On April 26th, the Chicago City Council approved an ordinance to ban the sale of foie gras in the city’s restaurants and supermarkets. City officials consider the production of foie gras to be cruel to ducks and geese. California enacted a similar law in 2004 banning the production and sale of foie gras in the state following a 7 year phase out period. Chicago’s ban takes effect on June 26, 2006.
The AVMA examined the issue in 2004 and 2005 and declined to take a position due to a lack of peer-reviewed scientific information examining the welfare considerations of foie gras production. The AVMA House of Delegates (HOD), after much debate, unanimously defeated a resolution opposing the practice of tube feeding ducks and geese to produce foie gras. In addition, the HOD stated that "the observations and practical experiences of HOD members indicate a minimum of adverse effects on the birds involved." Opponents in the HOD expressed concern that AVMA should not be taking a position on individual production practices without scientific data supporting the association’s position. They considered this to be a "slippery slope" that could open the door to attacks on other agricultural practices.
According to an article in the Chicago Tribune, actress Loretta Swit compared the practice of tube feeding birds to the torture of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison. The city ordinance cited a number of reasons for the ban including calling the practice "inhumane" and "unethical" and noted that a famous local chef had stopped serving it in his restaurants. The ordinance also cites the results of a poll in which nearly 80 percent of Americans support a ban on force feeding birds.
[ED. Similar bans are being debated in Hawaii, Illinois and Massachusetts. I don’t know about you, but it concerns me when a governmental body can dictate what foods its citizens can and cannot eat based solely on their prejudices regarding how the food was produced. Ignoring all science and expert opinion, the elected officials can decide the fate of an industry rather than letting the consumers speak for themselves. What’s next? But hey, that’s just my opinion and I could be wrong.]
Source:
Chicago Tribune, April 26, 2006