Truth About Fur, voice of the North American fur trade
Truth About Fur – The Blog is an opinionated and free-wheeling new voice for the North American fur trade.
This blog is a place for open discussions about the ecological, social and even philosophical dimensions of fur in our society.
We will also address criticisms head-on, challenging some of the unfair misconceptions about our trade that some animal activists continue to propagate.
All our guest bloggers are real people who make their living in the modern fur trade – as farmers and trappers, or in auctions, processing, design and fabrication or marketing.
Please read, share and comment. We only ask that if you comment on the post, please do so with respect.
We hope you enjoy Truth About Fur – The Blog. For more information about the North American fur trade, please visit our website, Truth About Fur.
– Alan Herscovici, Senior Researcher, Truth About Fur
If you’ve worked in the fur industry or been vocal about your love for fur, then you have probably suffered… Read More
If you’ve worked in the fur industry or been vocal about your love for fur, then you have probably suffered some verbal abuse from animal rights activists. Animal activists like to claim they hold the moral high-ground and that they are the compassionate ones. Well, let’s look at some of the things these models of compassion say ...
What they say about ... using foul language in front of farm animals:
"[it's] conceivable that verbal abuse of an extreme nature [against any animal, including sheep] could constitute an act of violence"
Nicolah Donovan, president of Lawyers for Animals (source)
I guess they never heard the old adage, "sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me."
What they say to ... a homestead farming family when they post a photo of a cow they have just raised and then slaughtered for food:
"What if I start raising children for raping? Would that be acceptable? Would that be better than raping another child? It's stupid to think it is OK to kill animals."
The fur industry is proud to state that one of reasons real fur is eco-friendly is that it biodegrades. Fake fur made from… Read More
RIP to our real mink stole (left) and our fake fur vest made of polyamide and polyester.
The fur industry is proud to state that one of reasons real fur is eco-friendly is that it biodegrades. Fake fur made from petrochemicals, on the other hand, just sits in landfills for centuries - though that is, admittedly, hard to demonstrate! So thinking it's time to walk the walk, we decided to do a little experiment. Join us now in the Great Fur Burial!
We've taken a mink stole and a fake fur vest, cut them into pieces, and buried them in the ground. At 3 months, 6 months, and then once a year for five years, we will be unearthing a piece of the mink and a piece of the fake fur and checking in on the biodegrading process. While our experiment is hardly scientific, we are endeavouring to ensure the results are as realistic as possible.
Mink vs. Polyamide
First, we found a real fur stole (100% mink) and a fake fur vest (80% polyamide and 20% polyester). We removed the lining from both.
Here is a closeup of the mink before the backing was removed ...
And here is a closeup of the fake fur ...
We cut both into pieces, all of similar size (mink on the left, fake on the right) ...
Then we dug a shallow hole, roughly one foot down, and placed eight pieces of each fur into the "fur grave". This happened on May 14, 2016. (Mink on the left, fake on the right.)
Then we covered them with dirt and turf ...
Now let's let Mother Nature do her work! See you in August, little fur pieces!
It’s time for our monthly Fur In The News roundup, and as always, we’ll be looking at the latest fur stories,… Read More
It's time for our monthly Fur In The News roundup, and as always, we'll be looking at the latest fur stories, but we'll start with a couple of more general interest. First up, there's a new illustrated parasite guide doing the rounds (above) that speaks for itself. Please share widely!
Then there's the story of how nasty scorned vegans can be, which surprised even us. When a group of Californians found out one of their favourite vegan restaurants had owners who raised their own animals and then slaughtered them, they got a bit upset. Actually, more than a bit upset, they started sending the restaurant owners death threats. We are still trying to figure out how someone can claim to care about animals' lives, but threaten human lives. It makes no sense! Then again, neither does not eating meat or not wearing fur.
LESLIE BALLENTINE: And last but certainly not least, in late May we lost a dear friend and a remarkable collaborator. Leslie Ballentine worked for some 30 years to help producers tell their stories and reply to animal rights challenges, including work with Ontario egg producers and later as founding Director of Ontario Farm Animal Council, and more recently as communications consultant for the Fur Institute of Canada and Truth About Fur, among other clients. Leslie’s knowledge, commitment and passion for our work will be sorely missed. We send our sincere condolences to Leslie’s husband Alan, to her daughter Kailin and to other family and friends. You left us too soon and we miss you already, Leslie. Thank you for all your hard work in our field.
It's time for our April Fur in the News roundup, so here's our summary of the media's coverage of trapping, sealing, fur fashion and stupid activists ...
Let's start with trapping, and this fantastic guest blog post by "modern trapper" Jeff Traynor (pictured), who talks about his love for this age-old skill and its traditions. Outdoor Canada recognized the importance of trapping and why hunters need to support Canada's oldest profession. "There was some income involved, there certainly was a pursuit involved, and it's an accumulative hobby,” veteran trapper Victor Blanchette is quoted as saying. It rings true, of course; Blanchette has been trapping for 50 years and knows what he's talking about.
Need to know when to sell your furs? This handy article from Grandview Outdoors gives some tips for trappers who need to decide whether to sell or store their skins. And if you ever get a cougar stuck in a trap, here is one way to release him (pictured.) But kids, it is best not to try this at home, or outside.
Of course trapping isn't without its controversy; like most animal-related activities, there is always someone complaining. The latest uproar is about a beaver derby in Saskatchewan, which sees beavers getting trapped and their skins getting used. But activists want the derby stopped so that the beaver carcasses get left to rot in fields instead. Speaking of beavers, some residents of this community don't want the local beavers to be trapped, even though residents' homes are at risk of being flooded. They claim it is unfair for the beavers to be killed because they are only doing what "is natural to them." It would be natural to a coyote to eat your cat, or a cougar to eat your toddler. Should we let them get away with that, too?
Activists just don't get it, do they? Case in point: this story about an ostrich who was released from a circus, and who died after being hit by a car ten minutes later. Another "liberation" gone desperately wrong. What is wrong with these people? A lot, we think, especially after reading this article about an "escalation workshop" for activists. The content in there was so messed up that we decided to include it in our new column, Things Animal Rights Activists Say (pictured). Read it to hear activists showing zero compassion for humans, including sick people and suicide victims, because animals are more important, right?
And to round out the month, activists put their misguided zeal into practice on the night of April 29, "liberating" mink from a farm in Ontario. A sizeable reward has been offered for the capture of the perpetrators. Let's hope someone can claim it!
On the bright side, it was nice to hear that a store in Vancouver, Canada, who has been dealing with militant anti-fur protesters in front of its store for three years, has announced that this year has been its best ever season for Canada Goose parka sales. It warms our heart when we hear that activists' actions fail.
April was sealing month, which means fundraising time for the animal rights charities who get donations by fooling people into thinking white coats get clubbed on the ice. (They don't, and that hasn't happened since the '80s.) Our favourite sealing spokesperson, Tanya Tagaq, had this to say about the matter. These incredible photos show a side to the hunt that we don't see portrayed in the media enough. And here is an innovative way to use seal skin - we can't wait to stock up on Aurora Heat next winter. And there is no shortage of sealing memes around, including one showing the incredible size of the seal populations, another making fun of protestors (pictured), and this one highlighting yet another celebrity fur hypocrite.
Let's finish off with a couple more things...
Wearing fur is a great way to celebrate Earth Day.
If you’ve worked in the fur industry or been vocal about your love for fur, then you have probably suffered… Read More
If you’ve worked in the fur industry or been vocal about your love for fur, then you have probably suffered some verbal abuse from animal rights activists. Animal activists like to claim they hold the moral high-ground and that they are the compassionate ones. Well, let’s look at some of the things these models of compassion say ...
What they say about ... poor labour practices in garment manufacturing in poorly regulated countries:
"I dont care about humans being exploited. animals arent in control of their destiny. period. i realise humans are massively destructive to everything. thats why i hate em.” [sic]
Welcome to the fifth installment of our Hypocrites series, dedicated to exposing celebrities who use their star power to attack the fur trade – while failing to see their own glaring contradictions. Today we turn the spotlight onto brash British funnyman Ricky Gervais, who fancies himself as a defender of animals. He has spoken out strongly against the use of animals in laboratories, trophy hunting, bull-fights ... and fur.
“Animals are not here for us to do as we please with. We are not their superiors, we are their equals. We are their family. Be kind to them,” says Gervais. Unless, of course, we fancy them breaded and fried.
Here is the fourth installment of our Hypocrite series, aimed at exposing the celebrities and professionals whose anti-fur arguments have… Read More
Here is the fourth installment of our Hypocrite series, aimed at exposing the celebrities and professionals whose anti-fur arguments have a lot of holes in them. Today we are talking about the Senior Fashion Editor of the British edition of Cosmopolitan magazine, Sairey Stemp. An email response of hers to a fur company was recently published in the Huffington Post. She had c.c.'d her email to PETA, which she suggested as a good source of information on "this highly cruel and unnecessary industry."
