Fork Dork: Crying Foul Over California's Ban on Fowl Liver

California became the first state to ban foie gras, leaving diners crying foul over liver fowl.


Foie gras soon will be a forbidden delicacy in California thanks to the state bill passed to control how food passes through duck bills.

Former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a bill in 2004 that will change the way ducks and geese that are farmed for their precious fatty livers.

When the bill becomes law on July 1, foie gras, a delicacy tracing back thousands of years to Roman times, will be outlawed in California. Supporters of the ban say force-feeding ducks and geese is inhumane and must be stopped.

Local restaurants might feel the effects. One of the few foie gras farms in the country, Artisan Sonoma Foie Gras, will go out of business at the end of June.

But that’s not the reason I am writing about foie gras this week.

I intend to enjoy foie gras at local restaurants such as and in Bellevue, and in Woodinville and in Kirkland, among other restaurants. 

My issue is with the irony of proponents of a foie gras ban and their ignorance and arrogance on the matter.

I am calling foul on their absolute condemnation of fowl liver.

Veterinarians fall on both sides of the argument. Some veterinarians say feeding ducks for the purpose of harvesting foie gras is not harmful, and is in fact humane. Some veterinarians go as far as to contend that ducks and geese farmed for foie gras lead less stressful lives than wild fowl. On the other hand, not all veterinarians agree. I am no clinician, so I will withhold judgment.

Traditionally liberal animal rights activists in traditionally liberal California lobbied for the ban. John Burton, a Democratic state senator at the time and current Chairman of the California Democratic Party, sponsored the bill. (In the interest of fairness, a Republican Governor, Schwarzenegger, signed the bill into law.)

The irony, perhaps hypocrisy, is that liberals used the same fear-mongering rhetoric tactics that many liberals often accuse conservatives of using, preying on voter and consumer ignorance.

California’s ban on foie gras is as draconian as enforcement on illicit drugs. The absolute nature of the ban is McCarthyist in style. Like drugs, what if outlawing foie gras creates a black market for the precious liver? The potential for animal abuse grows exponentially, after the market is no longer monitored.

Banning foie gras strikes at one of the most fundamentally precious freedoms in America: the freedom to choose how to make a living. The ban will affect small businesses. There are only a handful of foie gras farms in the country, all small businesses. Most restaurants serving foie gras are also small businesses.

It is in the best interest of foie gras producers to handle ducks and geese humanely. Cows in Kobe, Japan, are massaged, fed beer and exposed to classical music to produce superior product. Similarly, ducks and geese grown humanely and happy will produce superior livers.

Celebrity chef and television personality Anthony Bourdain likes to say, “A happy animal equals good quality foie gras.” He adds, “An unhappy, stressed out animal equals foie gras that neither me nor anybody I know is buying.”

Ducks and geese are not humans and do not have human processes. Gorging is also a natural process for ducks and geese. Ducks and geese gorge themselves in the wild to store fat in their livers for energy during migration.

Another difference is that ducks and humans don’t digest food the same way. Humans would gag at a tube in the throat. Ducks do not have a gag reflex, stomach or throat, thus, delivering food down a tube is not the same as shoving a tube down a humans throat. Further, ducks have a calcified esophagus which is also expandable and pliable. They can swallow fish whole.

Many, but not all, proponents of the foie gras ban are vegetarians or vegans. I will not listen to advice from vegetarians about animal products just like I won’t seek marriage advice from my thrice divorced neighbor. Just sayin’.

Sophie Gayot, French food critic and publisher of the eponymous restaurant, hotel and travel guide Gayot, is more poignant.

“If you don’t want foie gras don’t eat it but don’t force me to not be able to eat it. It’s a free country,” she said.

Frederick Good June 17, 2012 at 04:39 PM
I agree that the ban is a violation of our rights, and a lazy, broad-handed approach to the problem of animal cruelty. But you lost me completely with this bit: " ...liberals used the same fear-mongering rhetoric tactics that many liberals often accuse conservatives of using, preying on voter and consumer ignorance." Flip the words 'liberal' and 'conservative' and it works just as well. A generic line such as that could be used in any argument, for any cause, in any article. It cheapens your message. Better luck next time.
katie from Seattle June 20, 2012 at 12:29 PM
So then, what's yer position on veal?
bigyaz June 20, 2012 at 05:18 PM
"The absolute nature of the ban is McCarthyist in style." Huh? Are foie gras lovers being blacklisted? Are they suspected of being spies for foie gras-producing nations? Are they being unjustly accused of being Communists? This was a law that was passed by the duly elected legislature of the state, and signed by the governor of said state. It was debated in public. It went through the democratic process. To invoke the name of Joseph McCarthy just because it's a law you disagree with is intellectually dishonest and, frankly, abhorrent.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »