In the Algoma Highlands of Northern Ontario, a group of retired local researchers are trying to trap, tag and collect DNA samples from wolves, and then track them. The project is part of a three-year study by the Algoma Highlands Conservancy supposedly to improve understanding of local wolves and maybe restrict logging if it seems to interfere with their dens. But are they really after a bigger prize? I say they’re looking for an animal that could be used to restrict human activity far more: the so-called Algonquin wolf.

If you’ve never heard of the Algonquin wolf before, you’re not alone, because until five years ago the name didn’t even exist. So what is it, and why might protectionists be so keen to find more?

First we need to know a little about taxonomy – the science of naming, describing and classifying organisms. For the most part the system works well, but scientific names change all the time, and it’s not unusual for a species to get stuck with two names because scientists can’t agree. So a scientific name consists of two or three parts: the genus, the species, and frequently the subspecies. Species and subspecies can interbreed, but usually don’t in the wild because of geographic isolation. Then there are hybrids of two species, which are rare in captivity and even rarer in the wild, and are almost always beset with problems like infertility.

And then there are canids, the genus containing wolves and coyotes. These are so rife with subspecies – or hybrids treated as subspecies – that taxonomists have a hard time agreeing on anything. The problems are twofold. First, all canids are close relatives genetically, and can both interbreed and produce viable offspring. And second, their ranges often overlap, so when there’s a shortage of mates of your own subspecies, another will do. Indeed, so mixed have canid genes become that studies show nearly all North American gray wolves have some degree of coyote in them, increasing the further east one goes. The populous eastern wolf, meanwhile, is recognised as a wolf-coyote hybrid. This then raises the issue of whether protecting hybrids is desirable at all if it’s diluting the genetics of pure wolves and coyotes.

Enter the Algonquin Wolf

The designation of a new subspecies – or the granting of subspecies status to a hybrid – can have profound implications for wildlife managers and a whole range of human activities if it is treated separately from the general population. For practical reasons, therefore, a species made up of multiple subspecies is often managed as one homogeneous population. Whitetail deer, for example, are managed in this way, even though there are 22 subspecies in North America.

And that’s why, until very recently, all of Northern Ontario’s eastern wolves (Canis lupus lycaon or Canis lycaon – take your pick!) were managed as a whole, and it was working. The density was stable at 2.5 to 3 animals per 100 km2, which is at the high end of what the ecosystem can support. The Species at Risk in Ontario List, compiled on the advice of the independent Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario, listed its conservation status as “special concern”, which is actually the lowest level of concern, behind “threatened”, “endangered” and “extirpated”.

Then wolf protectionists decided to fix something that wasn’t broken. First they needed to identify a new subspecies/hybrid within the larger eastern wolf population, that wasn’t too numerous and had not been studied much.

They came up with the Algonquin wolf, and in 2016, the newly christened subspecies/hybrid made its debut on the Species at Risk in Ontario List. The basis for this was that they are a little smaller than other eastern wolves, though only a DNA test can tell for sure if they’re the real deal. Also, conveniently, mature individuals are estimated to number fewer than 500, so their conservation status has been upgraded to “threatened”, with all the extra protection that entails.

For now, eastern wolves and Algonquin wolves still share the same, disputed, taxonomic name. But from a management viewpoint, Ontario effectively now has a whole new subspecies to worry about, and a “threatened” one at that. So the key questions now become, where are they, and what changes in human activity will be made to accommodate them?

So far, a core concentration has been reported in and around Algonquin Provincial Park, with smaller populations in Killarney Provincial Park, Kawartha Highlands Signature Site, and Queen Elizabeth II Wildlands. Can we expect the Algoma Highlands to be added to this list soon? Only time will tell, but that would make wolf protectionists so happy!

Vilifying Opponents

Meanwhile, wolf protectionists are busy trying to appear better than anyone who sees them as just disruptive or worse.

The forestry industry, they say, threatens wolves by disturbing their dens. If the Algoma Highlands Conservancy can find where the dens are, “We can make sure they’re not being logged, and say ‘don’t log too close to the den’,” said president Kees van Frankenhuyzen to the Sault Ste. Marie community website Sootoday.com last Sept. 1. “We don’t want to unknowingly destroy or negatively influence a habitat that’s important for the wolves’ survival.”

But in Northern Ontario at least, loggers disturbing dens is simply not an issue. Timber has been harvested there for hundreds of years and is sustainable, as is the wolf population.

Then there are trappers. Protectionists want the public to believe trappers still use steel-jawed leghold traps for wolves, while they, being the good guys, use only humane traps. As Sootoday reported, “The traps being used [by the Algoma Highlands Conservancy] have had their harmful metal teeth removed and replaced with rubber.”

