Growers and Grocers

Washington State is one of many states in the U.S. currently considering a ban on the sale and production of foie gras, the fattened liver of a force-fed goose or duck. The law mimics the one in place in California, even coming into effect in 2012 alongside that state’s.

One editorial in The Herald claims that this bill is misguided, though the piece has several glaring mistakes about the proposed law. The bill does not ban consumption; a consumer could buy it from somewhere else and eat it in state. The bill does not just apply to geese but to all birds, and so forth. But the unidentified writer is correct that no foie gras is currently produced in the state (no goose foie gras is produced in the country), and s/he argues that it’s not worth government’s time and money to focus on this bill when others are in front of the legislature. It’s a surprising stance, given the author’s clear disapproval of foie gras.

Once Governor Schwarzenegger signed California’s bill in 2004, similar laws popped up in state governments around the country. What the writer of this editorial doesn’t understand is that the Washington bill—like its kin in other states—is a deliberate preventive measure. There’s little chance the California bill will be overturned, and Sonoma Foie Gras will no doubt try to find a new out-of-state site. If similar legislation passes in New York State, which seems inevitable in the next few years, Hudson Valley Foie Gras and La Belle Poultry will have the same problem. States are acting now to prevent the owners of these farms from moving in.

For many voters, foie gras is an easy decision. Any description of the force-feeding process disturbs people at a visceral level, even when not exaggerated by animal rights activists, and even though there’s little real evidence that the birds suffer during it. The high price ensures that most don’t eat it. A luxury food produced via an ethically debatable procedure? Most consider a vote against foie gras to be an easy way to make agriculture a little more humane.

It’s not misguided for animal rights groups to push these bills now. By the time Guillermo Gonzalez, owner of Sonoma Foie Gras, needs to move his operation, he won’t have many options. And this is precisely what animal rights groups want. I disagree with these laws, if only because the issue is so complex, but I admire the strategy nonetheless.