The American Spectator

Reader Mail

Liver Spots

5.30.06 @ 12:01AM

DEFENDING THE DUCKS
Re: John Luik's and Patrick Basham's No Ducking the Issue:

In "No Ducking the Issue," John Luik and Patrick Basham claim that "it is science behind foie gras production that provides the best way of disentangling the factual, emotional, and moral aspects of the debate."

Science can indeed help... but certainly not if you make false statements about the scientific studies you cite to defend foie gras production, as these authors do.

1) The authors write that the "1998 report by the European Union's Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare found "no evidence that intensive force feeding is stressful to the male hybrid duck."

In fact, the full quote of the European report is: "This measure, therefore gives no evidence..." (see page 37). Interestingly, the report was discussing a study, which had been ordered and funded by... the French foie gras producers association (CIFOG).

The European report never stated that there is "no evidence that intensive force feeding is stressful to the male hybrid duck." On the contrary, it reports, "When ducks or geese were in a pen during the force feeding procedure, they kept away from the person who would force feed them even though that person normally supplied them with food. At the end of the force feeding procedure, the birds were less well able to move and were usually panting but they still move away from or tried to move away from the person who had force fed them." (page 34)

2) The authors write: "Although mortality rates are higher than in comparable ducks, the overall death rate is less than that for farm-raised chickens and turkeys."

False again: they compare how many ducks die in the 12-day force-feeding period with how many chickens and turkeys die over several months! Refer to European report (page 47), and you'll see that indeed the mortality rates during force-feeding "compare most unfavorably with mortality rates for ducks and geese during normal rearing": it is 10 to 20 times higher.

All this explains why the European Report concludes: "The Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare concludes that force feeding, as currently practiced, is detrimental to the welfare of the birds." (page 65).

But this John Luik and Patrick Basham forgot to report about.
-- Antoine Comiti
President of the non-profit Stop Gavage
Bordeaux, France

While we appreciate the intentions of John Luik and Patrick Basham in trying to settle the debate over the animal suffering involved in foie gras production ("No ducking the issue," May 26), their creative misinterpretation of the European Union's study on foie gras production presents a flawed, one-sided view of the issue.

A more careful examination of the EU report on the welfare of birds used in foie gras production reveals another story: painful damage to the esophageal tissue, severely compromised liver function, difficulty standing and breathing, and demonstrable fear of the force feeder. Subsequent studies, pathology reports, and videotape evidence obtained from inside foie gras farms have all reinforced these facts pointing to severe animal suffering.

Indeed, far from condoning the practice of force feeding birds for foie gras production, as Luik and Basham would have readers believe, the EU Committee summarizes its report by plainly asserting, "The Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare concludes that force feeding, as currently practised, is detrimental to the welfare of the birds."

No matter how the foie gras industry apologists try to spin it, there is simply no humane way to produce foie gras. The fact that legislators in the U.S. are finally joining their European counterparts in banning it shows that U.S. laws are, thankfully, finally catching up with the humane views of the U.S. population -- 80% of whom support a ban on foie gras production, according to a recent Zogby International poll.

We invite readers to view the evidence on foie gras production for themselves. The full facts on foie gras, including the text of the EU's report, can be found at www.nofoiegras.org.
-- Gene Bauston
President
Farm Sanctuary
Watkins Glen, New York

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Taxes, Television, Islam, Abortion, Environment, Books, Constitution, Law, Military, Iraq, Iran, United Nations, European Union, NATO, Immigration, Energy, Oil, Unions