In truth, they have not “removed” or “replaced” anything for the simple reason that traps with teeth have been banned nationwide since the early 1970s.

I don’t know what kind of trap the Conservancy researchers are using, but whatever they are, I’m quite sure the researchers played no role in developing them. Indeed, they would have been developed by the very same trappers they now want to vilify.

All wildlife traps used in Canada today have been developed under the auspices of the Agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards, signed by Canada, the EU and Russia. And as it happens, leadership in this research program, which aims to ensure that all traps are as humane as possible, comes from the Fur Institute of Canada, of which I am chairman. So whatever traps they are using in the Algoma Highlands, they were probably developed and certainly tested and approved by us. Imagine, then, how galling it is for me to read that they have “removed” the “harmful metal teeth” in a trap that I guarantee never had teeth in the first place!

Cuddly Wolves?

Last but not least, the wolves themselves are getting an image makeover. It’s nothing new for advocates to paint rosy images of dangerous animals like sharks or killer whales. They’re “misunderstood”, we’re told, and will leave us alone unless threatened. Most people know to take such claims with a pinch of salt, but it only takes one idiot.

And so it is with wolves.

“People are scared of wolves, they think they’re dangerous,” says Algoma’s van Frankenhuyzen, stating the obvious. “But our experience so far is that wolves mix very, very well with people. … There seems to be a happy coexistence between people and wolves and that’s a story that‘s not being told because we don’t have the documentation of that. As a Conservancy we’re working on highlighting that and say ‘people and wolves can coexist’ …”

SEE ALSO: Should we be trapping wolves in Canada? By Ross Hinter for Truth About Fur.

But the documentation on wolf-human interactions that van Frankenhuyzen says doesn’t exist most certainly does, and it tells a different story. (See Wikipedia’s online entry “List of wolf attacks in North America”.) Wolf attacks on humans are indeed rare, but that is because wolves like to live far from humans, and when that’s not possible, they have probably developed a healthy fear of guns and avoid us like the plague. That’s hardly a sign of “mixing” or a “happy coexistence”. Occasionally though, a wolf pack may decide to “mix” with a lone human, and it usually doesn’t end well for the human.

***

To learn more about donating to Truth About Fur, click here.

Animal welfare and sustainability are both commendable goals for any company’s strategic plan, but they’re also like chalk and cheese. They’re unrelated, which means you don’t advance one by advancing the other. Yet these days, whenever a designer, brand or retailer announces it is dropping fur supposedly for animal welfare reasons, it also claims this will make it more sustainable. This is totally illogical, and they must be called out for it.

Worse still, the deceit appears to be intentional, not just the result of lazy thinking. In a conscious and cynical bid to associate themselves with two of the hottest buzzwords in marketing today, companies are pitching the message, “We believe in animal welfare and sustainability, so we won’t be using furry animals anymore. (Just don’t ask about all the other ones.)”

So why should the fur trade cry “Foul”? Because sustainability is the strongest argument in favour of fur, and we need to defend it against misuse. Now the debate is being twisted and co-opted to make it appear that fur is the very opposite of sustainable.

First let’s look at sustainability and animal welfare separately, and then see how some sneaky companies pretend they are related.

Sustainability Is One Thing …

Just about every business today claims to be striving for greater sustainability, and with good reason. Not only is it good for the planet, it also sells! It’s something customers want to hear. So even if your business is not sustainable today, at least say you are trying, and promise some vague delivery date like 2030.

For a few lucky industries, including the fur trade, sustainability has already been achieved. Historically, it wasn’t always the case, as some wild species were over-harvested. But with the advent of fur farming and a raft of regulations covering harvest sizes and trade, the modern industry has become a model of sustainability.

Here are its main credentials:

• Furbearers, whether trapped or farmed, are a renewable natural resource.
• No endangered species are used.
• Fur farming provides extra protection for wildlife as production can be adjusted to meet changing demand. (This is true for all livestock farming.)
• Farmed furbearers consume leftovers from the production of human food.
• Trappers provide vital information and assistance to wildlife managers.
• Fur is fully biodegradable, even after processing, no matter what animal rights groups claim.
• A fur garment can last for decades, or be restyled as fashions change. It is the complete opposite of wasteful “fast fashion”.

These credentials look even stronger when you compare real fur to fake fur made from non-biodegradable, non-renewable oil.

… Animal Welfare Is Another

Animal welfare is a different issue entirely. While sustainability is concerned with quantifiable inputs such as reproduction rates and environmental impacts, animal welfare deals with the quality of life and death of the animals we use.

