Foie Gras Ban/the Ethics of Foie Gras

[derricks]

Waitrose is currently trying to find a new supplier for its own-brand foie gras products which, they say, do not use force-feeding methods. They claim the ducks that supply its products will grow 350g livers naturally over a period of 25 days with an unrestricted diet as opposed to the 600g liver produced in 14 days by force-fed birds.

By the way, thought you'd guys appreciate a follow-up on this. I've been talking to their customer service department trying to get some info on this. They stopped selling it two years ago, they can't recommend any chefs who have worked both with it and force-fed foie gras, and they can't or won't tell me if their product is exactly like foie gras except for the smaller size. And they didn't exactly trumpet the product to begin with, when I would think it would be one of the hottest press releases a company could release about foie gras. Imagine the demand!

So I remain skeptical, but I'd love to hear differently. Obviously the UK wouldn't need to conform to whatever rules the EU has about the term foie gras.

[derricks]

If you got the geese stoned so they would have the munchies, would that still be considered force-feeding?

No, but I don't think Cheeto's make good foie gras. Too orange.

[Bux]

Obviously the UK wouldn't need to conform to whatever rules the EU has about the term foie gras.

←

I think that's incorrect. The UK is part of the EU, just not part of the euro currency club. Actually hard to keep the names and acronyms straight in my head. I base my statement largely on the flap that developed over chocolate. Over the objections of both Belgium and France, the UK managed to get the EU to define "chocolate" as a product containing a certain percentage of vegetable fat--think Crisco shortening or margarine--in lieu of cocoa butter. One now has to read the fine print on packages of chocolate in the EU.

To a large degree the food laws promulgated by the EU bureaucrats are the product of bureaucracy and heavily influenced by bureaucrats, scientists and public officials, all with political interests and few with what we might call quality of product interest. There are few people in important positions who are willing to represent the consumer's interest and save the consumer from "those interested in protecting the consumer."

Bux

[winesonoma]

No, but I don't think Cheeto's make good foie gras. Too orange.

←

How about corn nuts?

[FistFullaRoux]

As I read it - Link to Cal. legislature's info on bill

You face a $1000 fine per bird, plus $1000 per day in which the practice occurs. I also read this as

          4. Defines "force feeding" of a bird as a process that 

            causes the bird to consume more food than a typical bird 

            of the same species would consume voluntarily while 

            foraging.

          5. Provides that force-feeding methods include, but are not 

            limited to, delivering feed through a tube or similar 

            device inserted into the bird's esophagus.

To be a nitpicker... feeding pigeons in the park, which could concievably make their liver fatty, would now be a very expensive proposition.

It's badly written. They wrote it for "birds" in general, trying not to trap themselves when people started using other breeds of birds...

[derricks]

I think that's incorrect. The UK is part of the EU, just not part of the euro currency club. Actually hard to keep the names and acronyms straight in my head.

As it is for me. Your explanation makes sense, though.

Come to think of it, I don't know if there's an actual definition in the EU for "foie gras" by itself. There are definitions for various preparations that include foie gras (percentages of foie and such) but I wonder if you're safe as long as you don't use one of those terms. And they may just be in France; I can't remember if it's EU-wide or not. Hmmm. Something to figure out when I get home.

[simdelish]

NY Times article this morning

Is Luxury Cruel? The Foie Gras Divide

[derricks]

NY Times article this morning

They are being raised at California's sole maker of foie gras, a farm in Sonoma.

Or a company in Sonoma and a farm near Stockton

[jgm]

Rand Richards Cooper takes an interesting look for himself at the foie gras issue. Although we have a debate over this issue going on other threads, I'd be interested in hearing about any issues you think he has left out, or anything else that should be mentioned. It was an educational article for me, and I learned a few things.

Comments?

[FabulousFoodBabe]

Rand Richards Cooper takes an interesting look for himself at the foie gras issue.  Although we have a debate over this issue going on other threads, I'd be interested in hearing about any issues you think he has left out, or anything else that should be mentioned.  It was an educational article for me, and I learned a few things.

Comments?

←

Beat me to it, jgm. Interesting and true point, I think, about PETA and the anti-foies not being able to take on the meat industries -- too much money and power comin' right back at them. I always liken the foie gras battles to the anti-fur and leather crowd, who'd rather chase old ladies down Park Avenue than head up to Montana or Wyoming. Easier marks, yanno.

[west2100]

I think another aspect that places foie in such a position that it is in is that there is no way to make the production method of it much more humane. Regardless of all other factors, you still have to force feed the animals by a tube to produce the desired level of fat in the liver. All other forms of meat produced can be more humanely obtained, but foie must remain as it is.

[melkor]

Sure other forms of meat can be produced more humanely, but they aren't. Chicken factories are far worse than foie gras farms, but no one seems to care.

[Bill Miller]

I'm sorry--I don't plan to stop eating veal either--where are we on the food chain?

[Bux]

I have great respect for the concept that it's unethical to kill a living thing simply to eat, in spite of the fact that it's apparently a very natural thing in the wild. I have trouble with the position that it's simply unethical to force feet a bird, given the evidence that in some circumstances, geese, who do not normally seem to be friendly to humans, will come running to a feeder with his (or her) feed and tube.

