Practices employed by agribusinesses to convert living animals into tender delicacies are coming under fire in a number of states as rights activists move to expand cruelty prohibitions and spread awareness.
Many people eating the gourmet delicacy known as "foie
gras" do not know how it is produced. They might not even
know the translation from the French: "fatty liver."
An aggressive campaign by animal rights groups aims to tell
consumers exactly how the
duck and goose livers become so tender and
flavorful: by force-feeding cornmeal through a hard tube shoved down
the bird’s esophagus, causing its liver to bloat up to ten times its
normal size.
Groups such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA)
and Farm Sanctuary, an organization that rescues and provides refuge
to animals discarded by the agribusiness industry, have led the
charge against what they see as exceptionally vile animal
mistreatment. In response to the campaign, a number of high-profile
institutions and some celebrity chefs have stopped serving foie
gras.
| Both Massachusetts bills are largely meant
to have symbolic and preventive effects rather produce
immediate results since there is currently no veal or foie
gras production in the state. |
Foie gras
production was banned in California, effective 2012, by state
legislation signed in September, and bills are now pending or
proposed in Massachusetts, New York, Illinois and Oregon to ban its
production. The Massachusetts and Illinois bills also ban the
importation or sale of the fatty livers in the state; the Oregon and
New York bills are still in development.
"Once people find out just how cruel foie gras production is,
they’ll refuse to purchase it
or eat it," said Cem Akin, research
associate at PETA, which started pressuring institutions to remove
foie gras from their menus in 1992 and won such converts as the
Boston Symphony and Williams-Sonoma, the specialty food and cookware
supplier.
Meanwhile, Massachusetts legislators have introduced another bill
that would outlaw two other controversial farming techniques: the
use of veal crates for calves and gestation crates for pigs. In both
cases the crates prevent the animal from moving freely, grooming,
turning around or even lying down comfortably. With calves the
confinement crates are used -- along with a low-fiber, low-iron
liquid diet that can induce anemia -- to create the fatty, pale meat
popularly known as veal. Pig gestation crates are used to confine
pregnant sows in continual cycles of gestation, turning them into
"piglet making machines" in the words of animal rights activists, to
be slaughtered once their reproductive usefulness is expended.
Both Massachusetts bills are largely meant to have symbolic and
preventive effects rather produce immediate results since there is
currently no veal or foie gras production in the state.
| In the US, both opponents and supporters
of the Massachusetts anti-foie gras and anti-confinement bills
basically see them as wedge issues, which could open the door
for more animal rights-related legislation in other states and
perhaps more importantly, increased awareness of animal rights
in general. |
There are only two major foie
gras producers in the country, Sonoma Foie Gras in California and
Hudson Valley Foie Gras in New York. Animal rights activists say the
foie gras bills aim to prevent new foie gras outfits from setting
up, and to undermine support for French and Canadian foie gras
companies who export the product to the United States.
"We want to set the standard that this is not an acceptable
practice and we wouldn’t condone it on any farm," said Tim O’Neill,
budget and policy director for State Senator Susan Fargo, who
sponsored the Massachusetts foie gras bill and also signed the
proposed anti-confinement bill. "And we want to make sure no
businesses are procuring or selling foie gras produced through
inhumane methods."
Veal and foie gras producers say animal rights groups like Farm
Sanctuary are misrepresenting industries.
Steve Kraut, co-executive director of the American Veal
Association and an Illinois-based, second-generation veal producer,
said he thinks animal rights groups are inaccurately portraying veal
production as inhumane in order to create more general opposition to
the meat industry. "My entire livelihood is dependent on the
well-being and best interest of my calves," he said. "If I do
anything that’s not in their best interest, that will hurt me.
People who don’t understand our industry are trying to apply these
standards to it. You need to ask the folks who tend their animals
all day, not the folks who don’t think there’s a place in society
for animal agriculture. We need these decisions made by
veterinarians, not vegetarians."
Kraut said confinement in individual units is the healthiest
situation for the calves."That allows each calf to be cared for and
fed individually," he said. "It protects them more from sickness.
Our research has indicated this is a stress-free environment. You’ll
have a difficult time finding anywhere in animal agriculture where
animals are treated with the kind of consideration veal calves
get."
To back up such claims, Kraut pointed to a study produced by an
industry researcher at Rutgers University last year in response to
proposed anti-confinement legislation introduced there. But The
NewStandard has reviewed that report and found it was based
mostly on selective citations of other industry research and even
inaccurately portrayed the proposed legislation it purported to
refute.