It’s difficult to explain in logical terms how companies bundle animal welfare and sustainability together, because the “logic” they employ is false. They first present an erroneous argument, hope we don’t notice, and then use this argument to justify their business strategy. It’s like saying, “2 + 2 obviously equals 5, we can all agree on that. So now let’s focus on that number 5.”

The false logic they want us to fall for is typically along the following lines. “Treating animals well will result in a kinder and gentler world, which we all want to live in. That world must also be sustainable. Therefore, being kinder to animals is integral to ensuring the future sustainability of our planet. And since it’s impossible to achieve an acceptable level of welfare in the fur trade, the most sustainable option is not to use fur at all.”

QED: Fur is unsustainable.

And when you’ve finished wrestling with the twisted logic, take special note that companies are using it only to justify dropping fur. Not leather. Or feathers. Or any other animal products. For these, it’s business as usual. In other words, the level of animal welfare in producing crocodile handbags or goose down is acceptable, and therefore these products are sustainable. What?

Case Studies

Now let’s look at three real-life examples of fashion companies that have dropped fur, and see the knots they tie themselves in to justify it.

Gucci: In 2017, CEO Marco Bizzarri shocked the fashion world by announcing that his company would be dropping fur. He also announced that Gucci had signed on to the Fur Free Retailer program of the Fur Free Alliance, a group that, in its own words, wants to end the fur trade by “raising the serious animal welfare issues related to fur farming and trapping.” The Alliance expresses no interest whatsoever in promoting sustainability. But still, Bizzarri described Gucci’s move as demonstrating “our absolute commitment to making sustainability an intrinsic part of our business.”

The remarkable thing was that only the fur trade challenged Bizzarri to explain how jumping in bed with an animal rights group and dropping fur would make Gucci more sustainable. The media were all over the dropping fur part, but not one journalist questioned the logic. Why was real fur unsustainable? Was fake fur more sustainable? And why was Gucci not dropping leather, exotic skins and feathers too?

So in one fell swoop, Bizzarri framed Gucci as loving both animals and the planet, and he got away with it.

Nothing has changed since either. If you want to know more about Gucci’s stance on animal welfare, the go-to document is titled – wait for it – Gucci Sustainability Principles! This 21-page document on sustainability refers to animal welfare no fewer than 40 times. And there are three whole pages devoted to the “Kering Animal Welfare Standards” (Kering being Gucci’s parent). Why these in-house, self-serving animal welfare standards belong in a document on “sustainability principles” is not explained, but clearly we are supposed to accept that animal welfare is an integral part of sustainability.

Canada Goose: Known for its iconic performance parkas with coyote trim, Canada Goose is now in a tricky spot PR-wise, largely of its own making. For decades, it was a strong advocate of fur as a sustainable natural resource – an industry leader, in fact. Indeed, a page still on its website but that will presumably disappear soon, states: “We remain committed to the functionality and sustainability of real fur.” Then last June it announced that it was dropping fur.

Observers were in no doubt that this was a response to relentless pressure from animal rights groups, but CEO and president Dani Reiss wasn’t about to admit this. Instead he dug himself a hole, saying, “This decision was driven by our commitment to sustainability …”

So the official line is that Canada Goose is dropping fur voluntarily, as part of its ongoing commitment to sustainability, and you can believe that if you want. But the really tricky part is that it can’t actually say fur is unsustainable, because it’s been saying the polar opposite for years. Which leaves us in the odd position of having to turn off our brains and accept that while fur is sustainable, “fur-free” is more sustainable.

And here’s what it looks like in practice:

This new page on the Canada Goose website sports the headline, “We’re going fur-free”, unquestionably an animal rights slogan with no connection to sustainability. But the subhead reads, “Our desire to evolve into a more sustainable brand continues.” No matter what explanation Canada Goose may have for this, it is impossible for a visitor to this webpage not to connect these two ideas. The message, intentional or not, is clear: Canada Goose is going fur-free BECAUSE it is more sustainable.

Mytheresa: And this quote says it all – no further explanation required. This August 26, the Munich-based luxury retailer announced it would not sell fur beyond 2022. Said CEO Michael Kliger, “At Mytheresa, we believe that sustainability is an important part of our future strategy, and this view is clearly shared by our customers, partners and employees. As we already stopped buying exotic skins in spring 2021, it was clear that going fur-free is the natural next step for Mytheresa. We are proud to be making this change and thank the Humane Society of the United States, Four Paws and the Fur Free Alliance for supporting this policy.”

Each company that drops fur will claim slightly different reasons for equating animal welfare with sustainability, but it always boils down to placing them in the best possible light for consumers. And it looks doubly great if you can check two boxes at the same time!

But it’s all nonsense. Animal welfare and sustainability have as much in common with each other as chalk and cheese. It’s also damaging to businesses that really are sustainable, like the fur trade. And that’s why companies that practice this deception should be called out.

