People forage mushrooms for many reasons. For many, it’s a casual activity combined with hiking or walking. For others, it’s an obsessive hobby, akin to a treasure hunt in the woods. And then, for another subset of foragers, it is solely for making money. Sustainable mushroom foraging is essential for every type of forager; destroyed mushroom habitats doesn’t help anyone!
Jump to:
Only Take What You Need
Stumbling across a porcini honey hole is like tripping over a million dollars. Even if you don’t intend to sell them for profit, it’s difficult to exercise restraint. When there are so many mushrooms, it feels like there is no way to over-forage.
However, over-foraging is precisely what is happening in our forests worldwide. Excessive foraging (along with habitat destruction) is reducing mushroom populations and future growth potential.
Humans tend to collect, forage, and cut down everything as if there is no such thing as resource depletion. We put blinders on, take what we want, and then future generations must contend with the problems we created. Our ancestors thought the prairie buffalo were a never-ending resource; then, the next couple of generations had to work like crazy to ensure buffalo weren’t hunted to extinction.
The takeaway of this one example is that every individual’s actions matter. Repeat that a couple of times. Every individual action matters. No, you by yourself are not going to deplete the woods of chanterelles. Still, if everyone forages with the overabundance mindset, it is entirely possible chanterelles will be over-collected and face scarcity.
Another example: If you take five more trout than you need, and then your neighbor does the same because he saw you do it, and their neighbor takes ten more because he wants to keep up, how long until there aren’t any more left? Treat mushroom patches like the finite resources they are; treasure them and treat them well, and they will return riches.
Examples of Mushrooms Lost Due to Habitat Loss and Overharvesting
Most of these are not in North America, as our foraging tradition is still quite young. In other countries, though, like Europe, the UK, and Asia, there are a number of mushroom species that are now rare due to lack of sustainable mushroom foraging methods.
- Agarikon (Laricifomes officinalis) – This mushroom species occurs only in old-growth forests. It is believed to be a prime medicinal mushroom. Deforestation has alarmingly decreased its natural habitat. And, now, it is being overharvested because it is deemed valuable. Between old-growth forest destruction and unregulated harvesting, this fungus is in danger of extinction.
- Tibetan Cordyceps (Ophiocordyceps sinensis)– Due to high (and increasing) demand, the wild resources of this medicinal mushroom are under threat. While there is no exact numbers, the search for this mushroom is perceived to threaten the environment of the Tibetan Plateau. While it is still common in many areas, current collection rates are much higher than in historical times. It also causes serious conflict among tribes in the area, and people have been killed harvesting this fungus. Cordyceps can be cultivated, but many advocate that the wild specimens are more potent than the cultivated.
- Lion’s Mane – UK Only (Hericium erinaceus) – This mushroom is scarce and threatened and has the highest level of legal protection in the UK. Picking and sale of the fungus is illegal. Thankfully, this edible mushroom is easily cultivated. It also grows abundantly in North America.
- White Ferula Mushroom (Pleurotus nebrodensis) – This edible mushroom found in Sicily started out uncommon, and is now endangered. Because it is rare and said to be delicious, foraged specimens sell for a huge profit. The potential of big payments, then, in turn, sends more folks out foraging to find them to have a good payday. It can be cultivated, so hopefully that will relieve the pressure from the limited wild specimens.
Mushroom Patches Are Not Apple Trees
There is a common analogy used in the mushroom foraging world, likening picking mushrooms to picking apples from a tree. When you pick an apple from the tree, it doesn’t hurt the tree. And similarly, when you forage the fruiting mushroom body, it doesn’t hurt the underground mycelium. And, with this analogy, you can pick every single fruiting mushroom, and “it’s fine.” Picking every mushroom is considered to still be sustainable mushroom foraging.
Technically, this analogy is accurate. However, it isn’t comprehensive or complete – it needs to be taken a step further. There is a crucial point missing that is going to come back and bite us in the behind if we ignore it. An apple tree will eventually grow old and die and stop producing fruit. In the same way, a mycelium network will eventually run out of nutrients and stop producing mushrooms. This is normal.
But, if we picked every single apple and never let one or 10 or 100 fall to the ground, rot, and spread its seeds, there won’t be any more apple trees. With no seeds hitting the forest floor because they’ve all been picked, future generations of apple trees will be nonexistent. The same goes for mycelium and mushrooms.
When we pick every single mushroom, we are not allowing them to
go through their entire natural lifecycle, which involves spreading spores (their seed) to create new patches.