“I'm afraid this email has really upset me," she told the fur company. "I think you need to be aware of the extremely barbaric practices of the fur industry. I cannot and will not tolerate an industry that sees fit to torture, skin alive, electrocute and castrate innocent animals so their pelts can be used for 'fashion'.”
Now, let’s not focus on the problem that the supposed journalist didn't bother to have her work fact-checked. We all know that animals are NOT skinned alive for their fur, and PETA has even admitted that this is not a normal practice. We also won’t focus on the fact that Cosmopolitan features tons of cheap “fast fashion” clothing on its pages, clothing made under highly questionable working conditions in the Far East, from (usually petroleum-based, synthetic) materials that are filling our landfills and polluting our waterways. That is a topic for another day. This article’s about the hypocrisy of denouncing fur while featuring lots of other animal products in your magazine.
Some of the coats Cosmopolitan suggests for winter, from left to right: leather coat by Finery, sheepskin coat by Warehouse, and grey wool coat by Marks & Spencer.
The Hypocrite: Sairey Stemp, Senior Fashion Editor of the British edition of Cosmopolitan magazine, a publication that does not feature real fur but promotes lots of other “dead animals”.
The Hypocrisy: Stemp’s anti-fur rant, published in the Huffington Post, was one of the silliest articles we've read in a long time. Devoid of facts, she spews inflammatory (and hypocritical) garbage like this: “The fur industry is one of the most barbaric, hideous, cruel and bloody industries. The reason it continues is simply because of money. If people didn't buy and wear fur, if the fashion industry didn't use and support it, then it would cease to be a viable commercial industry and the fur farms would close.”
Stemp denounces fur, but guess what her Cosmo suggests for winter coats: leather, wool and sheepskin! “But they're by-products of the food industry!” she'll cry. Someone should tell her PETA also opposes the production and eating of meat animals! (And, funny, now that we think about it, we’ve never seen sheep on the menu in England, only baby sheep.) So it’s OK to kill farmed cows and sheep for clothing, but not mink? And how about the bags and shoes that Cosmo features? Many of them are made of leather and suede, a.k.a. dead animals. Yup, according to Stemp’s Cosmo, it’s “obscene” to wear fur but you look “Stunning in Shearling.”
Leather bags, as recommended by Cosmopolitan, from left to right: Kenzo at Forzieri, Diane Von Furstenberg and Millu Millu.
What we say: Her article was a load of hypocritical drivel, with lots of copy-and-paste from a PETA press release.
Sairey, we respect your decision to dislike fur, you have every right to do that. You don’t have to wear it, no one is forcing you. You also have the right, as a Fashion Editor, to decide not to put fur on the pages of your magazine. But, please, don’t write insulting articles about the fictional horrors of the fur industry while you happily promote other apparel that is also made from “dead animals”.
If your only knowledge of fur farming comes from PETA, you don’t know anything about it. (And by the way, did you check the welfare standards of the animals used by the leather brands you promote?) Please explain why fur is so terrible, but leather and sheepskin are totally fine. Last time we checked, animals died for both, so the real question should be how responsibly the animals are treated.
Bottom line, you have a choice: you can be a shallow-thinking hypocrite or you can act like a professional journalist. If you think it’s wrong to kill animals for clothing, then stop promoting leather and sheepskin too. But if you can’t do that (because the leather companies pay your salary with their ads), then at least stop parroting PETA’s hateful drivel about fur. You can’t have it both ways!
One of the most insulting and insidious lies spread by animal activists is that animals are “skinned alive” for their… Read More
One of the most insulting and insidious lies spread by animal activists is that animals are “skinned alive” for their fur. The origins of this vicious lie go back fully 50 years, to the first seal-hunt protests, and those charges were soon proved to be false, as we will explain soon.
Ten years ago, the old myth was revived – this time about Asiatic raccoons. Since then, activists have become more and more extravagant, claiming (and, no doubt, believing) that rabbits, mink and other species are also treated cruelly, including being skinned alive.
Genesis of a lie: In 1964, a Canadian sealer was paid by film-makers to poke a live harp seal with a knife. And so the myth about skinning animals alive was born. Photo: Visit Greenland.
One of the main goals of Truth About Fur is to debunk falsehoods about the fur industry, so let's make something perfectly clear: Animals are NOT skinned alive for their fur. Period.
Here are some of the reasons why it is absolutely ridiculous to even suggest it.
