and they are calling for much more stringent monitoring of these fisheries … The species is targeted by a number of modern fishing gears, making this species vulnerable throughout its range."

Right, so if not monkfish…what?

Buying halibut is likely to be even worse than buying monkfish. The Good Fish Guide reports that wild Atlantic halibut are "heavily overfished and listed as an endangered species". The guide gives it a rating of 5: the highest level of environmental damage.

*sighs* What’s left? Pilchards?

I would love to believe that Guardian readers are savvy about the fish they buy, but I'm constantly amazed by the number of right-on, socially conscious people who don't think twice about buying rare species. Or perhaps it's not so amazing. If the papers keep telling them that cooking these animals is normal and acceptable, by specifying their use in recipes, it's easy for people to imagine that there can't be a problem.

Or perhaps they just think life’s too short to worry about the long-term sustainability of fish?

I don't mean to single her out, as almost all the chefs who write for the papers include vulnerable or endangered species in their recipes. The notable exception at the Guardian is Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall. I find it astonishing that his excellent and highly visible campaigns seem to have had so little impact on other people who work for this newspaper and its sister publication, the Observer.

Oh, chefs! Why can’t you all be just like Hugh?

What's the point of telling us how to cook a species we shouldn't eat?

Angela and Nigel Slater wisely decided to ignore his further interrogation, but Yotam Ottolenghi responded:

"My main point is that my top priority is to deliver delicious recipes. That is, to share with my readers all the wonderful food the world has got to offer. I am not a campaigner. When it comes to choosing my ingredients, I try to keep myself informed and not use particularly contentious ingredients. I believe that different readers will make their own ethical choices – whether to buy any imported, CO2-heavy ingredients, only free-range animals, organic produce, sustainable fish varieties, fair trade, shop in small shops, etc etc. "I have been pretty consistent over the years saying that reducing your animal protein intake is, in general, a good thing to do both for our world and for ourselves. I say this all the time and I have been acting on this by offering recipes that are heavy on vegetables, pulses and grains. Many people who bought my books and read my column tell me that these have made a radical change on their diet and that they now consume much less meat or fish. I believe that this is as valuable as any campaign. Otherwise, I prefer that the informed reader makes his or her own choice and decides which of many current and important causes to follow."

Well, Yotam, if you thought allowing people to make their own choices was a good thing, then guess again! It’s George’s way, or the highway!

All this is commendable. But it does not sit easily with promoting the consumption of rare animal species, and species whose extraction is ecologically devastating. Most of the time I'm proud to be associated with the Guardian and the Observer. But our participation in the destruction of the ecology of the seas makes me ashamed. To titillate the palates of prosperous people (those who can afford to buy monkfish, halibut or tiger prawns are likely to be prosperous), chefs writing for these papers are helping to power one of the fastest and most extensive degradations of the natural world in human history.

I buy monkfish, halibut and tiger prawns. Quite often. Am I ‘prosperous’? Gosh!

I'd like to suggest that the Guardian and Observer implement – as soon as possible – a policy of not specifying any fish which has an environmental damage rating higher than 2 on the Good Fish Guide. And that whenever a recipe for fish or other seafood is published, it should include a note urging people to buy only from a stock certified by the Marine Stewardship Council. If your fishmonger doesn't have certified stock, cook something else. Does that amount to "censorship"? Or is it just a sensible and minimal response to one of the most urgent threats to the natural world?

No, no. It sounds eminently sensible. You go right ahead. I'm sure we’ll manage to find Angela’s and Nigel’s recipes in other publications, on TV shows, on the Internet.

After all, the day I look to the ‘Guardian’ or ‘Observer’ for ethical advice on what to put in my mouth (or anything, really) is the day I probably stop eating forever…

Update: From Robert the Biker, a song for George:

*To the tune of 'When the boat comes in'*

Who shall have the fishy 
On the little dishy 
Not you says the Moonbat 
'Cos that fucker's rare

Shock Survey Finds One In Five Shoppers Is As Thick As The Mince They Don't Like, But Buy Anyway!

