reLAKSation 279. Callander McDowell
The Best: In 1993, the now defunct Scottish Salmon Board asked British consumers which salmon they thought was the best in the world. Not unsurprisingly, the majority of consumers said that best salmon came from Scotland.
Did British consumers really think that Scottish salmon was the best or was it the only salmon they knew? The Scottish salmon industry has certainly encouraged the belief that their salmon is the best salmon in the world.
However the idea that Scottish salmon is the best did not originate with the development of salmon farming, it was already part of public consciousness. So where has this idea come from and have Scottish salmon farmers any justification for now claiming that their salmon is the best in the world?
The Atlantic salmon migrates out to sea to feed returning to freshwater to breed. Some travel down the North Sea seeking out the rivers of their birth. These can be in Norway, Scotland or even England. Other fish swim down the Irish Sea towards rivers in Wales and Ireland. It is unlikely that there is any difference between any of them. Good Atlantic salmon is good to eat no matter where it comes from. So why is Scottish salmon believed to be so special?
To find the answer it is necessary to go back to the Victorian era when two separate events elevated Scottish salmon to its status as the best salmon in the world.
The first was the decision by Queen Victoria to buy Balmoral. This encouraged many of her wealthy subjects to holiday in Scotland. Once there, they engaged in various sporting pursuits such as fly fishing ensuring Scottish salmon developed its association with high position and wealth.
The second event was the arrival of Eastern European immigrants into London’s East End who brought with them a tradition of eating smoked salmon. At first they continued to import Baltic salmon to smoke as they found that the local Scottish fish were too exclusive. However, connections with the British Empire meant that they could source salmon from Canada’s west coast. These fish were not Atlantic salmon but the very different Pacific salmon. These fish were smoked using a much milder smoke known as the London smoke.
The smoked salmon produced in London was very different to that found in Scotland. It was not only a different fish but also a different smoke and this is why Scottish salmon was perceived to have a superior image. This may have once been true but with the increased availability of farmed salmon from Scotland, the London smokehouses turned to Scottish salmon instead.
The differences that once made Scottish salmon special have now been lost in the mists of time. So is Scottish farmed salmon any different from Norwegian farmed salmon? Consumers do not seem to think so since many are just as happy to buy salmon farmed in Norway. After all they are the same fish, so why should Scottish salmon be different?
Foods have been
preserved by smoke curing since the dawn of recorded history. People in
countries the world over have relied on the smoke curing of fish and meat
products for long-term storage. Smoked salmon can travel great distances and
remain edible for long periods of time, and the drying process is of paramount
importance for preservation, because it is moisture in the flesh that permits
bacterial activity and spoilage. Salt accelerates the removal of water and hence
its widespread use as a traditional preservative.
Grantown
on Spey has a long and distinguished history of salmon smoking. As the leisured
gentlemen of the Victorian era took to fishing on the great Spey Valley River,
the demand for smoking and curing grew. It would have been almost impossible to
bring the beautiful Scottish Salmon back home fresh if one lived down south of
the borders, but if they were smoked by the river they would travel safely. The
choice of wood for smoking varies a great deal with geography. It is our aim to
work off the beautiful rich Highland environment to develop natural smokes.
This view first appeared in Fish Farmer magazine Vol.30. No.1. Jan/Feb 2007 (www.fishfarmer-magazine.com).
All talk: Interviewed by the Fishupdate newspaper, Scottish celebrity chef, Nick Nairn, said that unless immediate and meaningful action is taken, the Scottish farmed salmon industry faces major challenges. He is convinced that if quality issues are not addressed, there will be no significant industry left in 15 years because foreign competition is helping to reduce Scotland to ‘just another part of the global salmon sector’.
He believes that what is wrong is that commerce has become the governing factor and subsequently there is little differentiation between Scottish and overseas salmon whereas he believes that there must be. In addition, Mr Nairn believes that the old Scottish Quality Salmon organisation (now the SSPO) has failed to raise quality standards due to the fact they found it difficult to regulate the producers as they were subsidised by them. He argues that the arbitrators of the quality standards should be independently funded.