The very best practice is to pick some, leave some, and let the mushrooms do what Mother Nature intended so the spores can disperse and create excellent mushroom patches for the future. This is a key to sustainable mushroom foraging. We need to stop interrupting natural cycles — they exist for a reason – because they work and have for millions of years.
Let The Mushrooms Spore Out
Spores are mushrooms’ seeds. A mushroom usually doesn’t produce spores until the end of its life. It achieves maturity, releases spores, then dies off. The wind then carries the spores far and wide to settle around the forest. If a few land in a hospitable environment, new mushroom patches will form. This article explains mushroom reproduction more in-depth if you’re interested.
A mushroom picked too young will not get a chance to spread its spores and reproduce. An entire patch of chanterelles picked before spore release will continue to grow in that patch. However, it is unlikely new patches will have the opportunity to grow because no spores were distributed. Current actions affect future harvests. Sustainable mushroom foraging starts with our everyday actions.
The Pluck or Cut Quandary
There is a lot of, often very heated, debate about whether it is better to cut mushrooms off at the stem, leaving the base in the ground or to pluck the entire mushroom. Advocates of sustainable mushroom foraging can be on either side, depending on how they were taught or what they read.
Proponents of the cut-only method say that when you pull the mushroom up, it destroys the mycelium in the ground. Advocates for plucking the whole mushroom make the point that this the natural type of foraging that wild animals do, and it won’t hurt the mycelium.
This question was mostly laid to rest not to long ago when a group of researchers in Switzerland published the results of their 27-year study about this very issue. The study showed no difference in fungal production or harvests or in the health of patches based on picking or cutting.
Now, this is one study and even though it was broad, we cannot base all our decisions on one study in one country. However, based on the results, its probably pretty fair to say it doesn’t matter if you pick or only cut the fruiting mushrooms.
Another part of this study directly applies to the previous paragraph in this article. The study indicated that picking an entire patch did not impact the production of that patch the following year. This would indicate that it’s okay to pick a patch clean and it won’t hurt future harvests.
But, and the study and scientists make it clear, that this was not a comprehensive enough study to make a final determination on that issue. While the singular patch that was picked clean wasn’t hurt, clearing out a mushroom patch may prevent other patches from forming nearby or in the general area. This still needs to be studied to get a clear understanding of how new mushroom patches form. In the meantime, I think its best to be conservative on the issue and think about the long-term!
If we don’t know how picking a patch clean, before it the mushrooms spore out, affects the growth of new patches, we should abstain from doing that. While it may not hurt our mushroom harvests, generations from now there could be huge consequences if we are not using sustainable mushroom foraging tactics, or at least being cautious until we know more.
Stop The Raking
A common tactic used by mushroom foragers, especially of matsutake, is to rake the forest floor to find the mushrooms. This is the opposite of sustainable mushroom foraging. Raking is done because it is easier and quicker to find the fruiting mushrooms when you rake than to walk around and try to see them in the leaf duff. This is especially true of mushrooms that grow in conifer forests where the needle duff is quite dense.
Raking, though, directly disturbs and harms the fungi mycelium beneath the soil surface. Instead of raking, take the time to seek out each mushroom patch. Use your senses, and take pride in causing the least amount of harm to the landscape. When you rake the forest floor, you are seriously hurting future growth. If you are a commercial mushroom hunter, this means directly hurting your bottom line because in the future, your harvests will not be as abundant.
Sustainable Mushroom Foraging Ethics
- Harvest only half of a mushroom patch. Leave at least half behind on the tree or forest floor to complete their life cycle and spread their spores far and wide.
- When you harvest, try to take only the older ones – these have already released their spores.
- Tread lightly. Trampling patches and raking forest floors upsets fragile ecosystems, kills young mushroom growth and their symbiotic plants, and most likely inhibits future growth.
Kenny Rupert says
Interesting. I do agree about habitat loss being a problem. Can you elaborate on why we should view mushrooms more like buffalo and not like apples? Especially in regards to chanterelles and the Swiss study, I was always told that picking didn’t hinder future flushes. Is there a study out there that refutes that, and citations please?
