The End of Lobster Rolls?

Put up your dukes: lobsters are one scrappy sea creature. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bugre_americanu.jpg">Roberto Rodríguez</a>/Wikimedia Commons

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


When European settlers alighted upon what’s now known as New England, they gaped at the bounty of the shoreline, reports William Cronon in his classic 1983 book Changes in the Land: Indians, Colonists, and the Ecology of New England. Cronon lays out contemporary accounts of coastal waters teeming with cod, streams thick with salmon, of oysters “almost a foot long.”

Lobster barely registers in Cronon’s survey of this almost mythically productive ecosystem, but it existed in abundance, unloved as food but exploited all the same. Native Americans used it as farm fertilizer and fishing bait, the Gulf of Maine Research Institute reports, and it emerged as a kind of trash food for the colonialists, who “served it to children, to prisoners, and to indentured servants.”

Lobster’s rise from culinary afterthought to white tablecloth delicacy has become almost the stuff of cliché. For years, overharvesting led to falling catches and high prices—seeming to ensure lobster’s high-falutin’ status.

But something odd has been brewing off the coast of Maine for more than a decade. Despite fears of an imminent collapse, lobster landings have skyrocketed. As a Chronicle of Higher Education article put it back in 2001, “Scientists have warned that lobsters are in danger, but nobody bothered to tell the lobsters.”

Since then, the Gulf of Maine lobster fishery has only gotten more productive. “Maine lobstermen caught 123.3 million pounds of lobster during the 2012 season, which represents a 15 percent increase from 2011 and an 88 percent increase from landings two decades ago,” according to news site MaineBiz. The stuff has gotten so abundant, MaineBiz reports, that New England-area Walgreens are sprouting live lobster tanks. What gives?

As my colleagues Tim McDonnell and James West show, the Gulf of Maine’s teeming lobster population appears to be flourishing within a makeshift ecological niche created by two highly destructive human-induced forces: climate change and overfishing. The area’s fast-warming waters appear to make lobsters grow faster and reproduce more; and the great diversity of sealife enjoyed by the European settlers has largely vanished after centuries of heavy fishing pressure—and among the casualties are key lobster predators like cod.

As Taras Grescoe put it in his excellent 2008 book Bottomfeeder, “with top predators fished to a fraction of their former abundance, [the Atlantic] has become an ocean increasingly populated by shrimp, lobsters, crab, and other resilient, fast-growing crustaceans. An ocean, in other words, of bottomfeeders.”

In addition to the growth stimulation from warming waters, lobsters might be getting another boost from climate change: faster shell formation. As oceans absorbs excess carbon from the atmosphere, their acidity levels rise, and scientists have long hypothesized that acidification would harm coral reefs as well as all shell-forming sea creatures. But a 2009 study from Woods Hole Oceanic Institute researchers found that while acidic seawater caused the shells of the clams and oysters to dissolve, it actually improved shell formation for crustaceans like lobsters.

Even so, as McDonnell and West show, Maine lobsters’ unexpected abundance is leading to anxiety, not elation, among Maine’s lobstermen. Ever-expanding supply has caused prices to plunge, meaning they’re trapping more lobster than ever yet making less money.

Then there’s the specter of what happened a few hundred miles to the south in Long Island Sound, where the lobster harvest rose dramatically in the 1990s before plummeting just as rapidly—possibly because ocean temperatures there crossed a threshold above which lobsters can no longer thrive. As the Gulf of Maine’s waters continue warming, a similar fate could befall its lobster horde. In a fast-changing, unpredictable seascape, ecological niches can snap shut as quickly as they open. Grescoe laid out a a nightmare scenario in Bottomfeeder: “The lobster boom of the Atlantic …may be just a tiny blip on a slippery slope to oceans filled with jellyfish, bacteria, and slime.”

Yet lobsters are indisputably resilient creatures. In perhaps the least appetizing article in Gourmet Magazine‘s sumptuous history, David Foster Wallace trained a novelist’s cold eye on them. He pointed out that lobsters are “basically giant sea-insects” that “date to the Jurassic period.” Indeed, he continued, “they’re biologically so much older than mammalia that they might as well be from another planet.”

That means they have a long track record of surviving cataclysmic environmental change. And at any rate, we may as well enjoy them while we can. Here’s a vintage Julia Child video to remind us how to do just that.

 

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON MOTHER JONES' FINANCES

We need to start being more upfront about how hard it is keeping a newsroom like Mother Jones afloat these days.

Because it is, and because we're fresh off finishing a fiscal year, on June 30, that came up a bit short of where we needed to be. And this next one simply has to be a year of growth—particularly for donations from online readers to help counter the brutal economics of journalism right now.

Straight up: We need this pitch, what you're reading right now, to start earning significantly more donations than normal. We need people who care enough about Mother Jones’ journalism to be reading a blurb like this to decide to pitch in and support it if you can right now.

Urgent, for sure. But it's not all doom and gloom!

Because over the challenging last year, and thanks to feedback from readers, we've started to see a better way to go about asking you to support our work: Level-headedly communicating the urgency of hitting our fundraising goals, being transparent about our finances, challenges, and opportunities, and explaining how being funded primarily by donations big and small, from ordinary (and extraordinary!) people like you, is the thing that lets us do the type of journalism you look to Mother Jones for—that is so very much needed right now.

And it's really been resonating with folks! Thankfully. Because corporations, powerful people with deep pockets, and market forces will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. Only people like you will.

There's more about our finances in "News Never Pays," or "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," and we'll have details about the year ahead for you soon. But we already know this: The fundraising for our next deadline, $350,000 by the time September 30 rolls around, has to start now, and it has to be stronger than normal so that we don't fall behind and risk coming up short again.

Please consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO, and Brian Hiatt, Online Membership Director

payment methods

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON MOTHER JONES' FINANCES

We need to start being more upfront about how hard it is keeping a newsroom like Mother Jones afloat these days.

Because it is, and because we're fresh off finishing a fiscal year, on June 30, that came up a bit short of where we needed to be. And this next one simply has to be a year of growth—particularly for donations from online readers to help counter the brutal economics of journalism right now.

Straight up: We need this pitch, what you're reading right now, to start earning significantly more donations than normal. We need people who care enough about Mother Jones’ journalism to be reading a blurb like this to decide to pitch in and support it if you can right now.

Urgent, for sure. But it's not all doom and gloom!

Because over the challenging last year, and thanks to feedback from readers, we've started to see a better way to go about asking you to support our work: Level-headedly communicating the urgency of hitting our fundraising goals, being transparent about our finances, challenges, and opportunities, and explaining how being funded primarily by donations big and small, from ordinary (and extraordinary!) people like you, is the thing that lets us do the type of journalism you look to Mother Jones for—that is so very much needed right now.

And it's really been resonating with folks! Thankfully. Because corporations, powerful people with deep pockets, and market forces will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. Only people like you will.

There's more about our finances in "News Never Pays," or "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," and we'll have details about the year ahead for you soon. But we already know this: The fundraising for our next deadline, $350,000 by the time September 30 rolls around, has to start now, and it has to be stronger than normal so that we don't fall behind and risk coming up short again.

Please consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO, and Brian Hiatt, Online Membership Director

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate