The Future of Foie Gras
Is there one?
During the past few months in Britain animal rights activists have done much to increase public awareness of the way foie gras is made and to protest about the fine dining restaurants that serve it.
For those who are not familiar with the production of foie gras it is an age old method of increasing the fat content of the livers of geese and ducks. The way the birds are fed is something which I personally am not a fan of. They are force fed via a funnel attached to a long tube which increases the size of the liver which leads to a liver disease called hepatic lipidosis. Having observed this method first hand I can tell you it isn’t something which makes you want to reach for the nearest pate.
So that is my opinion and I choose not to feature it on my menus. I enjoy cooking meat, fish and varietal meats (offal) but I do believe an animal’s welfare should be protected even when bred for consumption. It is common knowledge that a bird,for example which has led a very short and stressful life is all the poorer for eating than one which has been allowed to roam and feed well.
On the other side of the coin however, Britain has been seeing a number of attacks and threats on restaurants which serve foie gras. There have been instances of vandalism and bullying tactics against restaurant owners by animal rights extremists resulting in some restaurants taking it off their menu in order to protect their staff and customers.
There has been a noticeable shift in people’s views on the ethics of food production in this country in recent times, well known media chefs such as Jamie Oliver and Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall have done much to raise the profile of intensive farming methods and the over-fishing of our waters and this is the type of ‘protest’ which I agree with.
Some chefs are now taking foie gras off the menu simply because it no longer sells as well as it once did which tells you something. Other chefs and restaurant owners argue that the customer should be able to make their own minds up without fear of intimidation by animal rights extremists.
I do believe people should be given the information about these types of practices and from there an educated opinion can be made a la messers Oliver and Whittingstall. In recent years I have taken a closer look at how food is produced and have made a concious effort to educate myself better in order to write menus which reflect sound farming methods and the basic rights of animals. I still look to others on both sides of the fence for further education but I don’t want to be bullied.
Whatever your personal view is on foie gras one thing is for certain, it faces an uncertain future.
Miles
I’ve eaten it before but I have to say for me it was a bit like veal.
That is to say, I knew people ‘played up’ about it but I did not really know why.
I’ve now seen the process on TV and I would not have it again. So you’re quite right about education being the key.
I suspect there is not quite the publicity for this issue as foie gras is not exactly on everyone’s weekly shopping list - doesn’t alter the principal though.
We either care about animal welfare or we don’t - currently we have a half-way house - vocal platiutudes but little actual action IMHO
Great post
Rod
April 13, 2008 @ 8:17 am
Rod,
Good points, putting aside the ethical aspect for one moment there is the question of cost. Foie gras is a luxury item in England, less so in France. I doubt the majority of my customers would choose it anyway. What percentage would be down to moral reasons would be interesting to know.
Miles
April 13, 2008 @ 8:23 am
It is very difficult to influence people in the conservative way that you suggest. What I fail to understand is why the BBC who are constantly highlighting the trials and tribulations of human beings in their coverage, seem to baulk at featuring programmes which address issues such as animal cruelty. I am certain that many people are happily unaware of the dark reality of the production of foie gras and would be horrified if they truly knew. Why then if education is the way forward are people not shown films which highlight this grim practice. At least then they can dine out on a guilt trip if they continue to eat it.
April 13, 2008 @ 9:40 am
Helen,
You make a valid point, it is difficult to raise and more especially maintain peoples awareness of such matters. I refer to the River Cottage Chicken Out Campaign which although it caused a lot of publicity it has, sadly lost much of its momentum. People are not made aware of such matters and you are right that more should be done by the likes of the BBC who only seem to focus on the activities of a few extremists rather than the real issue. A ‘conservative’ approach may take longer but it has to be better than violent protest.
Thankyou for taking the time to comment and welcome to the site.
KInd regards
Miles
April 13, 2008 @ 3:13 pm
This is very scattershot, sorry I don’t have time to compose this better. I’m of very mixed opinions on the subject. It might be done differently in Europe, but foie gras production in the states sounds a little more humane. D’Artagnan is a gourmet food purveyor that I use for all thing fowl related (and fresh young rabbit). Their products are superbly fresh and delicious. The company started originally as a supplier of foie gras and grew to it’s current size over the years. They are in work hand in hand with Hudson Valley Foie Gras - http://www.hudsonvalleyfoiegras.com/
There is a good video about the raising and feeding process that the ducks go through - it’s a clip from Anthony Bourdain’s show. The New York Times has also written a few articles about the company, taking a fairly balanced view:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/26/opinion/26sun2.html
All in, it’s a matter of choice, by the chef, and by the consumer. The spreading of information hurts no one, but violence and thuggery by the animal rights groups does more damage to their cause than they can imagine. They enacted a foie gras ban in Chicago last year - check out how it turned out:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/09/AR2007010900864.html
They are voting to repeal it soon.
If people have ethical issues over the production of foie gras I am fine with that. Don’t order it. But do not tell me what I can or can’t serve especially while you are wearing $200 shoes that were made by an 8 year old Indonesian making 12 cents a day. Whew! with that said, I do not serve foie gras - too expensive. I don’t serve veal either - I find it cruel and generally rather tasteless (except for osso bucco). Sorry for not being able to tie all this together better, and thank you for the help with the Langoustines - they were delicious.
April 13, 2008 @ 3:57 pm
Miles
I echo all the above comments. Education is the key in most things and the BBC could do far more along those lines. It is to be hoped that not only the price but also actions like yours and hopefully many others will send the right messages and eventually cease the production.
Elsie
April 13, 2008 @ 4:35 pm
Dave,
Thanks for that, I found the articles and video very interesting and it is always good to get another countries perspective. Agree with you on veal in every way, the price does not match the taste, ethics apart.
Thanks for the effort Dave, much appreciated, glad you liked the langoustines.
April 13, 2008 @ 7:57 pm
Foie gras is an appalling product, and thank you for stating that you will not featue it on your menus. PETA campaigns peacefully to end the sale of foie gras in the UK (and all countries!), and works to inform the public about what goes into the production of this diseased liver. Find out more at (I hope you let me post this link
) http://blog.peta.org.uk/index.php?s=foie+gras
April 15, 2008 @ 10:13 am
Just out of interest I asked colleagues at work what their feelings were about foie gras and I have to say that I was suprised at how many people not only did not know what foie gras was but also had no idea what its production entailed. Maybe this is going to turn out to be another class war which would be unfortunate because the aim is surely to eradicate a grim practice for the sake of the creatures involved. Isn’t that what civilisation is all about? - protecting the defenceless never mind the politics, the economics or even a moral stance? I have written the BBC. Lets see what happens??
April 15, 2008 @ 7:11 pm
Alexia,
Thankyou for your comment and welcome to the site, I am happy to hear from both sides of the fence on this matter and I am sure your website will be of interest to many of the visitors to this blog.
I wish you well with your campaign.
Miles
April 15, 2008 @ 9:57 pm
Helen,
Now that is interesting, there is a school of thought which says ‘If it doesn’t affect me then I’m not bothered’. Do you think people are less bothered because they look upon foie gras in the same way as caviar and think they are doing their bit by simply not being able to afford it?
I would be very interested to hear what the BBC has to say in their reply.
Miles
April 15, 2008 @ 10:02 pm
I have had a thought about what Dave said- you know the attitude we all have when we feel people are telling us what to do. One of the teachers at a school I visit was explaining to a class what civilisation means and she said that it was where a group of people accepted rules and regulations so that law and order could be maintained and that therefore people could live in relative harmony even if everyone didn’t like all the rules etc. Well isn’t it the same with the production of foie gras. First of all the government will not allow its production in this country because it is felt that the process is unacceptably cruel, so why then are the majority supposed to “stomach” its importation and consumption by others? Apart from anything else it just doesn’t seem logical or reasonable. Cruelty is cruelty. It doesn’t depend on where or to whom it happens. We have a responsibility at the top of the food chain? Do you agree with that Dave or not?
April 16, 2008 @ 6:32 pm
From my own perspective, I’ve come to terms with the fact that animals have to die in order to feed the population. Even in the production of grains, animals die (how many field mice, rabbits, and other such creatures do you think get caught up in the combines?) If death is a common occurrence in the realm of food production, then it can hardly be called cruel. The cruelty then, is not that animals die, but rather how the animals die.
When you start asking questions about the “how”, then the questions turn to how the animals are treated. And when you start asking questions about how the animals are treated at death, it is also reasonable to ask how the animals are treated during their life. It is, at the very core, a question of the animal’s “quality of life”.
The difficulty in this perspective is how to define “quality of life” for animals. Certainly it would seem a tad specious to use a human standard for the “quality of life” of a cow or a pig. What would make a good life for a duck or a goose?
