In ancient times, the poor had no food to eat, and there were groups of fish and shrimp in the river, so why would they rather gnaw on the bark of trees than go down to the river? In ancient times, although there may have been a large number of aquatic animals such as fish and shrimp in rivers, people tended to be more inclined to rely on food from land**, such as grains, vegetables, fruits, etc. This is mainly because these foods are easier to obtain, store, and process, and are also more in line with people's eating habits and taste preferences.
In addition, going down the river to fish is not an easy task. In ancient times, the lack of modern fishing tools and techniques made it difficult for people to catch fish and shrimp in large quantities in the river. Moreover, fishing takes a lot of time and effort, which may not be optimal for the poor who are already starving.
In addition, there may be various hazards and uncertainties in the river water, such as turbulent currents, low water temperatures, and the spread of diseases, which increase the risks and uncertainties of fishing in the river. For people who are already in a difficult situation, these risks can be even more difficult to bear. As a result, despite the abundance of food in the river, the poor are often more inclined to choose other, more reliable and safe food** than to venture down to fish. Although the nutritional value of gnawing bark is not high, it can at least provide some energy and satiety, and it is relatively easy to obtain and process. Of course, this is also related to the economic, cultural, technological and other factors of ancient society. In modern society, with the advancement of technology and the development of society, people have been able to obtain various food resources more conveniently and quickly, which also makes the traditional way of obtaining food such as fishing in the river gradually eliminated