***

To learn more about donating to Truth About Fur, click here.

The International Fur Federation (IFF) has appointed a range of fur industry “Ambassadors” as well as retained the services of outside industry consultants to market, promote and provide information on the Furmark® certification. The Ambassadors represent their respective regions and will be responsible to outreach to a range of firms and contacts to share the merits of – and encourage inclusion in – the Furmark certification program.

Sandy Reports reached out to several of the Ambassadors provided by the IFF and asked them to share feedback they have received to date from their respective regional outreach.

In their own words …

SEE ALSO: North American fur trade – ahead of the curve on traceability. Truth About Fur.

Molly Wang, IFF China – Furmark Ambassador, Asia

Regarding Furmark, I had conversations with fur people on my previous two trips in China this month. In general, bigger manufacturers for domestic market and exporters for Russia are viewing Furmark as a very positive tool either for increasing their revenue or simply for their own publicities use. For those manufacturers who do OEM fur garments for fashion brands and for Russian market, they believe that if their clients accept Furmark, then they should join as quickly as possible, so they will be receiving more orders than those who don’t. That’s why they want to know how Russians are truly viewing Furmark.

The smaller ones are definitely showing interests on Furmark as well but given that they don’t buy as many skins from auction houses as the bigger companies, so at the moment, instead of applying immediately, they’d rather take wait-and-see attitude to see how things are going with bigger ones. (For exporters, they also comment that they want to know how Russians react to Furmark, which I think is reasonable.)

Retailers, we have a well-known brand in China who take initiatives to have included Furmark as part of their own marketing strategies in the coming retail season, really move fast and even push IFF to provide more marketing toolkit for them.

As for Chinese domestic market, if Furmark will be known and accepted by Chinese consumers, it for sure will help a brand to sell more garments over others who don’t use … what Furmark stands for, such as sustainability, traceability system, green materials etc.

These ideas are very popular in the fashion world in China in recent years, you can hear these talks, discussions on almost every fashion-related Seminar or Forum in China. LV and Fendi’s joining in has become an endorsement for Furmark in the fashion world.

Jan Erik Carlson – Furmark Ambassador, Europe

I have been working as a freelance consultant for IFF for more than a year now, with a focus on developing and implementing the Furmark system in the fur trade and fashion industry. Acting as an ambassador in the outreach to the fashion brands in Europe is a natural extension of my assignment.

Behind the handful of much publicised brands that have said no to natural fur, I still find a genuine interest in fur. I would even say that in the post-covid markets there will be an increased interest in materials that are authentic and sustainable. Natural fur actually ticks all the boxes in this respect, and the Furmark system can provide the assurance and confidence that consumers need to buy natural fur.

Both my personal contacts in the fashion industry and the extensive research that has been conducted globally in B2B [business-to-business] and B2C [business to consumer] segments by IFF, points to the fact that Furmark is the right concept at the right time. Most companies in the fashion industry do understand that they need a new strong tool to be able to promote and sell natural fur. Although fake fur is an alternative, there is no way around the fact that it is a plastic product that does not add any value to their products/brands compared to natural fur.

Having worked intensely with Furmark for more than a year, I am left with a feeling that there is a future for the fur trade. Although we have had some setbacks in recent time, I still experience that natural fur has a unique cachet and the material is aspirational for many designers and consumers. The high level of interest in signing up to the Furmark system across the markets is a good indication for the future!

Charlie Ross – Furmark Ambassador, North America

The designers that I am concentrating my Furmark efforts are fur-friendly and sell to boutiques and direct to consumers. They are, of course, disappointed that department stores will not buy, but many of the mid-level designers do not sell to department stores. I did not ask any questions about their reaction to fur. I have been mostly targeting designers in New York. They are all suffering in their business with decreased sales, so they did not bring up a change of attitude to fur. To be honest, I have been speaking to fur-friendly designers. They have been busy with their spring collections, and we are doing a Blackglama project, so they seem happy. I think that Furmark will provide additional confidence, but without the department stores the fur business will be smaller in the future.

The designers that I have reached are very supportive of the Furmark concept but they are waiting for the program to launch in Q4. The designers think that an organized and common language of selling certified furs is important in light of department stores that have stopped selling fur. The actual language is still being discussed but the concept has been very well received. I think after the September shows this will be a more relevant conversation as the designers will think about fall and fur. I will have a Furmark presentation during Fur Vision this year to really bring the message to the trade. The IFF wants to do the designer outreach before the trade.

The fur farmers seem to understand that the manufacturers and retailers need a concept to provide confidence to their customers. The trade in New York has not really commented on the Furmark program since it launches the end of the year. The IFF would need to do some outreach to the trade to try to get the information about Furmark to the trade. This has not started and is a program for the fall.

