I've been an ovo-lacto vegetarian for almost two years now, for environmental reasons (and yes, I know I should be vegan but I can't commit myself to that level). I know that fish farming is not environmentally sustainable, but I can't seem to find any information about shellfish (which is pretty much the only meat that I miss eating). It's a shot in the dark, but does anyone here know whether or not shellfish cultivation/collection is at least fairly environmentally sustainable?

Additionally, in keeping with my inability to notice my diet insofar as it is not meat, I don't take any supplements, and I've heard that shellfish can fill in a lot of the missing nutrients (zinc, etc).

It sounds like you are looking for someone to tell you that it's OK to eat sea animals. If you choose not to devote yourself to something for whatever reason, shouldn't that be enough (the fact that it's your CHOICE?) Perhaps you would best be served by doing what you want and simply stop your searching for rationalizations.

I'm not rationalizing. I realize that most people here are ethical vegetarians rather than environmental vegetarians, and thus my reasoning for being a vegetarian is probably anathema to them. And the fact is, I won't eat shellfish until I find out that it actually is environmentally sustainable, just like I wouldn't dump toxic waste someplace unless I was sure that it wouldn't hurt the environment. I'm just asking the question here because this is a community of vegetarians, and I thought somebody might know.

But thank you for the pat interpretation of my question.

I believe the best thing to do is check out the enviromental web sites that may have that info. There are tons of issues like overfishing, the nets that are used which many animals get tangled in. here in New England red tide has happened the past several years die to the toxicity/pollution of the water.

I am an environmental vegetarian and I do not eat shellfish either. You wont get any "missing" nutrients out of them (if you want zinc, eat some nuts, beans, or fortified cereals. Zinc is not on the top of the hard-to-find nutrient list.)

Seriously, if you are vegetarian for environmental reasons, just the fear of taking in all those PCBs, heavy metals, etc. which you know are out there should be enough to keep shellfish off the list. I am from Maine so I understand the cravings for clam chowder - make a really hearty, savory, delicious potato/corn soup and you'll feel much better. :-) If you are worried about nutrition, please feel free to ask around on these boards, you're right, this is a great place to get good information.

(and yes, I know I should be vegan but I can't commit myself to that level).

You "should" be whatever works for you and be PROUD of it!! Good for you for doing what you do!!

I personally think lacto-ovo vegetarians are still doing a huge amount towards reducing animal suffering.

It's an excellent choice and nothing to apologise for!!

But thank you for the pat interpretation of my question.You're welcome! :sunny:

I'm just going off the information YOU presented...YOU say that you know you 'should be vegan' but can't bring yourself 'to commit to that level' and then you ask for reasons that would make it okay to eat sea animals? YOU do the math and tell me if you still think it's a 'pat' answer. Add it up any way you like and it still looks like a lame excuse to justify a path which you have already indicated you know isn't the MOST sound environmental choice.

*Joyfully plays pat-a-cake with newbies* :juggle:

Please don't piss off the newbies. She looks to me like she's struggling to determine what is best for the environment/health/etc - a lot better than the millions of people who will go through a McDonalds drivethru today. She came here for an honest answer, and yes, we will be predisposed as a vegetarian community to discourage eating shellfish. But that doesn't mean we have to act all morally superior. The facts will support that eating shellfish is not worth the environmental/health impact, and she will make her own choice. Play nice :-)

I KNEW when I wrote that someone would have an issue with it. Why did I post it? Because it's HONEST and an HONEST reply to the OP's snarky comment to me. Did I sugar-coat it? No. Did I attack her as others who are notirious for being mean and nasty here on VB do? No. I just responded in a human way to a human statement.

Please tell me exactly in what way I am acting morally superior by simply taking what the OP has said and drawing logical conclusions? Please remember that I NEVER said the OP should be vegan...the OP did.

To the OP: I really hope you find what you need to convince you to stay vegetarian and if you feel (as YOU have indicated) that veganism is THE most sound choice (AGAIN, this is what YOU indicated) I hope you move towards that.

Check out this thread below, but be warned, if you are sensitive to such things...people in there are more than just simply direct...they are confrontational and less than kind with thier words at times.

http://www.veggieboards.com/boards/showthread.php?t=55256

I KNEW when I wrote that someone would have an issue with it.

