Food 31 Dec 2005 03:20 am
local food: this one you have to try.
My piscivorous friends, this one you must try: Pelican Packers tuna. Now, I am not generally a great fan of fish, but every so often I like some tuna, and it’s nice to have on hand. I had a SPUD box that was a bit under the line for free delivery, so I thought I’d try a can. What the heck. I was charmed by the small size of the operation, and the fish is troll-caught younger tuna, which tend to be much lower in mercury and higher in omega-3 fatty acids.
Oh. My. God. I think it was even better than the fresh tuna I had in Kiribati. It’s an entirely different critter from supermarket canned tuna, even the relatively decent stuff. Josh and I split a 3.5 oz can. Yeah, it’s expensive, but it’s so excellent that half of one of those little cans is satisfying. Though we were certainly going to get every last bit of it we could:
Cam: <brandishing bread> “I’ve never even been tempted to mop up the last bits from a tuna can with a bit of bread before.”
Josh: <looks jealous, then hangs head> “I licked my plate.”
Cam: <cackling> “Me too!”
Josh: “I mean, I was really going at it. It was shameful.”
No shame. I’m just glad I thought of the bread thing first. (Josh says, “Damn you!”) This stuff is mindblowingly good.
I now understand a lot of tuna recipes that once baffled me. Pasta puttanesca with tuna, for instance, always seemed like a lousy thing to do to a perfectly innocent plate of spaghetti, but now I’m understanding how it could be delicious. Or fagioli al tonno — sounds awful when you consider the usual fishy mush that passes for canned tuna, but with this stuff, I imagine it could be excellent.
I think I’ll order a case tomorrow.
on 31 Dec 2005 at 8:03 am 1.Mia said …
I’ve clearly squandered the couple of cans that I’ve bought of it, since I just stirred it into my mac and cheese and didn’t pay attention to it except to notice that it was more solid and more solidly packed than the standard varieties.
I’ll show more appreciation next time.
on 31 Dec 2005 at 12:22 pm 2.Rachel Hestilow said …
Ooh, that looks good. Which kind did you have? I’m having trouble figuring out the difference between the “Natural”, “Original”, and “Smoked” varieties (how else *do* they cook canned fish besides smoking, anyway?)
on 31 Dec 2005 at 12:41 pm 3.Savannah said …
*giggling at your conversation of shame*
Thanks for the referral! I’ve not had tuna for a long time because of the bother in determining what’s safer and what isn’t. (I’d been concentrating on Trader Joe’s wild caught salmon patties, which are good broken up and sauteed and served with stir fry vegetables over rice).
The Red Cross/Peet’s has still not sent my receipt; I’m going to eat someone’s face at Corporate.
on 31 Dec 2005 at 12:43 pm 4.Cam Sculpin said …
I went for the Original. I’ll try the smoked variety next week. (It’s on sale at the aforementioned SPUD.) I think the Natural one doesn’t have salt, and the Original one does.
As for the cooking, I dunno — steaming, I’d guess. Could be that the heat of canning cooks the fish.
on 31 Dec 2005 at 12:52 pm 5.Cam Sculpin said …
Savannah - huh! Well, it sounds like their receipt system is screwed. Not too long ago I got my second receipt from the Red Cross, dated December 5. This one’s in English. Both of them are pseudo-signed by Napoleon Hendrix III (!) who’s the manager of Donor Relations.
Mr. Hendrix writes, “It has come to my attention that the initial acknowledgement sent to you by the Red Cross was in Spanish. I sincerely apologize for this mistake, which occurred because of a systems malfunction, and has been corrected. [blah blah apology blah blah more apology blah blah practically falls down apologizing].”
on 01 Jan 2006 at 11:31 pm 6.cookiecrumb said …
Cam: I’m so glad you came by my place so I could visit yours. I’m blogrolling you: great stuff.
xx
on 01 Jan 2006 at 11:34 pm 7.Cam Sculpin said …
*blush* Thanks!
on 07 Jan 2006 at 10:51 pm 8.Lou said …
I would like to say