Here’s where the opponents of foie gras fail in the debate. They have not yet provided any evidence that the act of gavage is in of itself, a bad “quality of life” for the birds. It is the incidental harms that they are focusing on (over crowding, sanitary conditions, etc, etc.) As not every foie gras producer is guilty of overcrowding or providing less than clean, then painting the entire industry with such a large brush is either being done intentionally or unintentionally. If unintentionally, then their position is based on fallacious reasoning. If it is done intentionally, then the debate then moves from a ethical debate, to that of a political one. And once you move into the realm of the political, whatever cachet one had from arguing from the ethical position is lost.
Once politicians start telling us what we can and cannot eat (and really, what are PETA and their ilk but politicians…or at least political agents… in this debate?), then they’ve crossed yet another ethical line. From my point of view, that’s what is at stake here - do we want political agents influencing diets based on nebulous ethical determinations?
April 16, 2008 @ 9:48 pm
Sorry, that should have been in quotes. It comes from a debate that took place on this site:
http://www.accidentalhedonist.com/index.php/2007/10/16/death_and_cruelty_foie_gras_and_ethics#feedbacks
April 16, 2008 @ 10:12 pm
Sorry, had to step off for a bit. Who determines cruelty? At what level does something become cruel? What is the next step? I can’t see how veal is tolerated yet foie gras draws such debate. I make a choice not eating or serving veal. An intelligently informed choice (I hope) - but still mine to make. The marketplace is driven by demand, not legislation - if enough people are informed, they can make the same decision - production will become uneconomical and it will cease. Miles spoke of a group trying to bring the plight of non free range chickens to the masses - I wholeheartedly support this. I serve only free range - I serve only cage free eggs. It is more expensive, but it supports sustainable farming, and offers vastly superior taste. I make a choice to purchase these birds, and my choice registers in the marketplace.
April 16, 2008 @ 11:38 pm
Dave-How do you define cruelty then? What is torture? Unfortunately we cannot communicate with animals to find out how they feel. Sadly we cannot ask the suffragettes how they felt when they were force fed in prison. All I know is that I have had a gastroscopy done with a mild anaesthetic. I cannot honestly say that it is a procedure I would want to have repeated three times a day for twelve days! So I disagree with you when you say that we cannot use a human standard to assess quality of life for a pig or a duck Sure, everyone has to die - man or beast( the circle of life and all that) but I refuse to accept that animal products produced by wanton cruelty have any part in a civilised society and I am not solely referring to foie gras. I feel very sad that there are people in this country who have made a conscious decision to supply this contentious demand so I do firmly agree with you over the education issue, but the point I made earlier still stands. Relatively few people know what foie gras is and even fewer eat it and as it is unlikely to make entertaining viewing on the telly, the grim reality of this disgusting product continues unseen. What do you suggest now?
April 18, 2008 @ 6:04 pm
Helen - I have the same procedure done every fall - it’s called an upper endoscopy here. I agree, not pleasant. But you are assuming human anatomy and human feelings for a non human - a non mammal even. If pigs were force fed I would assume they felt as you and I do. Ducks have very different anatomy. Have you ever seen a seabird swallow a fish whole? By your line of reasoning we should outlaw fishing because you don’t want a hook in your lip, or horseback riding because you don’t want someone sitting on your back all day. I have more to say but I am drunk and it is very late. From my perspective, I have PETA types telling me foie gras is evil, but at least half of their argument is about the birds living conditions (I agree, abysmal in some instances - but not in every) - vs veterinarians saying the birds are unstressed and it doesn’t bother them. Whom should I believe? In their Virginia headquarters PETA “rescues” unwanted animals and gets them adopted. In 2006 the “rescued” 3061 animals. 12 were adopted. They remaining 97 percent of the animals were euthanized. Some friend of the animal. What I want is science, not the rhetoric of some hypocritical media hound. And, after all this - I don’t serve foie gras.
April 20, 2008 @ 5:51 am
I take your point about the anatomy, but that apart, a goose or duck left to its own devices would never gorge to the point where its liver is diseased. If the humane foie gras allows the birds to eat, as is their want in preparation for the winter, I have no problem with that. It is the force-feeding notion which appalls me. It is unnatural. Many people have lost their connection with nature and where we are in the food chain.
By the way a friend of mine was at a’fancy’ resaturant last week and there on the menu was’Free-range duck with foie gras.’ Are they being sadly ironic, stupid or have I missed the point? I have no idea. I know you don’t like people telling you what to do, but should you be getting drunk?- only joking!
April 20, 2008 @ 4:48 pm