Supporting Good, Clean, and Fair Food

The Slow Food USA Blog

Chicago Lifts Foie Gras Ban

Posted on Wed, May 14, 2008 by Kurt Michael Friese
2 Comments | Categories: News, Current Events, Policy,

Print Icon Print this Page Email Icon Send to a Friend
Bookmark and Share

In the New York Times Dining section today, I read this:

Chicagoans can feast on foie gras once more. The Chicago City Council just repealed the ban on its sale that it put in place two years ago.

Now I know that many of my vegan friends will go ballistic on me when I say that this is a good thing, but this is a good thing. The animal rights groups who supported this measure did so because they saw it as a layup, and easy target. Who would oppose a ban on something only rich, snobby, hoity-toity gourmands consume.

Besides the measure being silly government intervention, it reminded me of the folks who say they won't eat veal because they heard it was cruel as they pull up to the KFC drive thru.

Banning foie gras saves a few ducks and geese. Wanna make a difference? Ban CAFOs. You needn't stop eating meat (unless of course you want to, that's entirely up to you), just stop eating feedlot meat. Get your beef, pork and chicken from the farmer down the road, from the farmers market, from a CSA. Trust the source, and you'll trust the food.


Member Comments

From lostalice on Thu, May 15, 2008

Why must one focus only on avoiding feedlot-raised food, and ignore a food that requires the intentional abuse of an animal for its production? I’m not a radical by any means, but finding out how a large metal tube is forced down a goose’s throat several times a day to pour grain down it… it seems like a no-brainer to me that this practice should be banned. I absolutely adore foie gras, but no animal should have to suffer like that, not even a few. I’m disappointed that Chicago has bowed to the luxury restaurants (no home cook serves foie gras) who insist that this food “needs” to be on the menu. It’s a diseased, oversized animal liver, produced by intentional harm done to an animal. Not even CAFO’s can be accused of intentional harm in quite this way. How is this in any way a good thing, when there are so many other delicious foods out there to eat?

From Kurt Michael Friese on Thu, May 15, 2008

Actually the cruelty often cited in regard to the gavage process results from the all-to-common mistake amongst the likes of the Animal Liberation Front to project mammalian traits on birds.
There is more than enough evidence to demonstrate that the ducks a) do not feel pain during gavage; b) can breathe just fine during gavage (unlike humans and other mammals, birds’ esophagi and windpipes are not connected); and c) force feed themselves in the wild to fatten up for migration.  It was hunters recognizing that duck liver of migrating birds tasted better than those of nesting birds that led to the development of foie gras in the first place.
I refer you to an excellent article in the Times of London at
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/02/21/do2105.xml
While the process may look unpleasant or even torturous to you or me, it is not so and should be considered with a more open mind.
And CAFOs can indeed be “accused of intentional harm in quite this way.” Have you visited one?  I live in Iowa, they are everywhere here, and they are not just cruel to the animals (mammals, by the way) but also to the humans who work in them and the neighbors who live nearby, and the land and the waterways too.  A far greater concern.



Post Your Comment

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information
Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below:



Find Slow Food in your State