Chicago's foie gras list.

[chicagowench]

One could argue the amuse is included in the cost of the meal and thus sold, if the amuse is listed as the first course. But man, I've had some wonderful courses which were simply 'sent out' with the compliments of the chef and were never listed on the menu I ordered. In which case- did I truly pay for it, was the foie sold to me, or was it a happy little squee-inducing gift of tasty goodness which could theoretically be used to stick it to Ald. Moore?

[Alex]

"I sent an email this morning. "

To where? the Mayor's Office does not list an email address? -Dick

←

Go to http://www.cityofchicago.org/Mayor/ and you'll be redirected to the correct page. Click on the teeny-tiny "Contact Us" at the top of the page.

←

I do not believe that is a link to the Mayor's Office but to the City of Chicago. The page for the Mayor's Office dose not list an email. -Dick

←

Yeah, I think you're right. Looks like we'll have to use that fax number under "Contact Info."

[chengb02]

why bother writing the mayor? In almost every article I've seen it mentions that Hizzoner feels the city council is wasting their time on this when there are far more important issues that face the city. Many of them also mention that da Mayor enjoys the occassional foie dish.

[ronnie_suburban]

Nothing will change this bad news but at least some folks have plans to send Chicago's foie gras era out in style. I just received word about a very special foie gras menu being offered at Avenues, starting this weekend.

I've posted the details here, on the Avenues thread.

=R=

[gaya]

From Chicago Magazine........

Foie Law

In response to the upcoming foie gras ban, Copperblue’s Michael Tsonton and Cyrano’s Bistrot’s Didier Durand are starting an organization called Chicago Chefs for Choice. “We want to protect our interests as restaurateurs, retailers, and suppliers from personal moral campaigns on products that are legally produced in this country,” says Tsonton. “The foie gras people are tired of being pushed around.” They’re teaming up with Bryan Scott, a foie gras lobbyist and a senior partner at Ag Associates, which is looking at the constitutionality of the ordinance itself. “We believe that the issue is not about foie gras,” says Scott. “It’s about consumer choice and personal freedom–and whether the Chicago City Council can legislate away freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution

[ulterior epicure]

Nothing will change this bad news but at least some folks have plans to send Chicago's foie gras era out in style.  I just received word about a very special foie gras menu being offered at Avenues, starting this weekend.

I've posted the details here, on the Avenues thread.

=R=

←

Yes, I've responded to this in the Avenues thread.

u.e.

[inventolux]

What would the potential penalty be for testing the waters on this? Would anyone be willing to take on the potential costs of fighting this by "giving it away" as an amuse? Even if legally gray area, the potential costs of dealing with this are high.

←

The legal ramifications mean nothing without action. Who is willing to waste countless hours of policing to catch the god forbidden foie gras culprits? (Not the law enforcement of chicago I assure you.) Drive to the south side of chicago and you will see ghettos and poverty where the police are and should be. This issue is retarded and nearly impossible to enforce. Those that back it should spend less time on self interest and little more time positively reinforcing the poor communities. Shame on them. They suck.

[ChefGEB]

As a conservative at heart, I always try to follow the idea that good government is less government. To pass an ordinance that has so many loopholes that it is unenforceable, is simply a waste of political capital. Bieng from Roger's Park (Alderman Moore's domain), I can honestly tell you that there a few things that are more important to his constituents (education, crime, energy prices, etc) than an ingredient that isn't sold in one of the local restaurants. If you want to get into the "humane" aspect of foie, simply take a look at the chickens, turkeys, cows (beaks/feet cut off, saline injections, growth hormones), etc you are eating on a daily basis. Hell, I would have even been open to putting a luxury tax on foie, thereby adding another viable stream of revenue to the city. Only one part of the larger stroy was told, which is how we ended up with such a lopsided vote.

