Four Fish: The Future of the Last Wild Food
Paul Greenberg
In the majority of cultures around earth, many have at least one species of fish that is a staple of their diet, or holds a religious, spiritual, or philosophical meaning. In the book, Four Fish: The Future of the Last Wild Food by Paul Greenberg, the author supports an explanation as to why we, as humans, have such a love affair with not only fish but the open ocean. Mr. Greenberg, who is a devoted angler and also a fish conservationist, introduces the four fish that are eaten the most around the world. These are salmon, tuna, bass, and cod. He has a section covering each fish that includes, the history of the fish in relationship to human societal development, the various instances of domestication, the attempts at aquaculture, and also the state of the current wild populations for each. Mr. Greenberg then goes on to the political spectrum of the fish industries and highlights many of the problems that not just Americans face but all humans. Overfishing, depleting entire ecosystems, no fishing regulations or quotas, public demand for fish on the dinner table, and polluting fish farms are just a few of the topics he discusses. He has written articles for The New York Times Magazine, Book Review, and in the October 2010 issue of National Geographic, he wrote an article that is a base summary of this book.
Award History
0 wins · 1 total
| Award | Year | Result | Category / Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| J. Anthony Lukas Book Prize | 2011 | Finalist | Secondary source |
Experimental book profileGenerated by GPT-5.4 nano · may contain inaccuracies
This is an unverified interpretation of the catalog description, offered as an opt-in discovery experiment—not as bibliographic fact.
01 Central figures
None extracted with sufficient confidence.
02 Central places
None extracted with sufficient confidence.
03 Suggested argument
No argument inferred with sufficient confidence.
04 Reading orientation
32 / 100 academicSerious trade
An estimate of intended readership and scholarly apparatus—not quality or importance.
Confidence percentages are the model's own estimates. Profile confidence: 78%.