The big brands in Europe are also supportive about Furmark because they feel it is a way to give confidence to the consumer and the program covers a lot of fur types which they sell.

I think the lack of action about the loss of department stores is shocking. We won the political battle in some states, but we lost Saks and Neiman.

Maksim Chipurnoy, Russian Fur Union – Furmark Ambassador, Eurasia Region

The reaction to Furmark in Russia and Eurasia is positive, Turkish brands are already joining the project and there is interest from major players from Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus. As in fact the Eurasian Economic Union has a mandatory traceability and labelling system in place by law since 2016, many players are interested in how technically the Furmark project can integrate into the existing system. We continue to negotiate with key industry players about joining the Furmark project.

The response to the Furmark project concept has also been received positively by almost all sectors of the fur industry. Proof of this: most sable fur farms in Russia have already joined the project and have been certified by independent inspectors from the Research Institute for Animal and Rabbit Breeding, two major auctions Sojuzpushnina and Ruspushnina, which sell Russian sable skins, have also been assessed for compliance with the Furmark project by independent experts from the Federal Centre for Hunting Development and, starting in 2021, all furs sold in Russia are certified. Plans for the near future include the inclusion of Uzbekistan and Uzbek Karakul in the Furmark project.

The main drivers of the fur trade are still China and Russia. In Russia, the turnover of fur goods is about US$3 billion, and compared to 2020, there is a noticeable revival of the market, sales growth, and a systematic return of business indicators to the pre-pandemic level.

***

To learn more about donating to Truth About Fur, click here.

The recent news that Canada Goose would stop trimming the hoods of its performance parkas with coyote fur by the end of 2022 disappointed and angered many trappers and others in the fur trade. But anyone who cares about nature and democracy should be worried too. Here’s why.

First, despite the rhetoric of animal activists and the chatter of some media pundits, it’s clear that the company’s decision to retreat from fur was not driven by consumer trends or evolving societal values. Canada Goose has offered parkas with and without fur trim for years, but thousands of young people continue to choose the iconic coyote ruff – as you can see on the streets of Montreal, Toronto, New York, London, Paris, and other cities as soon as the thermometer dips each fall.

No clothing brand has ever been subjected to such aggressive campaign tactics.

The real reason for Canada Goose’s retreat from fur is clearly because the security, PR, and other costs of responding to relentless protests from animal activists simply became too much to bear. No clothing brand has ever been subjected to such aggressive campaign tactics. Store invasions, social media barrages, even noisy protests in front of CEO Dani Reiss’s home – Canada Goose held strong through it all for more than a decade. But the company’s extraordinary success in making fur cool for hip young consumers singled them out as a primary target for increasingly aggressive activist attacks.

While Dani Reiss always expressed pride about the northern roots of the company his grandfather founded, it no doubt became increasingly difficult to resist activist pressure once a majority share was sold to Bain Capital Private Equity, a US private investment firm, in 2013, and especially when Canada Goose was listed on the New York and Toronto stock exchanges, in 2017.  The bean counters were now in control, and the financial and other costs of defending fur presumably became harder to justify as the company targeted new (warmer) markets, and expanded its product line with lightweight, all-season apparel and accessories.

Simply put, Canada Goose did not decide to stop trimming its parkas with coyote fur because consumers didn’t want to buy them. Canada Goose is dropping fur because it was subjected to the equivalent of a mafia protection racket. The activist message was: “Do as we say or we will destroy your business!” And, after years of intense (and costly) pressure, it worked. This should worry anyone who believes in freedom of choice, no matter what you think about fur.

MUST READ: Canada Goose: We’re Committed to Using Fur. Vice-President Gavin Thompson talks to Truth About Fur, 2020.

Undermining Conservation

Another reason why activist bullying tactics should worry the public is that they undermine responsible and successful wildlife conservation policies. As Ontario Fur Managers Federation general manager Robin Horwath explained in media interviews, “Coyote populations are at record levels; they will have to be managed to maintain a balance, whether we use the fur or not … but if activists succeed in destroying the market, it’s tax-payers who will foot the bill.”

LISTEN: Robin Horwath explains to 64 Toronto radio why coyotes will still need to be culled.

Coyotes are overpopulated across North America; they kill calves and lambs, and are now in our cities – from Los Angeles to Toronto – eating pet dogs and cats, and even attacking people, something rarely seen in the past.

Without a market incentive for trappers, the situation will only worsen. Instead of being valued as a natural resource, to be used responsibly and sustainably, coyotes will again be reduced to the status of “pests”. Governments will again be obliged to offer bounties, as several states and provinces did until not so many years ago. Coyotes will still be killed, but the fur will be wasted. So much for the ethical treatment of animals!