We, at Callander McDowell, have not had the privilege of eating Mr Nairn’s food so we do not know whether his cooking lives up to his reputation, but when it comes to life outside the kitchen, his thinking is more open to question. What this interview demonstrates is his inherent belief in Scottish salmon are special without understanding why. But of course as a Scottish chef, it would be unexpected if it were any different.
Mr Nairn argues that commerce now governs the salmon farming industry to the detriment of image and we would not disagree. But what the last fifteen years has shown is that producers can strive to produce salmon flesh of the highest possible quality but they cannot make a living doing so since most consumers are unwilling to pay any extra to buy it. This is because most consumers have been unable to differentiate between what Mr Nairn wants to buy and other salmon. Consequently, producers have had to accept the realities of the marketplace and produce what the consumer wants and is prepared to pay for; salmon of the right quality at the right price. Mr Nairn may have an idealistic view of what Scottish salmon should be but salmon farming is a business and not just a way of maintaining an image.
In the same way that commerce governs salmon farming, so it does the restaurant trade. Nick Nairn has given up on the day to day business of running a restaurant and instead owns a cookery school imparting his knowledge to amateur cooks. This is a wise move since the restaurant business can be extremely competitive with restaurants starting up and then closing down with alarming regularity. Failure to gain and retain customers, often because of wrong pricing, is a sure route to closure and so it is in salmon farming.
So Mr Nairn believes that the root of the problem in Scotland is the issue of quality. Quality can mean so many different things to different people and therefore it is often difficult to establish what it really means. Mr Nairn appears no different as he fails to back up his claim in any way at all. He blames the industry organisations for failing to enforce strict quality rules on their producers but producers continue to produce fish under Tartan Quality Mark guidelines even though the scheme has been an unmitigated disaster when it comes to the retail sector. Consumers have not been swayed by the presence of quality labels on their products and this is why the quality standard has failed. As we discussed in the previous article, the underlying problem is that Scottish salmon is no different to any other Atlantic salmon and thus consumers do not actively select Scottish salmon in the retail sector.
In addition, the quality issue is not just the responsibility of the producer. Farms can produce the highest quality salmon but this can be compromised further down the supply chain. Mr Nairn may be able to buy his fish direct from the local farm but most consumers do not have that luxury. They rely on various wholesalers and retailers and transport companies to supply their fish. Poor handling can destroy the quality in a second and this can tarnish the quality image of any product irrespective of where it is produced. For example, Rick Stein was recently extolling the virtues of line caught sea bass from the south west, yet we saw some tagged sea bass for sale which had sunken eyes and shrivelled skin. Clearly, the fishmonger had continued to display these fish long after they had passed their best. All the good work of the producers to get pristine fish to market as soon as possible would be undermined by one fishmonger who failed to treat the fish properly.
Sadly, Mr Nairn doesn’t actually clarify what needs to be done to help differentiate Scottish from other salmon, probably because one salmon is very much the same as another. However, it is unlikely that any potential suggestions will make any difference. He says that without differentiation, costs will get too high and Scotland will not be able to compete with lower cost producers like Chile, Canada and Norway. Unfortunately, experience has shown that attempts to differentiate Scottish salmon have actually increased costs and these have not been recouped from the end consumers. This led to the repeated claims that Scotland is not competitive with overseas producers. This is why the Strategic Framework recommended that a comparative cost study of international producers should be conducted. Although the study has now been carried out, the results have yet to be published so no conclusion on Mr Nairn’s advice can yet be drawn.
Finally, through differentiation, Mr Nairn hopes that the Scottish salmon industry can be revived. Yet, Mr Nairn ignores the fact that one sector of the industry has pursued exactly such differentiation with both salmon certified as either Freedom Food or organic. The jury is still out as to whether these differentiated niche markets provide a real answer for the Scottish industry.