The tone of your first post was just as bad as the second. And why take issue with it? Because you effectively have hijacked this thread, drawing the attention away from the environmental question which was asked. It was an honest question and your response, honestly, did not address the question at all.

No hijacking intended.

There is a small amount of *environmental* information re. the negative impact that the demand for shellfish and sea creatures has on the environment.

http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=52

Here's a list of non-animal sources of zinc:

Pumpkin seeds
Peas
Almonds
Wheatgerm
Chickpeas

I think the harvesting of shellfish would most likely be harmful to ocean floors. Usually when nets are dropped, they capture a lot of sea life and not just the sea life being harvested. Factory farmed shellfish may or may not have less impact. The harvesting and eating of any animal is unlikely to be sustainable.

I think the harvesting of shellfish would most likely be harmful to ocean floors. Usually when nets are dropped, they capture a lot of sea life and not just the sea life being harvested. Factory farmed shellfish may or may not have less impact. The harvesting and eating of any animal is unlikely to be sustainable.

:yes: And here's a related link:

http://shopping.guardian.co.uk/ethicalshopping/story/0,11951,899658,00.html

I can't imagine that other sealife wouldn't be affected by shellfish fishing (unless you catch it yourself while scuba diving.)

I don't think they farm a lot of shellfish in tanks.

No hijacking intended.

There is a small amount of *environmental* information re. the negative impact that the demand for shellfish and sea creatures has on the environment.

http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=52

Here's a list of non-animal sources of zinc:

Pumpkin seeds
Peas
Almonds
Wheatgerm
Chickpeas

I'm with AHIMSA on her comments about the motivation.

As an aside, this is an interesting topic, but the way it was presented in the original post, I don't see where it fits in a Vegetarian/Vegan discussion board. Kind of like starting a thread on the most ecologically friendly dry-rub for a pork tenderloin.

You know, the very fact that I'm asking this on a v*gan board, rather than whatever forum caters to meatlovers should indicate that I am interested in the arguments against eating shellfish.

I chose my vegetarianism based primarily on an ecological standpoint (although animal suffering concerns still played a major part). If it turns out that eating non-dredged shellfish is no worse, environmentally speaking, than buying non-organic, non-locally grown food, I would consider that acceptable.

I hate this sense of orthodoxy - I come here to ask a question for useful information, and even though I am furthering your cause (although not for the same reasons), AHIMSA, by not eating meat, you attack me for not carrying out my convictions to the fullest extent possible.

Are you an environmentalist, AHIMSA? I assume so, because all the veg*ns I know are. Let's say you gave up all directly fossil-fuel based travel (buses, taxis, etc) and started using primarily other forms of transportation - trains, walking, bikes, etc. And you hear that there are actually some circumstances where buses have less of an environmental impact than trains. You can't find any reliable information online, so you go to a place online where people would tend to have the most negative arguments against direct fossil-fuel based transport. And immediately you get attacked for still possibly using any fossil-fuel based transport at all, because these people are morally opposed to that. Without any useful information pro/con about using buses.

Anyway, thank you to everybody else, you've been quite helpful.

I think the harvesting of shellfish would most likely be harmful to ocean floors. Usually when nets are dropped, they capture a lot of sea life and not just the sea life being harvested. Factory farmed shellfish may or may not have less impact. The harvesting and eating of any animal is unlikely to be sustainable.

Oh yeah. When I read this it reminded me of an older thread so I looked it up:

http://www.veggieboards.com/boards/showthread.php?t=44541&highlight=ocean+floor

The info about "trawling" and the before and after pictures is especially interesting....

Hope this helps.

I chose my vegetarianism based primarily on an ecological standpoint (although animal suffering concerns still played a major part).

I hate this sense of orthodoxy - I come here to ask a question for useful information, and even though I am furthering your cause (although not for the same reasons), AHIMSA, by not eating meat, you attack me for not carrying out my convictions to the fullest extent possible.

Sorry you feel attacked. I *never* attacked you and I *did* try to help you. Please remember that YOU were the one who said you were not carrying you convictions to the fullest extent possible. I *never* said such a thing. I didn't have to...you did it for me.

Also, please ntoe that I *DID* answer your question with links that address your concerns as well as nutritional information, so your analogy doesn't fit.

I am sure if animal suffering plays any part in your decision making process as you now indicate, you can understand that eating sea creatures causes suffering to the creatures being eaten, regardless of the negative environmental impact it may have.

