California Chefs to Wield Their Spatulas in Fight Over Foie Gras Ban

[alp227]

Source: New York Times

A collection of some of California’s best-known chefs, including four-star celebrities like Thomas Keller, began a full-course press on the state’s legislators on Monday, hoping to prevent a long-simmering ban on foie gras from taking effect on July 1.

The group, which calls itself the Coalition for Humane and Ethical Farming Standards, delivered a charter statement to lawmakers in Sacramento, advocating a wide variety of new animal-friendly commitments, including cage-free birds and hand feeding, to replace the current law, which would effectively bar foie gras from the state’s menus.

“We want to create a humane market,” said Rob Black, executive director of the Golden Gate Restaurant Association, a member of the coalition. “Not a black market.”

The ban would prohibit the production and sale of any product derived from force feeding birds to enlarge their livers beyond normal size — the only way to mass produce the fatty French-inflected delicacy. The law was passed in 2004 but had a seven-and-a-half-year grace period. It is the nation’s first such law to pass.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/01/us/california-chefs-fight-states-foie-gras-ban.html

[freshwest]

1. It's an unnecessary and inhumane thing to do.

Last edited Tue May 1, 2012, 12:37 PM - Edit history (1)

Edited:

After WM correction, went to link... OP doesn't go into detail because of paragraph limit. Later paragraphs don't match the postiive tone of the beginning of the article, which appeared to support hunane practices.

[Warren Stupidity]

4. They would like to continue the practice.

This group wants to block the ban on foie gras from taking effect while posturing as in favor of humane treatment of animals.

[freshwest]

10. Link says more than the OP. I'm in favor of cage free eggs, not foie gras, which why my comment.

They intend to compromise the lawmakers:

“The chefs are going to invite lawmakers to foie gras dinner in their districts, all over the state,” Mr. Ballard said.

And this is disgusting:

Greg Daniels, who runs Haven Gastropub in Pasadena, Calif., said he feared it could result in the diminishment of the state’s reputation as an adventurous and first-rate place to eat. “I think the culinary landscape of California will change much more than anybody is realizing,” Mr. Daniels said.

What hyperbole. This dish is rare, that's why it's costly. The intention of the law, is to change the culinary landscape of California. Just like getting rid of things exposed on videos. People can easily do better than this by simply allowing the law to go forward.

These chefs are arguing for their wealthy patrons to be allowed to relish that they have money to waste on food. It is unneccesary. No one will starve from this.. California needsa reputation as adventurous in doing something other than stuffing one's face with stuffed liver. This is surreal.

[dballance]

2. And slaugtering the many animals we do

For food is humane?

[saras]

5. Would you rather be slaughtered humanely or stuffed until your liver explodes? Easy choice for me.

[PatrynXX]

3. Why am I thinking thunderball when I hear that word

Oh thats right. it's in his briefcase full of goodies on his supposedly wellness vacation. so he can seduce his nurse (007) Say can I be that suave to do that. course then I'd need some Caviar and that won't work. (bleh)

[Hell Hath No Fury]

6. Tough shit, chefs....

Any process that results in foie gras stinks, and I am thrilled our State banned it.

[Odin2005]

7. Tough shit, you whiners!

[redqueen]

8. So force feeding by hand is somehow better? Idiots.

And shark fin soup should be banned as well.

[petronius]

22. The soup is banned here, sort of. Importation of shark fins into CA is illegal

as of Jan 1, although fins already here can be sold until July 2013. The difference is that you can still go catch your own shark if you want, but you won't be able to humanely force feed by hand in a quaint artisanal manner torture your own duck or goose...

[cbayer]

9. Sounds like a great solution to this *problem*. Signed, a big fan of foie gras.

[Warren Stupidity]

11. So you have no compassion for animals?

[cbayer]

13. I'm an omnivore.

I shudder when I drive by the cattle slaughterhouses on I-5, but I still will stop for a hamburger.

I squirm when I see those horrible chicken factories, but I eat chicken about 3 times a week.

I live on the ocean and love being surrounded by all kinds of fish, but I love sushi.

Overfeeding a goose is no worse or better than what we do to our other *sacrifices*. I love foie gras. I dream about it. I miss being able to get it easily, like I could in New Orleans.

I'm in favor of more humane treatment if that can be done. I don't think the state should legislate what I can eat or what chefs can serve. Well, I might draw the line at people or pets.

Does that answer your question? It's not a black or white issue.

[Warren Stupidity]

15. Indeed compassion is not a black and white issue.

You draw the line at people and pets. Good for you. I don't think there should be a law controlling what you eat, within limits, but I certainly think it is entirely acceptable to regulate the production of food products, including banning agricultural practices that are grossly lacking in any compassion at all.

Geese make wonderful pets. Smart. Protective. Beautiful.

[cbayer]

17. I was chased and bitten by geese on numerous occasions, so maybe it's my

deep seated resentment of them in this case, lol. Or it could be that the first time I tasted foie gras, I knew that I had never tasted anything quite so delectable. It was brought to me by an exchange student from france in my late 30's.

This OP is about a proposal to make conditions more humane. I think that's a good compromise.

IMHO, anyone here who is not a vegetarian but feels that the production of foie gras is somehow worse than what we do to our other sacrificial animals doesn't really have a case.

[closeupready]

12. I love foie gras!

nt

[truthisfreedom]

14. Take every single person involved in this argument and ask them if they've ever eaten meat.

If they have, tell them they can't argue against foie gras. Because killing an animal is terminal. And overfeeding an animal is not.

[Warren Stupidity]

16. ever? So all of us have no say if we, growing up in a meat eating culture, have ever eaten any meat?

I can't support banning the slaughter of animals. I can argue for not eating them so that the practice will die out on its own. I can support banning practices that are grossly unethical, and this is one of many.

[RebelOne]

18. I do not believe in the of killing any animal

and I have not eaten meat in 15 years.

[LeftyMom]

23. Overfeeding a goose for foie gras certainly is terminal.

First of all, you have to kill them to get their diseased liver, it doesn't climb up their throat and run away or something.

Second of all, foie gras is the product of nearly terminal liver disease. If you continued the force feeding any longer, the bird would die. Otherwise the producers would certainly feed them longer in order to increase the size of the liver and their profit.

[and-justice-for-all]

19. Fois Gras and Veal should be BANNED!

When will people stop acting like barbarians.

[grok]

20. There is a better way.

There is this gentleman in Spain that has perfected the technique. It is a far tastier product that the force-fed fare. And the Geese are VERY happy so should YOU be.

Unfortunately it's been hard to reproduce here. Probably succeeded by now though.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1919163,00.html

here is the old "This American Life" take on it...

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/452/poultry-slam-2011?act=3

[killbotfactory]

21. The Physiology of Foie: Why Foie Gras is Not Unethical

http://www.seriouseats.com/2010/12/the-physiology-of-foie-why-foie-gras-is-not-u.html

Dan Barber's foie gras parable
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_barber_s_surprising_foie_gras_parable.html