Jenny says
Hello and thank you for responding. I dislike the apple analogy because people don’t take it far enough and use it as a reason/justification for picking patches totally clean, all the time. Based on the Swiss study, picking does not hinder future flushes. FOR THAT ONE PATCH. What we don’t know because there are NO studies, is whether picking hinders future patch formation and therefore the spread of the spores to create more patches. You can pick a whole patch and it’s fine for that one patch — that’s what the Swiss study showed. There is no evidence or studies available regarding the effects of picking a patch clean for the mycelium development in the rest of the forest. Because there are no studies, I have no citations to give. And, so I recommended erring on the side of caution. Mother Nature and evolution determine that the evolution of mushrooms involves releasing their spores. This must be for a reason. Most likely to spread to create new patches. When we pick a patch clean, we inhibit and prevent the mushrooms ability to complete it’s natural lifecycle.
I am not a scientist (as some will love to point out) but I have common sense. If you don’t allow spores to spread, it can’t be good for the longevity of the species. Some mushrooms must be left behind to spore out.
I actually dislike both the apple and buffalo analogies, lol, I don’t think there should be analogies. Mushroom are their own kingdom with their own set of rules. And we don’t know them all. And we shouldn’t make assumptions, especially when we are actively disrupting their natural life cycles.
Kenny Rupert says
There are certainly a opinions I disagree with here, but seems kind of tedious to go over each one, so I will just let that go. I do agree whole hardily with the habitat loss and raking being a problem though. That said, I do wish that you used “in my opinion” more in this article, so that others don’t cite this as fact. As per refuting the Swiss study, the lack of an opposing study doesn’t prove another study wrong. What are your thoughts on leaving Armillaria to produce and distribute spores? They’ve become the largest organism in the world and they kill a lot of trees? What about Pleurotus citrinopileatus and the possibility it is stealing habitat from other Pleurotus spp. as well as other saprotrophs? Similar with the naturalization of Lentinula edodes. The same could be said for some mycorrhizal species. Do you think that we should only leave some of the popularly picked edible mushrooms, but take ones that aren’t? Should we try and pick all of the lethal mushrooms we can like Amanita phalloides to hope they don’t produce more or let mother nature and evolution do their thing?
Jenny says
I appreciate your thoughtful response. I never said the swiss study was wrong. I said more studies need to be done. One study does not equal a balanced and complete scientific reasoning. I would agree that all mushrooms, including Armillaria be allowed to produce and distribute spores, as they’re meant to do. It doesn’t matter whether they’re edible or not. BUT, the ones at risk ARE the edible ones because they are the ones being harvested. Armillaria is a naturally occurring species that plays a huge ecological role where it resides. The invasive species are a completely different story — shiitake and yellow oysters aren’t natural in our environment in North America. I do understand what you’re saying and we can parse hairs as much as we want, but the poisonous/non-edible species are not at risk like the edible ones.
It is interesting to me that this article has triggered so many people but only on one point, and that is that I suggest we don’t harvest entire patches. That we err on the side of caution. Why is this triggering? Because folks want to take them all and want permission to do so — for money? Otherwise, why is leaving some behind problematic?
I HIGHLY recommend everyone read the conclusions of the Swiss Study , especially the conclusions, where it says
Kenny Rupert says
Thank you for the response. I am not “triggered” in the least. I go to and help organize a lot of forays as well as I admin a lot of ID groups. I go out of my way to dispell unproven info and/or misinformation. If this was written from a “in my opinion” point of view I wouldn’t have a problem with it. I just don’t want people taking your opinions as facts and using this resource as a citation on its own. The general public isn’t all that intelligent and will want to equate pulling trout or shooting buffalo to picking chanterelles, when it’s more like having you pets spade or neutered if you really want to make an animal analogy. JMHO.
Jenny says
Yes, I understand your point, but also, this is the internet and to take anything I say as fact is on the shoulders of the reader. I will not assume unintelligence. In fact, I assume the opposite. I think it is clear, based on the fact that I say there aren’t enough studies, that this is a subject up for discussion and further analysis.
Either way, shooting buffalo, fishing trout, spaying pets — it all leads to one thing — a decline in population numbers. Hence the need for a conservative approach :-D. I think we have the same goals in mind, we want good information out there. I want to see more research and a conservative approach until that happens and I will advocate for it. And I don’t want people assuming that one or two studies in another country equals a clear scientific analysis that we should base our approach on.
Matthew Melnikoff says
Hello, I am a mycologist from Northern Illinois. I stumbled across your article and… well, I am just very disappointed with what you’re putting out there. The trout analogy is ridiculous and does not reflect the reality of fungal biology. Picking all the mushrooms in an area does not inhibit growth. You make wild jumps with little to no understanding of fungal biology. Buffalo extinction? The science does not support what you’re speaking about.