SEE ALSO: Will urban coyotes change the animal rights debate? Truth About Fur.

First Nations leaders are also expressing their concern for how Canada Goose’s decision will impact the markets for furs their communities rely on.

Unfortunate Statement

Caught in the middle between activist pressure and the trappers they have worked with for decades, it should be noted that the media statement issued by Canada Goose about its new policy carefully avoided any negative comment about fur. Fair enough. It is unfortunate, however, that it did include a statement from the CEO of Humane Canada, a coalition of SPCAs and other animal welfare groups, claiming that this was “a significant step forward toward building a more humane and sustainable world.”

The use of coyote and other furs in North America is, in fact, an excellent example of the responsible and sustainable use of nature. And there is nothing humane about leaving nature (i.e., starvation and disease) to manage coyote populations. The leadership at Canada Goose knows this. So why was this misleading and provocative Humane Canada statement included in its announcement? We can only guess that Canada Goose is working with Humane Canada to provide cover for its continued use of goose down, which is the core of its business.

In fact, responding to the decision by Canada Goose to drop fur, PETA announced “a moratorium” on protests against its stores, while pledging to work “behind the scenes” to end the company’s use of down. (Can you spell “Protection Racket”?)

SEE ALSO: 5 Reasons Why PETA Won’t Make Me Ditch My Canada Goose. By Alan Herscovici, Truth About Fur, 2016.

Vicious Circle

Meanwhile, hardly a week goes by when we don’t hear that another major brand or retailer is “going fur free”. It becomes a self-reinforcing cycle, because when Saks, Neimans, Holt Renfrew, and other retailers say they will stop selling fur, there is even less incentive for brands like Canada Goose to continue producing it. If allowed to continue, this vicious circle will also make it more difficult for politicians to resist calls to ban the retail sale of fur products entirely.

SEE ALSO: Progressive politicians should promote fur, not ban it. Truth About Fur.

So what should the fur trade be doing about this? Some people are writing to Canada Goose CEO Dani Reiss to express their concern. We should also be writing to and supporting the brands that continue to use fur, including Rudsak, Kanuk, Mackage, and others.

Most importantly, however, the fur trade must make a huge communications effort to regain control of our own story. We must explain to the public how fur is responsibly and sustainably produced in North America, and why fur is now, more than ever, an ethical choice. We must also sound the alarm about how activist bully tactics are eroding consumer choice, and threatening public health and safety by sabotaging responsible wildlife management. Must a child die from a rabid raccoon bite or being mauled by an urban coyote for the public to appreciate the role trappers play in controlling wildlife populations?

And we must make it personal: it’s time to put the real people of the fur trade – trappers, farmers, craftspeople – at the forefront of this campaign. These are the people whose livelihoods, cultures, and ethics are attacked by increasingly arrogant animal activists. Activist campaigns play on emotions — and in public debate, emotions trump logic — but we have feelings and values too. It’s time we were heard!

***

To learn more about donating to Truth About Fur, click here.

A troubling new trend among progressive legislators in the US is to virtue signal by proposing to ban the sale of natural fur products. Apart from the question of whether it is appropriate for government to legislate such personal choices, even a quick review of the facts suggests that progressives should be promoting natural fur, not seeking to ban it.

Unfortunately, the sponsors of recent fur-ban proposals in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and several other states have clearly not bothered to do their own research. Instead, they just parrot animal activist inaccuracies and even lies.

Scaremongering Over Covid

Fur-ban supporters are also guilty of scaremongering about the susceptibility of mink to Covid-19, claiming that mink farms are a threat to public health. Strict bio-security measures in place on all North American mink farms are one reason the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention can state: "Currently, there is no evidence that mink are playing a significant role in the spread of SARS-CoV-2 to people."

As for the fear that a virus strain that showed up on mink farms in Denmark will lower the efficacy of vaccines, America's top infectious disease official is not too worried. "[A]t first cut, it doesn't look like something that's going to be a really big problem for the vaccines that are currently being used to induce an immune response,” said Dr. Anthony Fauci, who was Chief Medical Advisor under President Trump and has stayed in the role under President Biden.

Bear in mind also that when there are outbreaks of swine flu (H1N1) or avian flu in chickens, we do not ban the sale of pork and poultry – although this is exactly what animal activists call for. Instead, farmers work closely with public officials to resolve the problems, just as US mink farmers have done with Covid-19.

Ignoring Positive Contributions

Fur-ban proponents also refuse to acknowledge the many positives of producing and wearing fur.

