Rights Campaigners Call for Focus on Fur Industry's Immediate End
Friends of Animals, an international environmental and animal rights organization, is calling for the immediate end of the fur industry.
Friends of Animals is displeased with the half-measures and platitudes recently expressed by several animal-advocacy organizations in The Independent.
Statements Friends of Animals found objectionable included RSPCA spokesperson Robyn Kippenberger’s eagerness to “support the killing of possums for their fur” when “produced by humane methods.”
This half-hearted opposition to the fur industry is nothing new. Friends of Animals noted that a 2004 letter from Mary Beth Sweetland of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, on the topic of a chinchilla farm in the United States, argues that the farm should use better methods of killing chinchillas.
While the fur industry is reinventing itself with terms like “eco-fur” animal advocacy organizations would do well to give up their shallow focus on industry husbandry standards, says Friends of Animals.
The rights group also doubts that the fur industry can be addressed by targeting pop icons such as Madonna and Kate Moss. Friends of Animals will continue campaigning to end state-sanctioned schemes targeting wolves in Alaska and seals in Newfoundland as part of a movement to respect the interests of nonhumans to live on their own terms.
Daniel Hammer, speaking for Friends of Animals, says this respect requires ending both captive-breeding of animals for their fur and the control of free-living groups. “As other animals’ natural lands continue to shrink,” said Hammer, “Animal advocates have no time to waste on cheeky stunts or on husbandry reforms.”
This autumn and winter, Friends of Animals’ full-page anti-fur advertisements appear in various publications, including The Progressive, a leading voice for peace and social justice since 1909, and also in Shape, the number-one selling active lifestyle magazine for women in the United States with a readership of 5 million.
“Humanity can and should outgrow the obsession with proving we can dominate other animals,” Hammer said. “The sale of fur, for everything from boots to coat trimmings, is a particularly obvious and showy sign of this fixation. No matter what methods or practices are employed in the production of fur, or what animals are being skinned, we call for the outright end of this practice.”
Post your comment
Comment Guidelines: We welcome your expressions of opinion on this subject. Please avoid false commentary about individuals or groups. Facts must be verified by the person posting. Off-topic comments, and comments inappropriate for a readership of all ages, may be deleted. E-mail addresses will never be published. Only comments with valid e-mail address will be published.
20 Comments
On December 12, 2006, Noah Lewis wrote:
Friends of Animals also had two great fur demonstrations on over the weekend.
Plus, join FoA and Animal Rights Front again this weekend!
Anti-fur Demonstration in Stamford, CT
Saturday, Dec. 16
11am — 1 pm
Mary’s Furs, 163 Bedford St. (meet here)
We’ll also cover Engel’s Furs, which is several doors down at 115 Bedford Street.
Leaflets, buttons, and stickers will be provided. Signs and banners will also be available — including the great ‘Tis the Season… signs.
Directions: This is near the corner of Broad St. and Bedford St., which is where the Ferguson Library is (it’s also near the Avon theater). The area is easily accessible by public transportation. There is on-street meter parking, and there is also a parking lot behind the stores, which is accessible from Broad St.
On December 12, 2006, dave wrote:
its hard to believe people still wear fur, these boneheads dress up like a monkey and think there making a fashion statement.it would be cheaper and more humane to just put a bag on their head.and there is only two sides to this issue. either your for it or against it, humane killing is still killing.theres no reason for any animal to be breed to just be killed so some ugly person can walk around looking like an idiot. so if you find it neccessary to wear fur, remember when your in public and people are pointing and laughing, they are not laughing with you, they are laughing at you.the caveman look went out centuries ago,so get with the times.if you were meant to have fur on your back,you would have been born with it.i personally dont let people in my house or cars that wear fur, i have better things to do with my time than vacuum up after some halfwit who thinks they look cool wearing fur,besides they attract flies and smell.
On December 13, 2006, Joan Cameron, FoA-NYC wrote:
To suggest that indulging in animal based products is allowable, as long as the animals’ emotional & behavioral imperatives were accounted for, & to further suggest that one method of slaughter is better than another, is sheer arrogance on the part of those making the suggestions.
Furthermore, it is too much of an easy way out, for individuals who could not care less about altering their personal food & clothing practices, but, nonetheless, wish to be seen as enlightened.
We need to stop worrying about the acceptability levels of various forms of abuse, & start concentrating more on erradicating industries & practices which are specifically designed to abuse.
The way we choose havoc, we can choose true enlightenment, not just the veneer of it.
The more we embrace a vegan lifestyle, & persuade others to choose it, the more we can get this point across.
On December 13, 2006, heather bean wrote:
Anyone who wears fur knowingly makes me question their character. What kind of person would kill an animal to wear their skin and fur on their body? This is barbaric, idiotic, and ignorant! I would never befriend someone like that, I would rather make friends with a monkey, mink, or rabbit. They have more brains anyway.
On December 13, 2006, Noel E. Parmentel Jr. wrote:
“Spouses and the high-end retailers that cater to them feel the effect of the bonus payment”, said Faith H. Consolo, of Prudential-Douglas Elliman. “The luxury market is very dramatically affected by bonuses,” Ms. Consolo said. “We are talking FURS” …(“Huge Profit at Goldman Brings Big Bonuses” by John Holusha, New York Times, December 12/20/06).
In view of FoA’s current anti-fur protests, why not add the
Goldman-Sachs Group to your list? Placards could read:
‘We’re happy 4 your bonuses but please don’t spend them on FUR’.
I believe that a boldface name like Goldman-Sachs (combined with above NYT quote) would guarantee MAJOR press & TV coverage.
Hope you find the above suggestion worthy of consideration.
Best wishes.
Noel E. Parmentel Jr
On December 14, 2006, dave wrote:
this is the peek of the fur industry season.starts in dec. and ends around mid march, i see them running their ads now. i have an idea for a counter ad, i know this might worry you, but it is quite good. make a picture with a person on one side wearing a fur coat,gloves, hat and boots all made of fur. on the other side of the picture put a bunch of people pointing and laughing. have the person say “look what i just blew my money on”. on the other side of the picture have the people say “you look like a monkey”,” your barber missed a spot”,”you know they have electrolysis for that”,”put a shirt on, that’s disgusting”, “mommy, that person killed bambi”. now make this a printable picture so people can download it.put it on myspace.com, run it in college papers,charities can advertise for free. let this photo flood the market and the net.this will make people think twice before going out in public in fur and people wont want to be around them either. and the fur industry will like it because you will be taking customers away from them and they can go bankrupt and go out and get real jobs like the rest of civilization. i am not an artist or good with the web,but getting this point across to the younger generation will speed up a stop to these type of sales.
On December 15, 2006, James wrote:
All of this is very troubling, but to be perfectly honest, what point is there in trying to get people to stop wearing fur as long as they are wearing leather coats, belts, and shoes or wearing a jacket padded with down?
For that matter, I cannot see why someone would stop wearing fur or leather if he continues to consume meat, dairy, eggs, and honey.
Blog editors’ note: [ Every bit of enlightenment
helps. The question is what will it take to get someone
to rethink a number of things? The fur of animals is recognizable, and challenging the fur trade in a substantial, serious campaign is needed. One group’s anti-fur campaign that involves naked stunts hardly drives an enthical message about anything.]
On December 17, 2006, PuppyVigilante wrote:
Being born of the human race instead of the animal kingdom does not give us more rights. It gives us more responsibilities.
On December 23, 2006, Ben wrote:
Although I do find the current methods of obtaining fur rather inhumane, I still do not approve of completely ending the fur industry. Fur can hold many meanings to people, and can still outdo any synthetic material, which is probably more damaging to the environment to produce, when it comes to keeping warm. I believe that a better concept would be to place more conservative guidelines with the industry, rather than destroying an entire economy.