The mycelium is the organism, the mushroom is a fruitbody of that organism. Picking the mushroom is like picking an apple from a tree, in the sense that picking one mushroom does not harm the entirety of the organism. Pulling a trout from the stream hurts the trout. It diminishes the trout population. Picking a mushroom does not do that. It is so unlike picking trout from a stream that I have to beg the question of your understanding of fungal biology. Mushrooms are so plentiful, it’s going to be impossible to pick all the mushrooms in an area to prevent growth of future patches. I understand your impulse to try and teach responsible or ethical foraging of mushrooms in this way, similar to how overfishing causes problems in fish populations, but your approach is not based on science. You are effectively pick shaming people for no reason; that’s not okay. We fight every day against these misconceptions in the mushroom foraging community, we don’t need internet articles like yours spreading mycophobia. Please consider changing the information in your article to match the scientific understanding of mushroom foraging, which is that picking mushrooms does not influence future yields, since the organism itself is not affected. There are plenty of other mushrooms releasing spores, and most mushrooms you find will have already started to release spores. Granted, chanterelles do sporulate slower than other mushrooms, but if you’ve ever seen chanterelles in the woods… you’ll realize quite quickly that even if you, your neighbor, his neighbor, their mom, their uncle, and Jim Bob went and picked their fill, there would still be thousands left over in only a single square mile.
I would also recommend understanding the difference between saprobic, parasitic, and mycorrhizal mushrooms. It helps to understand what “mycorrhizal” means; these mushrooms are in symbiosis with trees. You mention the possibility of chanterelles being picked into extinction, but then you start talking about several mushrooms that aren’t even mycorrhizal… relating their extinction to overharvesting. It just does not seem like you have a firm grasp of what you’re speaking about. If you picked all the chanterelles in an area, the mycelium is still there. It has all the nutrients it needs to re-fruit and create more spores.
Hopefully you’re able to change your article, full of this misinformation. I understand you want to “buck the analogy of the apple tree”, but it’s a fine analogy that is perfectly descriptive for how picking one mushroom does not disturb the entirety of the organism. Please reconsider your opinions which are not based in science and stop spreading mycophobia.
Thank you for reading.
Jenny says
Hi and thank you for your very thorough response. I invite you to re-read the article, possibly a little slower this time. I agreed with the apple analogy, but said it didn’t go far enough. It is not a fine analogy. It only considers the one apple tree or the one mushroom patch, completely ignoring the forest for the single tree.
And, I never said Picking all the mushrooms in an area inhibits growth, FOR THAT PATCH. In fact, I referenced the Swiss study to say the opposite. You can pick an entire patch and it does not affect future growth for that patch.
My exact words – “An entire patch of chanterelles picked before spore release will continue to grow in that patch. However, it is unlikely new patches will have the opportunity to grow because no spores were distributed.”
What I DID do is give a warning about the UNKNOWN effects of picking entire patches as it relates to the formation of other patches in the forest. I am thinking widely, forest-wide, vast forest wide, not singular patches. I am thinking of the entire ecosystem, and the mushrooms desire to spread to other parts of the forest.
Mushrooms are meant to release spores, as part of their natural lifecycles, and when we pick patches clean, we are disrupting a natural life cycle. Now, I can’t cite studies as to the exact effects of how this effects new patch formations in the rest of the forest, because there are none. There are NO studies about this. And so, I advise to err on the side of caution, until there are actually studies we can rely on. Again, mushrooms are meant to release spores as part of their natural life cycle. We need to let them do that. How problematic is it to pick half a patch as opposed to the full patch?? Seriously. Why is that so upsetting to hear?
If exercising caution is spreading mycophopia, so be it. The world is not ours to seize all the resources without side effects. This upsets people. It always will. People want to take and take and take and not have consequences. But, we will have the consequences or our children and grand children will.
David says
Jenny, you are EXACTLY RIGHT on the science. We do NOT know the effects on POPULATION DYNAMICS of overharvesting. The examples from other continents are very instructive. I agree that studies of patches do NOT study the population dynamics over 10 or 20 or more years, in the area of spore spread (1/4 mile diameter? 1 mile diameter?)