[mike_r]

i'm just waiting for the chicagoland foie running wars...i picked up my tommy gun last weekend, and will be raising ducks in my bathtub to smuggle into the trendiest of restaurants.

a bunch of people have expressed their dismay about the new ordinance, as well they should. the two things that get me are (1) the fact that loretta swit--most famously "hot lips" houlihan from M*A*S*H--was able to pull off some ridiculously sentimentalist ploy reminding people of american embarrasments oversees in order to fuel some personal agenda, and (2) the fact that trotter's name was cited as a justification for the ban, "well, TROTTER'S doing it, so we all should, right?". mindless celebrity fawning at its worst.

ducks are animals. i do believe that they should be treated humanely, but as a card-carrying carnivore and as a cook who has spent a lot of time up to my arms in animal body parts, i am fully cognizant of the fact that animals have to die for their delicious flesh. bottom line, WE WON the evolutionary battle. we developed brains, opposable thumbs, and sensitive palates. if the ducks had won they'd be eating us. sure, the life of a food animal is short and probably not the happiest, taking anthropomorphized cartoons and kids' movies as a guideline. the thing is...we shouldn't anthropomorphize animals, especially food animals. that's not donald and it's not lil' clucky the brave explorer. it's a DUCK. with a brain the size of a couple of walnuts. it's not spending time bemoaning its fate, or planning its memoirs, or voicing an internal narrative as it cleverly evades capture from the evil farmer. its internal narrative, translated into human terms, might go like this: "FOOD FOOD FOOD FOOD FOOD FOOD OW OW OW FOOD FOOD FOOD FOOD MATE? MATE? MATE? FOOD FOOD FOOD FOOD." it can feel pain, yes, which is something we should avoid, as highly evolved stewards of this planet. but i cannot see how mindless, knee-jerk reactionary prohibitions like this one are a sign of higher evolution.

bugger city hall and alderman moore especially. i'm going to request a ban on shitty overacting in the city, drawing a connection to 9/11 somehow, to trade in on people's emotions. oh, and i officially scoff at this ordinance.

[inventolux]

i'm just waiting for the chicagoland foie running wars...i picked up my tommy gun last weekend, and will be raising ducks in my bathtub to smuggle into the trendiest of restaurants.

a bunch of people have expressed their dismay about the new ordinance, as well they should.  the two things that get me are (1)  the fact that loretta swit--most famously "hot lips" houlihan from M*A*S*H--was able to pull off some ridiculously sentimentalist ploy reminding people of american embarrasments oversees in order to fuel some personal agenda, and (2) the fact that trotter's name was cited as a justification for the ban, "well, TROTTER'S doing it, so we all should, right?".  mindless celebrity fawning at its worst.

ducks are animals.  i do believe that they should be treated humanely, but as a card-carrying carnivore and as a cook who has spent a lot of time up to my arms in animal body parts, i am fully cognizant of the fact that animals have to die for their delicious flesh.  bottom line, WE WON the evolutionary battle.  we developed brains, opposable thumbs, and sensitive palates.  if the ducks had won they'd be eating us.  sure, the life of a food animal is short and probably not the happiest, taking anthropomorphized cartoons and kids' movies as a guideline.  the thing is...we shouldn't anthropomorphize animals, especially food animals.  that's not donald and it's not lil' clucky the brave explorer.  it's a DUCK.  with a brain the size of a couple of walnuts.  it's not spending time bemoaning its fate, or planning its memoirs, or voicing an internal narrative as it cleverly evades capture from the evil farmer.  its internal narrative, translated into human terms, might go like this: "FOOD FOOD FOOD FOOD FOOD FOOD OW OW OW FOOD FOOD FOOD FOOD MATE? MATE? MATE? FOOD FOOD FOOD FOOD."  it can feel pain, yes, which is something we should avoid, as highly evolved stewards of this planet.  but i cannot see how mindless, knee-jerk reactionary prohibitions like this one are a sign of higher evolution.

bugger city hall and alderman moore especially.  i'm going to request a ban on shitty overacting in the city, drawing a connection to 9/11 somehow, to trade in on people's emotions.  oh, and i officially scoff at this ordinance.

←

Well, for what its worth I will be in a debate on q101, the Mancow show this monday morning at 7am. There will be acouple of other people on the show, including Alderman Moore.

[BryanZ]

i'm just waiting for the chicagoland foie running wars...i picked up my tommy gun last weekend, and will be raising ducks in my bathtub to smuggle into the trendiest of restaurants.

(2) the fact that trotter's name was cited as a justification for the ban, "well, TROTTER'S doing it, so we all should, right?".  mindless celebrity fawning at its worst.

