5 Comments
User's avatar
John the Obscure's avatar

One of the reasons barracuda is not on more resturant menus is that it has a bad reputation. As they get over three feet long, they begin to accumulate heavy metals such as mercury, in very small amounts. At five to six feet long, they are currently not recommended as food. This may have to do with the increasingly strict standards for environmental mercury.

They do appear on menus and fish shops in Florida, where the buyers know what sizes are good. They have a stronger flavor than drum, snapper, or snook, but not as strong as mackrel or bonito.

John in Indy (on Floridas' East coast for now)

Expand full comment
H.D. Miller's avatar

Thank you for that information. I obviously had no idea what was going on with barracuda, and you've really explained it.

Expand full comment
Polly Frost's avatar

Do you have prices for The Pantry? https://pantrycafe.restaurant/about/

Expand full comment
Andy's avatar

Very interesting! I do wonder if we're missing something else here. One thing I have heard a bunch is that we're spending a much smaller fraction of our income on food now as compared to other points in history. So unsure exact how to reconcile all these details...

Maybe you can talk to someone next door in your econ department? 🤔😅

Expand full comment
H.D. Miller's avatar

That's a great comment. I keep hearing that food is cheaper than ever, as a percentage of income, but then I see something like this and it makes me wonder. I'll have to take your suggestion and ask an economist to explain.

Expand full comment