Akin of PETA counters industry arguments, suggesting that all
animals - like humans - have immune systems for the purpose of
fighting disease, and if they are allowed to nurse and normally
associate with other animals in a relatively comfortable,
stress-free setting, their immune system will develop normally. He
notes that isolating calves and feeding them formula rather than
letting them nurse inhibits their immune system development.
Animal rights groups also object to the small size of veal and
gestation crates, arguing that animals would never choose to live in
an enclosure so small as to prohibit them from so much as turning
around.
Kraut’s industry association strongly opposed anti-veal
legislation that failed to pass in New Jersey, Illinois and
California, and also opposes the Massachusetts bill. He noted that
although there is no veal production in Massachusetts, the bill
could affect the state’s large dairy industry.
"The veal industry, through purchasing calves and milk products,
provides $300 million annually to the dairy industry," he said,
referring to nationwide production. "This bill would not only impact
veal; it would have a chilling effect on the dairy industry."
Akin said opponents of veal should also learn about how it is
linked to the dairy industry, against which many animal rights
groups also level numerous complaints.
"We often say there’s a little chunk of veal in every glass of
milk," Akin said. "The veal and dairy industries are almost one and
the same. Most veal are the male calves of dairy cows. It’s a good
way for the dairy farmer to get rid of them and make a little
money."
Back in New York State, the foie gras prohibition bill would
directly affect Hudson Valley Foie Gras, which kills about 250,000
ducks a year. Hudson Valley Foie Gras co-founder Michael Giron
disputes assertions that foie gras production is inhumane, and he
blames animal rights groups for stirring up public opinion about the
issue.
"I think what they’re saying is silly," said Giron. "This hasn’t
been carefully studied at all, there’s been no evidence that the
process causes suffering or stress to ducks. When you humanize it
and think of this being done to us, it sounds inhumane. But they
have different anatomies. They have a calcified [hardened]
esophagus, while we have a soft esophagus. They don’t have a gag
reflex. They’re meant to gorge and grow fat on the liver as part of
the migratory process."
Animal rights activists argue that the bloated ducks being raised
for foie gras -- pictures of which are widely available on the
internet -- would have a hard time migrating anywhere, since their
bodies are so enlarged and they suffer from a liver condition called
hepatic lipidosis.
Besides, most ducks bred for foie gras are not naturally
migratory birds in the first place, veterinarians point out.
"In nature ducks and geese would never eat to the extent that
their livers are so bloated, that their bodies are so swollen that
their legs become distended and they can’t walk," said Akin. "Our
investigations and others have found that [foie gras] birds end up
propelling themselves with their wings instead of walking because
they are so crippled. And in nature birds would never impale
themselves on metal rods, as happens with the feeding tubes."
Giron said that while he cannot offer official statistics, ducks
on his farm being raised for foie gras have about a 3.5 percent
mortality rate, which he says is below average for poultry. He also
said foie gras-bound ducks live for 16 weeks before being
slaughtered, while chickens are usually slaughtered after only eight
or nine weeks and other ducks generally after 10 to 12 weeks.
Animal rights activists say lifespan is not the point, if those
extra weeks the animals are living are ones of disease and misery.
Giron is doubtful that legislation will pass in New York
prohibiting the sale of foie gras, and he said a law banning its
production would only increase the production of foie gras in France
and Canada.
"And if the media is bringing more attention to the issue, even
more people will want to try foie gras, so the marketplace will
actually grow," he said. "More ducks will be processed, but it will
happen in Canada and France."
Many of France’s European neighbors already outlaw foie gras
production. A report by the Scientific Committee on Animal Health
and Animal Welfare of the European Union extensively documents the
negative impacts of foie gras procedures on birds. Among other
points, it notes that at the end of the forced feeding process, "the
birds were less well able to move and were usually panting, but
still moved away from or tried to move away from the person who had
force fed them."
Israel, which used to be one of the world’s major producers, also
now bans the practice.
In the US, both opponents and supporters of the Massachusetts
anti-foie gras and anti-confinement bills basically see them as
wedge issues, which could open the door for more animal
rights-related legislation in other states and perhaps more
importantly, increased awareness of animal rights in general.
"It’s difficult to pass legislation even in states with
supportive constituencies, so it would be a long way off to pass
something like this in a big farming state," said Alison Stoll,
international legislative coordinator of Farm Sanctuary. "But it
could help set a precedent."