Irish famine

[DobryDen]

During the Irish famine of the 1840s, why didn't people eat fish? No point in Ireland is more than 70 miles from the sea. I've heard this question raised many times, usually with the implication that the starving Irish peasants were pretty dim not to take advantage of an obvious remedy.

But I'm guessing there are good reasons why fish couldn't alleviate the suffering very much. Perhaps it's that Ireland then didn't have roads good enough for transporting fish even a short ways inland. And there was no fishing industry with boats -- people standing on the shore with fishing poles could hardly feed 8 million people (the population at the time).
I do know the British helped institute a fishing industry on the west coast of Ireland in the late 19th century. One wonders why doing so during the famine wasn't part of the relief efforts.

Anyone know? Thanks,
Dennis Moran
Pacific Grove, California dobrydennis@yahoo.co

[pravnik]

Dobry den, DobryDen:

Some sources, like this guy, claim it was passive genocide on the part of the English; Irish Catholics couldn't apply for hunting or fishing licenses.

Others, like this guy say it was more because of the relative poverty that prevented a large enough fishing industry to feed the whole island. Fish were considered a luxury item, and Irish fishermen ate potatoes as their main staple, especially when weather was bad for long periods and they couldn't fish. They didn't have boats large and sturdy enough for deep sea fishing. They were too poor to buy salt themselves to preserve their catch to bring very far inland, or to last through bad weather when they couldn't replenish their catch.