Why Did WeHo Ban Foie Gras?
Who eats foie gras? Not West Hollywood restaurant-goers, at least not anymore. Despite the recent failure of Chicago's City Council to ban foie gras in that city, West Hollywood is charging ahead with a new city ordinance to prevent the sale of foie gras in restaurants.
However, I can't help but point out the short-sighted and ultimately unsatisfactory nature of this ruling. First of all, many West Hollywood restaurants are driven by a monied, sophisticated clientèle who are knowledgeable about food and expect quality ingredients. WeHo is a destination for foodies, and its restaurants shouldn't be punished for the tastes of their consumers. WeHo hosts a wonderful enclave of fine French and modern Californian restaurants -- Sona? Comme Ca? The Hall at Palihouse? Hatfield's? All are destinations, all serve fois gras. And will this trend spread? Will our finest restaurants, like La Cachette, become outdated relics of a more tolerant time?
Secondly, foie gras foes who decry the cruelty of the production method (force-feeding geese and ducks until their livers become fatty and engorged -- reminds me of college for some reason, except with alcohol) are overlooking -- or purposely ignoring -- the every day horrors of the food industry.
Why can't the City Councils of the world focus on eliminating salmonella in vegetables? Cramped and painful conditions for pigs, cows, and chickens all over California? Horrors are inflicted upon many, many animals -- to simply make an example of foie gras seems to miss the forest for the trees. Why can't they ordain that all restaurants must buy locally and organic, from cruelty-free producers?
Furthermore, the real damage done to the animals is still a matter of fierce contention: while websites like Ban Foie Gras call for immediate action against a "cruel" and "barbaric process", a recent investigative article in the Village Voice -- titled "Is Foie Gras Torture?" paints a very different picture.
The notion that foie gras is diseased liver is often cited by opponents of the food. Cheever's e-mail to me described how, in the later stages of force-feeding, "air sac and lung volumes are compromised, and they begin to show metabolic illness from liver function impairment."But Dr. Jaime Ruiz, director of Cornell's duck-research laboratory (and who was at pains to note that he did not support or oppose foie gras production) told me, "The farmers that I know here in New York and France handle the birds carefully, not feeding them above the physiological limits of the birds." He also said that he did not think that force-feeding, done correctly, would cause pain and that he does not consider an enlarged liver to be diseased.
Finally, as the lifting of the ban in Chicago shows, this ban probably won't work. Hot Doug's got away with serving foie gras on their signature dogs, with only a slap on the wrist and a nominal fine. As a consumer, it's your choice whether or not to order foie, according to your personal values. There's no reason why these things need to be legislated.
I rarely order foie gras in a restaurant -- perhaps once a year -- but it's an indulgence I value and I am ready to own up to any cruelty that might be involved. Anybody who's eaten a McDonald's meal in the past year must do the same. I mean, come on guys -- What Would Anthony Bourdain do? Sorry, veg-heads, but you know the answer.