I have a degree in biology, and there’s a HUGE hole in the apple tree analogy. Apple trees do not spread to new areas by their seed. People spread apple trees, plant them, water them, fertilize them, and protect them, etc. Its a horrible analogy. On the other hand, Mushroom spores are the way that a species will spread to NEW areas. Apples are a species bred and spread by people. Mushrooms are wild.
I DO think the fishing analogy is a great one, and supports the author. We do not harvest fish before they have had a chance to reproduce. We should treat mushrooms the same. In other words, we should not pick ‘button’ (baby) mushrooms – only mature ones that have had some chance to produce spores!
Thanks to Jenny, the original author for this excellent article. This is cutting edge. I have been bringing up these points on forums, and have noticed the experts do not argue with the POPULATION DYNAMICS angle. Its super easy to avoid harvesting ‘buttons’ (pre-reproductive mushrooms) anyway! I like your rule of thumb to harvest half a patch. That’s what I’ve been doing.
David says
OK, well, I have a degree in biology, and there’s a HUGE hole in the apple tree analogy. Apple trees do not spread to new areas by their seed. Mushroom spores are the way that a species will spread to new areas. Apples are a species bred and spread by people. Mushrooms are wild.
I DO think the fishing analogy is a great one, and supports the author. We do not harvest fish before they have had a chance to reproduce. We should treat mushrooms the same. In other words, we should not pick ‘button’ (baby) mushrooms – only mature ones that have had some chance to produce spores!
Thanks to the original author for this excellent article.
David says
This is looking at it through a POPULATION DYNAMICS lens.
Lisa says
Of course apple trees spread by seeds! Where do you think apple trees came from? Trees, that grew from seeds, way before humans started selective breeding and planting in orchards. If you don’t like the apple tree analogy because we don’t find new patches of cultivated varieties like Fujis or Pink Ladies, then just say “fruit trees.”
Kevin Taylor says
Thank you for explaining the science. I have a pretty good grasp on what you were talking about already and have seen several articles like this one that seemed far off base I just wanted to say thank you for explaining it so well.
Jenny says
You are very welcome! And glad you enjoyed the article. Happy sustainable foraging 😀 !
Vic R. Boom says
It’s interesting to me that you discount the supported facts from two experts with what amounts to your opinion. I encourage you to examine the Dunning-Kruger effect. They are honestly and accurately trying to combat misinformation.
Jenny says
Thank you for your response. My point is: One (or two) studies does not equal Facts. That’s not how science works. In the study itself, it says more studies must be done to determine the effect of completely picked patches on the overall distribution and spread of mushrooms in the forest. That is not my opinion; that is the opinion of scientists. I would suggest you also examine the Dunning-Kruger effect and also, re-read the Swiss study. Yes, I do insert my opinion in here, based on common sense approaches to ecology — it seems that the only people outraged by my article are those who want to be given total permission to pick entire patches willy nilly. And, I can only assume these are harvesters with a monetary interest. Or people who like to take all they see? Why is exercising restraint a trigger? Swiss Study Conclusions
David says
Jenny You ARE right, and cutting edge at that. Keep up the good work. Harvesting pre-reproductive fruiting bodies can easily be avoided – ‘button’ mushrooms are so small anyway. You will continue to encounter folks who are knowledgeable, but are not looking ahead 20 years, 50 years.
Overharvesting also can affect population dynamics, in ways that have definitely not been studied (to my knowledge, if someone knows otherwise, please speak up.) This would mean not only studying multiple patches, but rather studying the spread of new patches (or lack of spread) in a large area. Would it be a 1/2 mile radius? More? So many unknowns.
And your inclusion of the concrete examples of now-endangered mushrooms on other continents is very pertinent.
The best model we have for responsible, sustainable harvest of mushrooms is fishing regulations. I lived in Hawaii where the regs were almost a joke, and unenforced, no licence required, etc. And over the 80s and 90s and to today, I have seen the loss of large fish, and loss in numbers of fish. Overharvesting, harvesting young (pre-reproductive), habitat degradation and loss, climate disruption, all these and more should be looked at carefully. But following your rules of thumb are a fantastic start. Keep up the great work. David H., BA Biology, Masters Public Admin
Jenny says
Thank you, David! I did not expect such pushback from suggesting we think about the future. And pointing out that the lack of just these thoughts has led us into current situations with so many species that are now on the verge. I lived in Hawaii for awhile, too :-). So gorgeous and so sad to see what is happening in the oceans. There was such abundance that no one imagined it could ever run out…until it did. A classic and now almost predictable human led disruption that I would like to avoid with fungi!