You know, the very fact that I'm asking this on a v*gan board, rather than whatever forum caters to meatlovers should indicate that I am interested in the arguments against eating shellfish.

I chose my vegetarianism based primarily on an ecological standpoint (although animal suffering concerns still played a major part). If it turns out that eating non-dredged shellfish is no worse, environmentally speaking, than buying non-organic, non-locally grown food, I would consider that acceptable.

I hate this sense of orthodoxy - I come here to ask a question for useful information, and even though I am furthering your cause (although not for the same reasons), AHIMSA, by not eating meat, you attack me for not carrying out my convictions to the fullest extent possible.

Are you an environmentalist, AHIMSA? I assume so, because all the veg*ns I know are. Let's say you gave up all directly fossil-fuel based travel (buses, taxis, etc) and started using primarily other forms of transportation - trains, walking, bikes, etc. And you hear that there are actually some circumstances where buses have less of an environmental impact than trains. You can't find any reliable information online, so you go to a place online where people would tend to have the most negative arguments against direct fossil-fuel based transport. And immediately you get attacked for still possibly using any fossil-fuel based transport at all, because these people are morally opposed to that. Without any useful information pro/con about using buses.

Anyway, thank you to everybody else, you've been quite helpful.

I guess what threw me was that you chose to post in a Vegetarian and Vegan forum with the topic. Would this not have been more appropriately posted in Environmental Issues? It seems that's what you're getting at, and like I said - it's an interesting topic, it just might not fit here. You posted in a Vegetarian and Vegan forum about raising shellfish. It's out of place.

uhh--the OP is a newbie, so don't give such a hard time about where they posted...

So when you said:

Add it up any way you like and it still looks like a lame excuse to justify a path which you have already indicated you know isn't the MOST sound environmental choice.

you meant what, exactly? I mean, I know the MOST sound environmental choice is killing myself. Absent that, I truly do not know whether eating oysters or non-organic bread at a restaurant is more environmentally sound.

In keeping with my previous post re: the fossil fuels - even if you are completely committed to living in a state where your ecological footprint is as low as possible, there is no way to avoid using fossil fuels unless you do a Walden. I am primarily committed to preserving the environment and secondarily to reducing animal suffering. Given how many arthropods (which have considerably more ability to suffer than shellfish) die as the result of even a vegan diet, I don't consider the additional suffering of shellfish in my equation of what to eat. If dredging is involved (where vertebrate fish can be captured) in harvesting the shellfish, of course, I will consider the additional suffering.

Would this not have been more appropriately posted in Environmental Issues?

Yes, sorry. I should probably have posted it in a different topic - but I have been a vegetarian for two years now and am considering reasons to diverge from that.

So when you said:
Add it up any way you like and it still looks like a lame excuse to justify a path which you have already indicated you know isn't the MOST sound environmental choice.
you meant what, exactly? I mean, I know the MOST sound environmental choice is killing myself. I meant exactly what I said. I won't argue with you as I think you can figure out what transpired by simply reading it and looking over your own words. Killing yourself is an option? Strange approach indeed. :confused:

I truly hope you are not trolling the board trying to start problems. I also hope you find sufficient reason to eat an all organic, locally-grown vegan diet. One can dream :naughty:

Did those links help you at all? :boobies:

I simply meant that, as a human (the most consumptive species), the most sound ecological approach would be to remove myself from the equation. It's not actually an option, obviously. And just like I am not willing to act to this extreme, there are other options that I either cannot or will not commit myself to - like veganism.

The fact was that I was not looking for an excuse to eat shellfish - I was looking for reasons not to eat shellfish. If none of those were compelling from either an ecological/animal suffering standpoint, I would feel OK about doing so. Believe me, most of the people that I interact with daily would have no problem with me eating beef, let alone shellfish.

I truly hope you are not trolling the board trying to start problems. I also hope you find sufficient reason to eat an all organic, locally-grown vegan diet. One can dream

Maybe when I get my life together. Really my standpoint between becoming a vegan from an ovo-lacto vegetarian is cheese and the eggs that are in various cakes, etc. Neither of which I really need to eat or find any real pleasure in.

Oh, AHIMSA, the only link that you provided regarding shellfish said that you could eat it with a sound conscience as long as it was not dredged (eg, the BBC report).a