←

Honestly, this whole thing reminds me of foodie's Ayn Rand novel. Bumbling, misinformed politicians and encroachments on individual freedoms abound.

I'm just waiting for the likes of chefg and inventolux to show everyone else the light.

Now, all we need is a brilliant and attractive but temporarily misguided female heroine and we're set.

Edited May 10, 2006 by BryanZ (log)

[inventolux]

i'm just waiting for the chicagoland foie running wars...i picked up my tommy gun last weekend, and will be raising ducks in my bathtub to smuggle into the trendiest of restaurants.

(2) the fact that trotter's name was cited as a justification for the ban, "well, TROTTER'S doing it, so we all should, right?".  mindless celebrity fawning at its worst.

←

Honestly, this whole thing reminds me of foodie's Ayn Rand novel. Bumbling, misinformed politicians and encroachments on individual freedoms abound.

I'm just waiting for the likes of chefg and inventolux to show everyone else the light.

Now, all we need is a brilliant and attractive but temporarily misguided female heroine and we're set.

←

Remember, unpopularity is what gives us the benefit of freedom of choice. From choosing what we eat to choosing what we want to cook. If we choose to let others dictate both, then we are no longer creators, rather uncreative laborers for watered down policy makers. Life is too short to put up with that.

[ulterior epicure]

...mancow... that's AWESOME! will try to tune in online! go chef cantu, go!

u.e.

[KendallCollege]

Here is the local petition against the Foie Gras ban:

http://animalagalliance.org/petition/

Anyone who is opposed to the ban of Foie in the City of Chicago should follow the link and sign the petition...Please forward it to anyone that you think would sign it as well.

Trevor Williams

-Kendall College-

[ulterior epicure]

Do we have to be residents of the City of Chicago?

u.e.

[ronnie_suburban]

The Chicago Reader has a useful piece in their May 5 edition which features some better-known places in town to source foie gras before the ban goes into effect:

The Final Days of Foie Gras (this .pdf file loads a bit slowly)

=R=

[KendallCollege]

UE.

I'm not sure if you have to be a resident of the City of Chicago. The petition allows you to select what city and state you are from. Given this addition to the petition, I believe that it may not necessarily matter.

http://animalagalliance.org/petition

TW

-Kendall College-

[Gifted Gourmet]

Men's Vogue this month: related article from Jeffrey Steingarten

[gaya]

Did any one catch The Mancow Muller show this morning? He had the pleasure of talking to Alderman Joesph Moore. Gale Gand was also a quest. This was hilarious. Alderman Moore sounded like an idiot. He had none of his facts right about the production of Foie Gras. Mancow was calling him an idiot as well. Gale Gand bought the question "What is next Chicken, Veal, all animal products?" This is an important point to all the Chefs in Chicago. Stop and think the effect this is going to have on you, consumer, business! If you don't act now we will be serving nothing but organic vegetable. It is disgusting that this forum is not at the top of egullet.

[KendallCollege]

I recently wrote an essay about the ban on Foie Gras. Its something that I just can't get out of my head and I felt that, if I typed something about it, I'd find some piece of mind.

If anyone is interested in looking at it, PM me and I'd be happy to forward it to you.

Trevor Williams

-Kendall College-

[ronnie_suburban]

I recently wrote an essay about the ban on Foie Gras.  Its something that I just can't get out of my head and I felt that, if I typed something about it, I'd find some piece of mind.

If anyone is interested in looking at it, PM me and I'd be happy to forward it to you.

Trevor Williams

-Kendall College-

←

I'd love to see it. Feel free to post, as well.

=R=

[Elrushbo]

I recently wrote an essay about the ban on Foie Gras.  Its something that I just can't get out of my head and I felt that, if I typed something about it, I'd find some piece of mind.

If anyone is interested in looking at it, PM me and I'd be happy to forward it to you.

Trevor Williams

-Kendall College-

←

I'd love to see it. Feel free to post, as well.

=R=

←

If legislators think they can tell us what to eat, what other insidious legislation will be next? The ban is a dangerous precedent more far reaching than a ban on foie gras. If the politicians think they can do this, a luxury tax on fine dining could easily happen, as could a 'fat tax.'

