As diners, we make, or should make, ethical decisions on a daily basis. We decide whether to eat meat or not, buy foods that are organic or conventional, local or imported, natural or processed. We might even encourage others to follow our path, whatever it is. When making these choices, we also consider how much of our income we want, or can, dedicate to food. But for the most part, these choices remain personal ones, achieved in the comfort of our own homes and kitchens.

So what happens when legislature tries to dictate what we can and cannot eat? Should we protest? Should we accept what we had no choice in choosing? What if it concerns what we do for a living?

Chefs, producers, and consumers are now faced with this dilemma as it pertains to foie gras, which groups such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), Farm Sanctuary, and the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) have taken on as culinary cause célèbre. California passed in 2004 a law set to take effect in 2012, which will ban the production and retail of foie gras in the state. New York State is the only other major foie gras producing state in the country, and it is under its own threat: a bill that would ban the force-feeding of ducks, the most common method of foie gras production, is in front of the state legislature. The legislature did not make a decision before its summer recess, but the trend is not in favor of producers like Ferndale-based Hudson Valley Foie Gras.

"Animal rights extremists have been very aggressive in spreading disinformation about foie gras farming," said Leslie Horst of D'Artagnan, the country's leading foie gras distributor. In Chicago, the City Council passed in April a law set to take effect on August 22, which will ban the sale of foie gras by restaurants and food retailers within the city limits. Chefs there have been extremely outspoken against the ban, founding for example Chefs for Choice, a chapter of the Illinois Restaurant Association. The group organized on July 11 a fundraiser to benefit its Freedom Fund.

At Avenues in Chicago, Chef de Cuisine Graham Elliot Bowles chose to express his discontent through his cooking. He designed a 10-course Chef's Palate dinner entirely built around foie gras, from a Caesar salad appetizer with foie gras snow to foie gras milkshake for dessert.

"It was our way of silently protesting what we feel is a ridiculous ordinance," Bowles said. How did the council manage to pass such ban, even under criticism from the mayor, who deplored a focus on foie gras when ridding the city of crime and drugs should take precedent? "PETA lobbied hard to do away with it [foie gras]," said Bowles, "and the council only heard one side of the argument."

It is hard to understand how spending so much time and energy on fighting foie gras, which has remained a luxury food, is justified. While foie gras dishes are now found in a wider range of restaurants than strictly four-star locales, it is still not an everyday food. Its elitist appearance might make it an easy target. It also means that it does not benefit from the powerful lobbies of the poultry or beef industries. "Industry" being the key word here. Exposing to all eyes, not just the most consummate shoppers', the conditions in which chickens or pigs are raised on factory farms would certainly force many to make definite choices they might not be ready for (such as doubling or tripling the portion of their income spent on food to put their wallet where their mouth is). With foie gras, no such lifestyle altering commitment is needed.

Many who have ethical issues with foie gras production, and thus its consumption, nonetheless disagree with the focus placed on it at the expense of more urgent issues.

"I tend to think it's kind of a dangerous thing, when the government gets involved in telling us what to eat," Dan Barber, executive chef and co-owner of Blue Hill in New York City and Blue Hill at Stone Barnes in Westchester County, said. "I don't understand why foie gras, when other practices are much worse. Foie gras is such a small market. They're not helping to raise issues that I feel are much more profound. What about the intensive feeding of grains to ruminants? They cannot survive, they become sick, and we need to give them antibiotics to survive. That's intensily inhumane, intensily polluting for the envinronment."

Barber, who chooses not to serve foie gras in either of his restaurants, is not alone in feeling that other food production issues deserve more attention. Jay Weinstein, author of The Ethical Gourmet (Broadway Books, 2006), said that he does not favor the consumption of foie gras because of the way it is produced and that he believes the government has a responsibility to enforce laws that protect animals from unnecessary cruelty, but "that said, I don't see foie gras production as significantly more cruel than most poultry production, so I also don't endorse consumption of conventional chicken," he added. "I recommend humanely raised free-range chickens and other poultry."

"We look to the government to tell us whether food is safe to consume," said Horst. "All foie gras sold in the US meets strict government standards for food safety. That's a proper role for government. Controlling menus, that isn't the government's job."

D'Artagnan aligned with "small artisan farmers" who produce foie gras, among other products, and companies like Hudson Valley Foie Gras, Sonoma Valley Foie Gras, and Rougie of Canada, to form the Artisan Farmers Alliance. As part of their effort, they retained a lobbying organization.

"We're working to get the facts out about foie gras farming," Horst said, "and we're dedicated to keeping foie gras safe, legal, and delicious, as it's always been."

Consumers can also do their own lobbying to guarantee that no legislature will dictate what they eat. "Tell your elected representatives that your food choices are your own," said Horst, "and to keep the government out of the dining room."

We can only hope that the foie gras ban already in place in Chicago will ultimately benefit New York. If the state legislature fails to pass a ban, chefs like Bowles and other Chicago stars such as Grant Achatz, Homaro Cantu, and Rick Tramonto, might decide to relocate.

"A few months ago I would have said [I wouldn't move out of Chicago]," Bowles said, "but with the smoking ban, the foie gras ban, and now a proposed ban on trans fats, I would have to think long and hard if Chicago was the last place I ever want to cook."

Anne E. McBride