On December 27, 2006, andrea steinke wrote:
About the chinchilla furs:
They talk about a better killing method for the chinchilla
fur -
I can only say this: all killing for fur is wrong, unethical
and totally unnecessary
On January 10, 2007, Rachel Elizabeth wrote:
I beleive It is Completly and Moraly Wrong to kill animals. Expeacialy Just so you can WARE them. That is Wrong and Discusting and We need to Put a STOP to it. That is All i can say. It Needs To Be Stoped.
On January 15, 2007, Martin wrote:
I am just as much in favour of ending animal abuse in the fur industry as the author of this article; however, I feel that it is counterproductive to publicly criticize organizations such as the RSPCA and PETA, as they are key contributors to the AR/animal welfare movement. Instead of reprimanding those who dedicate their lives to ending animal cruelty, why not work with them? We would make a lot more progress in this struggle if there was less division among the organizations that share the common goal of liberating all exploited animals. This article seems like you are treating this very serious issue as a petty contest to show who is the most righteous.
[Blog editors’ note: But this is exactly the point we are making: It is not possible to end abuse within the fur industry, as these groups suggest. We are not working to end abuse within the industry. We are working to end the use itself, by asking people to simply and unequivocally opt out of it. Illustrations of these differences must be noted if there is to be an animal rights movement, as distinct from a general agreement to regulate the industry and attempt to amelioriate some of its husbandry problems. Thank you, Martin, for reading the piece and offering feedback, which is always read and appreciated, even if we don’t agree on this point.]
On February 24, 2007, Joyce Mount wrote:
shopping AC Craft store in Clifton New Jersey saw they were selling swatches of rabbit fur for craft use re checked the next day tagged on back, some frow Korea and the others from Spain called store, district manager and main manager in Berlin New Jersey ( Fay Melvin Brown) left messages on voice mail and with others no response this is disgusting no more AC Moore for me
thanks
[Blog editors’ note: News this week that
Whole Foods Market bought Wild Oats, so a grocery store with organic fruits and vegetable selections will now stage fresh rabbit flesh and much more. When I see annoying rabbit fur accessories, it’s impossible not to think of rabbit meat; it’s peddled in successful, upscale Whole Foods stores. Worse, they’re putting other, smaller natural foods stores out of business. ]
On August 7, 2007, luanne wrote:
if people only knew how their fur coat came about,this whole sorry business would stop.
On October 2, 2007, Russie wrote:
I just took up a sudden interest in chinchillas, and i think your sight rocks and animals should never be killed for fur.
On October 17, 2007, Dexter wrote:
Land’s end is selling rabbit fur trimmed coats. Lands end is owned by Sears- Lands end said that fur is a by-product of meat industry, so this makes it OK how?
Sears Call 1-800-549-4505 then press “5”
Land’s End Corporate Office (800) 338-2000
On December 30, 2007, mike wrote:
i agree with fur and how the animals are treated when theyre being killed for this things…. however cows pigs sheep etc are used for meat and what are the people supposed tod o throw away the skins????? i agree with not killing a rabbit or a mink or anything else that is being killed solely for its skin and not having the animals die in such inhumane way but I wear leather my mom wears leather my freinds wear leather and im not going to stop wearing it
On December 30, 2007, Priscilla Feral wrote:
Mike — People can opt out of supporting the fur industry,
and animal agribusiness. There are alternatives to wearing fur and leather. You can find sweaters made from cotton and other fabrics that don’t stem from an animal exploitation industry. It’s up to us whether our monies support industries that are a disaster for animals.
Priscilla Feral
Friends of Animals
On December 30, 2007, mike wrote:
yes it is but what about for meat eaters?????
On December 30, 2007, Priscilla Feral wrote:
Omnivores bankroll an industry that drives climate change, harms animals, the environment,human health, and it’s all unnecessary. It’s high time for a few serious New Year’s Resolutions that might start with what we call food.
Priscilla Feral