1. It would be completely inhumane
Contrary to what activists would have us believe, most farmers take great pride in what they do; they take good care of their animals and treat them with respect. After all, their livelihoods depend on these animals, and the only way to produce the high quality of mink and fox for which North America is known is by providing them with excellent nutrition and care. When you work hard to care for animals – seven days a week, 52 weeks a year – you certainly don’t want to see them suffer.
It is therefore completely ignorant (and insulting) to claim that farmers would treat their animals with cruelty. They certainly would never skin an animal alive!
If respect for the animals and normal compassion were not enough to ensure that animals are not skinned alive, the farmer's self-interest would be. A live and conscious animal will move, putting the farmer at risk of being bitten or scratched or cut with his own knife – creating a real risk of infection or disease transmission.
Why would anyone expose themselves to such risks by skinning a live animal? The answer, of course, is that they don't!
Wildlife control professional and bushcraft educator Ross Hinter shows a wolf pelt to his audience. He doesn't need to explain why skinning a live wolf is a bad idea. Read his blog post, Should we be trapping wolves in Canada?
3. It would take longer and be less efficient
We've already explained the dangers of skinning a live animal – only common sense when you think about it – but let's also take a moment to consider how difficult it would be.
Farming is a business and, like in most businesses, it is important to be efficient. Clearly it must be faster to skin an animal after it's been euthanized. It is also important to understand that the skinning of a mink or other fur animal must be done very carefully, to avoid nicks and other damage that would lower the value of the fur.
So, again, why would anyone skin a live animal? Quite apart from the cruelty, it would make no business sense whatsoever.
4. It would spoil the fur
While activists like to accuse farmers of being greedy ("killing animals for profit!"), they don't seem to understand that skinning animals alive would work against the farmer's financial interest.
Today’s international markets are very competitive. The amount you earn for your fur is determined by a number of factors including pelt size, fur quality, colour ... and damage. But the heart of a live animal would be beating and pumping blood; attempting to skin a live animal would therefore unnecessarily stain the fur. Yet another reason why animals are not skinned alive.
Farming mink requires a high level of care during their lives, and skill during the pelting process. Aside from being inhumane, dangerous, time-consuming and illegal, pelting mink while they're still alive would ruin their fur. See A year on a mink farm. Part 1: Breeding. Photo: Truth About Fur.
5. It's illegal
In North America, Europe, and most other regions it is illegal to cause unnecessary suffering to an animal. Skinning an animal alive is therefore not only inhumane and immoral – it's clearly illegal. Yet another reason why animals are not skinned alive.
But what about that video?
Activists frequently cite a horrific video taken in a village somewhere in China as "proof" that animals are skinned alive in the fur industry. When this video was first shown, in 2005, fur industry officials contacted the European animal-protection group that released it. They asked for a complete, uncut version of the video, as well as for information about when and where it was filmed, so a proper investigation could be conducted.
Unfortunately, the activists refused to provide this information. Strange.
The lie revived: In 2005, an animal activist group released video of an Asiatic raccoon being skinned alive in China. The original, uncut footage has never been made public. For this and other reasons, the video is believed to have been staged. Photo: 663highland.
If animal welfare was really their goal, wouldn’t you think they would want a full investigation? And if this was really common practice, why has there never been another video showing this type of cruelty? (Even PETA now concedes skinning alive is not common practice, but still insists it happens on fur farms because workers are rushed. In fact, euthanized mink and other farmed fur animals are usually laid out on the wire tops of their pens to cool thoroughly before pelting; otherwise the fur can be damaged or fall out after tanning.)
Combined with the facts outlined above, the only reasonable conclusion is that the cruel actions shown in this video were staged for the camera. That would be a sick thing to do, but it wouldn’t be the first time.
The film that launched the first anti-seal hunt campaigns, in 1964, showed a live seal being poked with a knife – “skinned alive”, the activists cried! But a few years later the hunter, Gustave Poirier, testified under oath to a Canadian Parliamentary committee of enquiry that he had been paid by the film-makers to poke at the live seal, something he said he would otherwise never have done. [For more on this, see Alan Herscovici's book, Second Nature: The Animal-Rights Controversy (CBC 1985; General Publishing, 1991), pg 76.]
The moral of the story? No matter how you look at it, even from the perspective of self-interest and "greed", it is ridiculous to claim that animals are skinned alive. Now you know. And so do our activist friends who monitor these pages.
EDITOR'S NOTE: Due to a large volume of comments received in September 2016 that contributed nothing to the discussion, we have chosen to close comments for this post.