[pork]

I'm sorry--I don't plan to stop eating veal either--where are we on the food chain?

←

I'm with you buddy. Make mine extra cute, please.

[Jennifer Iannolo]

I'll have to take a look at this article, though I doubt it will change any of my thinking at this point (and I've now ranted enough about that).

Food chain. Top. The end.

[gruyere]

Sure other forms of meat can be produced more humanely, but they aren't.  Chicken factories are far worse than foie gras farms, but no one seems to care.

←

I couldn't agree more.

Foie gras producers are generally smaller, non-factory style enterprises where the animals are permitted some sense of freedom and an outdoor existence.

The number of birds used to produce foie rounds to zero when compared with the numbers that are caged by the corporate factories to produce boneless, skinless chicken breasts wrapped in non-recyclable plastic; or even more repulsively to manufacture such vile products as chicken nuggets.

At least the duck gives up its life for something delectable and magnificent.

The cowardly mission of certain groups, particularly lawmakers, to appear to be concerned about animal rights by banning foie gras is perplexing when they pander to the corporations that create much more hardship for many more animals.

Edited February 14, 2006 by gruyere (log)

[malcolmjolley]

Amen. I find this all so boring. If only these energies were put to save the Caspian sturgeon, etc.

[The Apostate]

This is what happens when humans transfer their own feelings and experiences onto animals, mistakenly assuming them to be the same.

My son (a doctoral candidate in microbiology) assures me that the digestive system of waterfowl is entirely different from our own. Due to the fibrous nature of their diets, they have evolved a much tougher and less sensitive tract (consider the texture of gizzards) making it highly unlikely that they truly feel any discomfort during the feeding process.

Just my two cents.

Edited February 14, 2006 by The Apostate (log)

[Csaville]

This is what happens when humans transfer their own feelings and experiences onto animals, mistakenly assuming them to be the same.

My son (a doctoral candidate in microbiology) assures me that the digestive system of waterfowl is entirely different from our own. Due to the fibrous nature of their diets, they have evolved a much tougher and less sensitive tract (consider the texture of gizzards) making it highly unlikely that they truly feel any discomfort during the feeding process.

Just my two cents.

←

That's the most interesting argument I've heard yet and certainly the most likely to get someone to shut up about this topic...... Thanks for posting!!!!

[Patrick S]

I have great respect for the concept that it's unethical to kill a living thing simply to eat. . .

←

You mean there is a way to feed yourself without killing living things?

[docsconz]

The article in question actually showed a fairly balanced approach to the question. That the ultimate conclusion of the author was indecisive was, however, IMO a copout. This was probably because the magazine wished not to offend either camp.

[bigred93]

This is what happens when humans transfer their own feelings and experiences onto animals, mistakenly assuming them to be the same.

My son (a doctoral candidate in microbiology) assures me that the digestive system of waterfowl is entirely different from our own. Due to the fibrous nature of their diets, they have evolved a much tougher and less sensitive tract (consider the texture of gizzards) making it highly unlikely that they truly feel any discomfort during the feeding process.

Just my two cents.

←

That's the most interesting argument I've heard yet and certainly the most likely to get someone to shut up about this topic...... Thanks for posting!!!!

←

The beautiful irony here is that anti-foie advocates' anthropomorphizing of geese is actually one of the most grossly human-centric things they could do.

I keep hoping that come some August or September PETA will organize a trip to the Arctic to hang out with all those cute and cuddly-wuddly polar bears, and in the process come face to face with the food chain issue brought up by others here...

[Busboy]

This is what happens when humans transfer their own feelings and experiences onto animals, mistakenly assuming them to be the same.

My son (a doctoral candidate in microbiology) assures me that the digestive system of waterfowl is entirely different from our own. Due to the fibrous nature of their diets, they have evolved a much tougher and less sensitive tract (consider the texture of gizzards) making it highly unlikely that they truly feel any discomfort during the feeding process.

Just my two cents.

←

Nothing like a tough gizzard to make having a metal pipe shoved down your neck feel like a Swedish massage! And then the force-feeding followed by slaughter! I don't know which is more fun, eating the foie gras or being the duck that gives it up!

In my experience, both sides in this debate have an unfortunate bent for ludicrous oversimplification. I eat foie gras, I have friends who won't. We all agree, however, even at the top of the food chain, there is merit in avoiding needless cruelty. Whether foie gras production falls into that category is a legitimate question. Building up straw men and knocking them down ("The beautiful irony here is that anti-foie advocates' anthropomorphizing of geese is actually one of the most grossly human-centric things they could do") or falling back onto glib observations ("Food chain. Top. The end.") brings very little illumination to the discussion.

[Jennifer Iannolo]

I did not say "Food chain. Top. The End." to be glib. As I've stated before, that statement comes from the philosophical perspective that we, as conscious beings, can put the creations of nature to our use as we see fit. Whatever one's opinions are regarding morals, processes, etc., they don't change the reality of that.

Is that the illumination to which you were referring?