For example, they ignore the fact that farmed mink, as carnivores, eat by-products from human food-production – the parts of cows, pigs and fish that we don’t eat, expired cheeses, broken eggs – that might otherwise end up in landfills. Manure, soiled straw bedding, and other farm wastes are composted to produce organic fertilizers, completing the agricultural nutrient cycle. And mink are raised on family-run farms, providing employment and revenue to support rural communities.

They also fail to mention that half the fur produced in the US is taken from the wild, and from abundant species only. This way they avoid the awkward truth that many of these furbearers are so numerous that they'd have to be culled even if we didn't use their fur. Overpopulated beavers flood homes and roads; raccoons spread rabies and other dangerous diseases; coyotes are the main predators of young calves and lambs, and even pet dogs and cats; and the list goes on. Regulated trapping, as practiced in the US, helps to maintain more stable and healthy wildlife populations by smoothing out boom-and-bust cycles. And if we must cull some of these animals, it is surely more ethical to use their fur than to throw it away.

SEE ALSO: The ethics of fur. Truth About Fur.

Finally, it is grossly misleading for fur-ban proponents to claim that alternative materials render the use of natural fur “unjustifiable”. Fake furs – and more than 60% of all our clothing – are synthetics, mostly made from petroleum, a non-renewable resource. We now know that each time these synthetics are washed, they leach micro-particles of plastic into our waterways that are now turning up in marine life, drinking water, and even breast milk. Cruelty-free indeed!

Natural fur, by contrast, is produced responsibly and sustainably. Each fur garment is cut and sewn individually by artisans maintaining heritage handcraft skills. A well-made mink coat can be worn for 30 or 40 years or more, passed from mother to daughter and granddaughter. Unlike most clothing, a natural fur coat can be taken apart and completely restyled. And after decades of use, it can be thrown into the garden compost where it will biodegrade completely. Using natural fur makes more sense than ever at a time when environmentalists are saying we should buy better-quality clothing and keep it longer.

Scapegoating Artisans

So why do we hear so much anti-fur rhetoric? Despite its “luxury” image, the fur trade – from farmers to trappers to craftspeople -- is a small and artisanal industry that has been unfairly stigmatized and scapegoated. The fur trade is easily sacrificed by politicians bent on winning votes and raising funds, in the knowledge that it simply doesn't have the resources to compete with multi-million-dollar, media-savvy, “animal rights” lobby groups.

No one is obliged to wear natural fur – or, for that matter, wool or leather – or to eat meat or dairy. These are personal choices, and they are rarely black and white. For example, despite the growing popularity of vegetarianism, few of us actually go the whole nine yards, let alone become vegans. Instead, we may opt to become pesco- or ovo-vegetarians, meaning we still eat seafood or eggs. Others choose to buy organic beef, or free-range eggs.

As we navigate these choices, we want more information about the environmental and ethical implications of our decisions. In response, the International Fur Federation is launching FurMark this year to further enhance traceability and transparency about industry standards.

What is not appropriate is for legislators to impose such decisions from on high. Rather, it behooves them to actually meet with the people whose cultures, reputations, and livelihoods they are so blithely and unfairly attacking. Politicians who fancy themselves to be progressive may then find that they should be promoting natural fur, not seeking to arbitrarily ban it.

***

To learn more about donating to Truth About Fur, click here.

The following statement from the four signatories below was released to the media on Jan. 24, 2021.

"Harvesting and trading fur and other gifts of nature is our inherent right since ancient times, not a privilege to be bartered or revoked!" says Chief Brian Wadhams, trapper, of the 'Namgis First Nations.

As Indigenous trappers and traditional trapline holders, we can no longer remain silent about self-appointed “animal rights” activists who think they have a right to spread lies about the fur trade and call on politicians to ban the production or sale of fur products.

The latest example of this vicious and misleading campaigning is a recent call by animal activists for the Canadian Government to ban mink farming, after mink on two BC farms tested positive for COVID-19. While mink farming is not a tradition in our culture, we oppose this attack on small family-run farms and on rural communities where the majority of Indigenous harvesters live. And we are not naïve: we understand that this attack on mink farming is just the latest weapon in an orchestrated plan to turn the public against any use of fur – a campaign that directly attacks our culture and inherent rights as Indigenous peoples of Canada. We call this for what it is: Cultural Genocide.

The fur trade played a central role in Canada’s history, and it's an important part of our Cultural Identity; our people were harvesting and trading furs long before Europeans ever set foot on our eastern shores. The harvesting and sale of fur still provides income for many First Nations communities throughout Canada. Beavers, muskrats, and other furbearing animals also provide nutritious food for many hunters and their families. The respectful harvesting of fur and food from abundant wildlife populations is central to our relationship with the land – a relationship that the federal and provincial governments are legally mandated to protect.