Hello 2016! Here’s our roundup of the fur in the news from the month of December. While many of us were busy shopping… Read More
Hello 2016! Here's our roundup of the fur in the news from the month of December. While many of us were busy shopping and eating turkey, there were still a lot of news stories featuring the subjects that are dear to our hearts: trapping, farming, fur fashion, and cute animals. Let's start with farming!
And speaking of not understanding, it always comes as a surprise to us when farmers have to explain that "smells" are part of life near farms. This Canadian mink farmer is proud of what he is doing, despite the smell (see photo above.)
An important story from the other side of the pond is this one from Denmark, where mink farmers are dealing with a scary outbreak of Aleutian Disease.
Cold weather brings lots of fur-clad celebrities, and we love the way singer Miranda Lambert showed off the fur coat her grandmother gave her (photographed above), despite upset from some of her activist fans.
Hockey player PK Subban looked amazing in the fur coat made for him by the sisters behind Montreal-based brand Eläma.
Huffington Post hired yet another poorly informed "writer" who penned a piece about Canada Goose. He eats meat and claims that it is ok for his friends to hunt, but somehow it is not ok for trappers to live off the land. Hmmm ... Sounds as ridiculous as it is. Although we can never count on activists to be very sane or smart, here's a story about one who is threatening to kill people who consume or use animal products.
Sounds like the Chinese are to thank for boosting the hunting and trapping industry. Here is a very interesting piece about how Chinese are the main buyers of polar bear fur, but the trade is no threat to the animal population.
This is the third installment in our Hypocrite series, aimed at exposing the celebrities and professionals whose anti-fur arguments are… Read More
This is the third installment in our Hypocrite series, aimed at exposing the celebrities and professionals whose anti-fur arguments are full of holes. Today we are talking about singer-songwriter and TV presenter Brian McFadden.
Your first thought is probably “Who the heck is that and why do I care?” We realize that someone who rose to fame with an Irish boy band called Westlife isn’t exactly worthy of a column here, but this was one hypocrite we just couldn’t resist, because it was TOO EASY.
Can anyone be a PETA spokesman now? PETA opposes pets and fur, but Brian McFadden loves both.
The Hypocrite: Brian McFadden, ex-boy band singer, now TV presenter and singer-songwriter, who is also the star of PETA’s latest anti-fur campaign (see above).
The Hypocrisy: We’ve gotten into the habit of doing a little bit of research on PETA spokespeople, so after seeing the new campaign, we wandered over to Brian McFadden’s Instagram page, hoping to find a photo of him eating a burger or wearing leather shoes. But what we found was even better. We found a photo of him, less than a year ago, wearing fur!
You are probably thinking, as we did, what if it's fake? Well, PETA condemns wearing fake fur as well as real, so either way he'd be an odd choice for a spokesman. (PETA also believes people shouldn’t have pets, but that’s another story!) But we checked anyway.
Our lead was a tag on Brian's photo to fantastic British accessory designer Charlotte Simone, who works in both real and fake fur. So we emailed the brand and asked if the item was still available. A representative confirmed Brian's scarf is not only still available, but is made of real fox fur. And here it is!
What they say:PETA says, “Brian knows that just like dogs, minks are sensitive animals with emotions and the ability to feel pain – and they deserve better than to be killed for a frivolous fashion accessory.” (Luckily scarves aren’t frivolous fashion accessories, they play the very important role of keeping our necks warm when it's freezing cold!)
Brian's fabulous "Hero" fox fur scarf from Charlotte Simone's Autumn-Winter 2014 collection.
What we say: Charlotte Simone makes some seriously beautiful fur accessories, so we totally understand why Brian wears one. But it is all wrong for him to wear fur and campaign against fur at the same time!
Brian, it's time to decide. Either ditch your beloved fur, or - much better - keep it, be warm, be stylish, and ditch PETA.
While we are on the subject of activism, Greenpeace has backtracked and is now supportive of the seal hunt. Too bad its campaigning in the 1980s has already done so much damage!
Let’s not forget that activists frequently conceal their agenda, which is not about welfare but instead eliminating animal use altogether. This article does a good job reminding us of the distinction.
This memoir of 30 years battling animal rights is a story close to our heart, written as it is by our senior researcher Alan Herscovici.
And our latest blog post is about our Christmas competition giveaway. We are giving away six beautiful fur goodies over the next three weeks, and it is really easy to join.
There were a lot of bizarre fashion laws in history, some involving fur. For example, 14th-century English yeomen and their families could wear no fur other than lamb, rabbit, fox or cat. Even weasel was too good for them!
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
