For a quick definition of the word, I grabbed this from Wikipedia:

“When ecotarians make a consumption decision, they consider the impact on the land of growing the product, the impact of transporting the product from where it was produced, and the labor conditions for the people who grow the product.”

At tangent on Tuesday night we read over Genesis 1&2 (the story of creation) and discussed what it means to be stewards of everything. I quickly gravitated to a concept that has been banging around my head for quite a while now: Eating in a resource sustainable way.

So these are my rough rules:

  1. No produce that is terrible for Australia’s environment (most European animals do not co-exist with Australian fauna efficiently, so this rules out beef, pork and dairy, and possibly other meats)
  2. Nothing that needs to be shipped internationally, and limit the cross country foods.
  3. Must be in season, or be stored without excessive use of energy. This allows the consumption of grains all year, and I suspect maybe potatoes, but research will tell. The aim is for things that a 10th century person could eat.

Tangent wants us to do our thing for 2 months, I want to see if I can pull it off for much more than that.

Am I nuts? (hrm I wonder if 10th century man could store nuts for all year use?)


3 responses to “Ecotarian?

  1. PS: I’m aiming to start on Monday, need to do more reading to actually achieve what I intend.

  2. Well, you can survive off roo meat and bush tucker for a while :).

  3. I’m so bored of the way vegans are trying to hijack the ecology movement. The ‘ecotarian’ theory is stuffed with fallacies about animal food production in Australia. Sure, there are bad meat products, but there are also really bad vegetable products out there too: how many vegans avoid palm oil from east asia or soy from brazil? Precious few. You simply can’t accurately label one category of food as universally bad.
    Cattle do fine in the outback- if they are not overstocked they co-exist really well with native wildlife. I live in central australia and I’m a birdwatcher- cattle stations are some of the best sites for outback birds, often much better managed for wildlife than many national parks or Aboriginal lands.
    Kangaroo is the ultimate planet friendly food. It produces no GHGs, uses barely any water and is always organic and free range (BTW-there are no roo farms- its all taken under strict sustainable harvest rules).
    Eating camel and wild pig meat is a triple whammy- you are helping pay to remove serious environmental pests from the outback, supporting rural economies and getting a good dose of tasty nutritious flesh into the bargain.

    With your 10th Century diet rule, I wonder which part of the globe you are thinking of? Surely not England? If so, who’s English diet would you pick? A peasant, or a king’s?
    An average Aboriginal diet in the 10th century would have consisted of a minimum of half meat (including lizards, insects, fish, shellfish etc) and the rest whatever plant material was in season: wattle seeds, native grasses, wild fruits. I live in the Red Centre and have met a few old aboriginal folk who talk fondly of those days.

    I would really encourage everyone to be as ecologically minded in their dietary choises as they can but I do worry about the amount of mis-information being propogated as ‘eco’ on this subject- usually by the animal rights mob…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s