I am writing to express my dismay that group leaders of the Miller Canyon backpacking
trip (October 11) are planning to prepare “local crawdads with garlic and
lemon sauce” each night of the group hike. It’s one thing for one
or two people to go off into the woods and have a few of the local inhabitants
for ingredients for their dinner, it is something else again to collect enough
of the indigenous creek animals to feed a group.
Whereas the flesh of a fish is edible, the only part of a crawdad that is eaten
is the tail, a mere bite of food. I am appalled at the idea of a Sierra Club group
killing so many crawdads for the sake of what? To feel like they are living in
nature for the weekend? It is my opinion that our members shouldn’t have
to kill the animals that live in the natural habitat to experience the joy of
being there. Isn’t our motto to “Leave only footprints and take only
pictures?”
Please reconsider the idea of allowing a Sierra Club group to go into nature
and kill numerous little indigenous crawdads for the thrill of eating a tiny bit
of their body.
Teetle Clawson, Santa Cruz
Editor’s note:
The biologists The Ventana consulted informed us that the common crayfish is
an introduced species and is not native to California. They have all but replaced
our original native species which is now on the California Fish and Game list
of threaten and endangered species, and which occurs only in northeastern California.
Given that fact, a crawdad feed might be compared to ripping out invasive exotics
such as Pampas grass or ice plant.
Regarding wastage, up to 50% of the biomass for marine fishes like ling cod
and rockfish are discarded after the fillets are taken, and similar numbers pertain
for crustaceans and mollusks. The “waste” for freshwater fish is somewhat
less. Returning the offal to the ecosystem by leaving it for scavengers or by
burying, ensures that it will be re-used, and not really wasted at all.