One in five shoppers regularly ends up binning goods bought on supermarket buy-one-get-one-free offers, it emerged yesterday.

Research revealed a large percentage of consumers who snap up BOGOFs and three for two deals find sell by dates often expire before the items are used.

The report also found the average household succumbs to six special offers in a typical week.

And worryingly, one in five of those polled said they often buy food they don't like - just because it's cheap.

So, what conclusions do we draw from this? That there's a lot of dim people about, who don't understand how freezers work?

Yesterday a spokesperson for the Organic, Naturally Different campaign, which carried out the research, said: 'It's completely unnecessary that so much food is going to waste.

'The findings show that just because a certain food is discounted or part of an offer people feel the urge to give in and buy it regardless of whether they need it or not.

'It's false economics if you end up buying food because it's cheap but subsequently don't like it or end up throwing it away.'

Yes. Yes, it is. But that's hardly the fault of the companies that sell it, is it?

So good luck with your campaign to point out how stupid a lot of people are, and hope that they will therefore buy organic foo...

Oh. Hang on. You're not stupid, clearly!

Let Them Eat Couscous!

I suspect this is a somewhat different story to the one about Liz Haughton’s The Park Café:

A change of menu at Stoke Newington's Clissold House café has started a row.

Claims that the manor house café had been taken over by the snooty and the "nouveau riche" came after traditional fare such as chips, beans and chocolate pudding were replaced by couscous and spiced nut salad, beetroot and seed cake, and £12.75 gnocchi with roast mushrooms.

It’s met with the same reaction from the locals, though, unsurprisingly enough:

Some customers were so angry they set up an action group on Facebook. One critic wrote: "It's a sad day for those of us who have lived in the area all our lives. Gone are the days when the café would provide basic and hearty food at decent prices."

But it’s not just because the management thinks this is the sort of thing that the residents should be eating, oh no.

In fact, it seems more as a push to get the right sort of residents through the doors:

The organic revamp has been overseen by Company of Cooks, which also runs Kenwood House in Hampstead.

The area has seen an influx of political and media types over recent years, with relative newcomers including Labour power couple Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper, comedian Stewart Lee and BBC news reader George Alagiah drawn in by its village feel.

Couscous eaters if ever I saw any…

Locals say the café should be a meeting place for the community and were angry when the council handed the contract to run it to Company of Cooks rather than a local outlet.

Oh, but I’m sure there’s no hidden agenda here. Or…is there?

Vicky Cahill of Company of Cooks told the Hackney Gazette that although the café had been "incredibly busy" since opening last month they were aware that not everyone was happy.

"We're listening to the many viewpoints about the type of food that people want to see available, and in no way see the opening menu as the final version."

It’ll just stay there until you ghastly little oiks have all found some greasy egg & chip dive to favour with your custom, ok?

"...The dead ones were happy pigs until they got hungry."

That being the reaction of 'ethical organic farmer' Keith Barnett (in reality, an ex-computer consultant) on being told that he was under investigation for the conditions on his farm, if the term 'farm' can be used to describe the squalid collection of ramshackle pens and half-collapsed huts...

Touring the farmers' markets, the owners of the Happy Pig Company trade on a growing consumer demand for meat from animals reared with kindness.

They charge £35 for a few 'organic' chops and pork joints in a pack bearing their logo of a smiling cartoon pig leaning on a wall.

They boast that the 'top quality, additive-free' pork comes from pampered pigs living free-range in a field close to the sea, eating 'only natural foods'.

Well, that last was certainly true. They were found eating the dead bodies of their companions, as a result of starvation. It doesn't get more natural than that!

The Animal Health agency and East Sussex county council confirmed they were investigating.

I wonder how many more of these enterprises are out there, cashing in on the demand for 'ethical organic farming', and thereby giving a bad name to real farmer who know what they are doing?