People on this board in the affected area need to write the legislators involved, as well as their congresspersons. Foie Gras ban? If legislators have time for that then they aren't spending enough time attending to things for which they were elected.

Edited June 2, 2006 by Elrushbo (log)

[KendallCollege]

Luxury Food as Public Debate.

When alderman Joe Moore presented a potential policy that would ban the sale of Foie Gras in restaurants throughout the entire Chicago area, local chefs scratched their heads as they stared down at the glistening, golden lobes lying on their cutting boards. They all wondered, “Is Foie Gras really an issue?” The aldermen answered with a resounding “Yes!” as they almost unanimously voted for the ban on the sale of fattened Goose and Duck livers. With this ban almost in place, restaurants are saying that luxury foods, such as Foie Gras, are a treat and are not up for public debate.

Foie Gras is a process that was observed, mimicked, and championed by the Egyptians. These early people noticed that before Geese and Ducks prepare to take flight for their seasonal “vacations”, their abdominal areas became engorged. It was during this period of time that the birds’ livers were at their fattest and most decadent. The Egyptians started to fake this natural process by feeding the birds five times as much grain and fruit in order to enlarge their livers by leaps and bounds.

The Romans, who had entered into Egypt, fell in love with this process and brought the technique with them. They experimented with different types and qualities of grains. They also tried many different varieties of fruit, along with the grains, in order to produce the sweetest and most delicious variation of Foie Gras.

When the Romans went into Gaul (France), they left behind this wonderful preparation and it was adopted into the French culture. The French people began rearing Ducks and Geese on farms in order to create many different forms of the liver. These products are still prevalent today in the form of pates, spreads, butters, and stuffings. The most popular and controversial form of Foie Gras is the whole, raw liver or lobe.

There are a few farms around the United States that are currently producing a product of similar or superior quality. Therein lays the problem. One of the farms was recorded on video adhering to less than humane standards. This video circulated and fell into the hands of Chicago Aldermen.

Like all products that are produced in larger quantities, there will be slip-ups in perfection. Perfection, as the word is defined, is difficult to achieve and even more difficult to maintain. Once perfection is achieved, it is no longer perfect. The bar is raised. The Chicago Aldermen have raised the bar. They have moved beyond the level of servants of the people. They have taken away peoples’ rights.

Foie Gras is, at the end of the day, just a food. Like all food, it doesn’t come with a disclaimer. People would not want a police officer to walk up to their table and remove their chicken sandwich from their plate because those chickens were raised without beaks. Those chickens were raised in their own feces and lived their entire lives with their feet nailed to the floor. The guest is only concerned with impressions. What impressions matter?

If Foie Gras is successfully allowed to continue to be banned from Chicago restaurants, it is a warning sign to the rest of the public and private sector. George Orwell wrote a successful book about the very matter that is on the desks and tables of Chicago government leaders and restaurant owners. This message is that if we allow our government leaders to control what we see, feel, hear, smell, and taste, we will become pawns. Even though pawns are important, they are also the easiest target to manipulate. Unfortunately, they are also the easiest figure to remove. If people keep allowing pleasures and sensations to be removed, what are we left with? Where does it end? When did pleasure and enjoyment go up for public debate? Why do we have to be stripped of our enjoyment of Foie Gras?

Trevor Williams

-Kendall College-

Edited June 6, 2006 by KendallCollege (log)

[ronnie_suburban]

Thanks, Trevor -- very enlightening.

=R=

[david coonce]

While I don't support the Foie Gras ban, I do think it's dangerous to take the most extreme examples of animal mismanagement (chickens having thier beaks removed and nailed to the floor) and use those as the norm by which all other animal products should be measured. Obviously, there are many, many chefs who would argue that free-range, natural chickens are the best to cook. Even Bourdain makes this argument in his "Les Halles" cookbook.

It is, I believe, counter-productive to use this if=then argument. In other words, I don't think it does any of us any good to argue that Foie Gras is okay to sell because lots of other animals are tortured and treated badly on their way to the table. I think we have to have a position that is purely applicable to Foie Gras, and doesn't rely on the terrible treatment of other food animals to support its case. Because us Foie Gras advocates will lose out completely if we try to compare FG as okay in the same way that nailing chicken to the floor is okay. We have to find a different angle than that used by Moore, et. al.