Let us be crystal clear: the goal of animal activists – including those now calling for a ban on mink farming – is to destroy all markets for fur, to further their own ideological agenda. In doing so, they are directly attacking our right to responsibly harvest and trade nature’s gifts, which is our inherent right, a right recognized by the Supreme Court of Canada and by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP).

It is doubly unfortunate that animal activists seek to mislead the public and the government about fur at a time when Canadians seek to live in better harmony with nature. Furs are a sustainably produced, long-lasting, and biodegradable natural clothing material. It is the Honest Fabric. By contrast, the fake furs and other synthetics promoted by animal activists are generally made from petroleum, a non-renewable, non-biodegradable, and polluting resource.

Indigenous people have respected and protected the survival of the animal populations upon which we depend since time immemorial. Our message today to self-appointed “animal rights” extremists and their celebrity cheerleaders is this: Your misguided attacks on the fur trade are not “progressive”; they are attacks on Indigenous people. Your uninformed and misguided lies must stop NOW! 

We take this opportunity to remind the Government of Canada, and their provincial and municipal counterparts, that fur trapping, trading, displaying and selling fur is our Inherent Right, not a privilege to be bartered or trifled with. You are responsible for protecting these rights!

Furthermore, governments cannot make any changes in policy or legislation concerning the responsible harvesting, production, displaying, selling or bartering of fur products without full consultation and consent from Indigenous people, as the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled.

We will no longer remain silent while self-appointed urban activists attack our cultural traditions and livelihoods.  It is time you showed some honesty, decency, and respect for Indigenous fur harvesters and our fur trade partners.

It's time to take a stand. We call on all Canadians to say “No!” to the lies and cultural intolerance promoted by anti-fur groups. We ask you to support Indigenous harvesters, to support the responsible and sustainable use of nature's gifts -- and to buy and proudly wear Canadian Fur. 

Thank you.

Signed by Indigenous Fur Trappers & Supporters.

• Chief Roy Jones, Haida Gwaii First Nations.

• Chief Brian Wadhams, trapper, 'Namgis First Nations.

• Karen Dunstan, Lytton First Nation member, trapper, and director of the BC Trappers Association.

• Thomas Sewid, Kwakwaka'wakw / Cree, Pacific Balance Marine Management.

***

To learn more about donating to Truth About Fur, click here.

In response to an unexpected shortage this year of opportunities for aspiring fur designers, the Canadian fur trade has launched a whole new competition. Ten lucky winners of the inaugural Student Fur Design Competition will enjoy an all-expenses-paid week-long workshop, learning not only techniques for working with fur, but also why fur is a responsible choice in an age when we are all being called upon to wear sustainable and ethical clothing.

The competition was launched on October 28, but the deadline for entries is not until January 15, so there's still plenty of time folks!

What makes this competition special is that it's truly a group effort, with the list of contributors reading like a who's who of the Canadian fur trade. In alphabetical order we have the Canada Mink Breeders Association, the Fur Council of Canada, Fur Harvesters Auction, the Fur Institute of Canada, International Fur Dressers and Dyers, the Ontario Fur Breeders Association, the Ontario Fur Managers Federation, and the Seals and Sealing Network. Coordinating them all is Melanie Calandra, Managing Director of Canadian Relations for the International Fur Federation - Americas Region.

The workshop itself will be held at Ryerson University in downtown Toronto, under the auspices of Canadian Fur Atelier, a new name for an old hand, Farley Chatto, who is both a Ryerson professor and designer in residence at Four Seasons Furs.

Successor to Studio NAFA

The competition is not so much a new idea as a response to fill a gap created by two major developments, explains coordinator Melanie.

"In 2007, North American Fur Auctions launched Studio NAFA, a series of annual workshops for aspiring fur designers, led by none other than Farley Chatto. But when NAFA closed its doors in 2019, that meant the end of the workshops too."

Then came Covid-19, and the fur trade's premier international design competition, REMIX, had to be cancelled.

"The International Fur Federation, which organises REMIX in collaboration with Vogue Italia and Vogue Talents, just couldn't go ahead due to travel restrictions," says Melanie. "And that was when we reached out to Farley and Fur Harvesters Auction with the idea of launching a whole new event.”

Pandemic Concessions

Still, concessions have had to be made to the pandemic. Unlike Studio NAFA and REMIX, which were both open to designers from around the world, for this year at least the Student Fur Design Competition will be strictly a national event, open only to Canadian students and recent graduates.

"When Covid-19 is behind us, who knows what the future may hold," says Melanie. "But for now, we are happy to provide an opportunity for our fellow countrymen at least."

Also reflecting life under lockdown, the competition stage - during which winners will be selected to take part in the workshop - will be held entirely online. Using their imaginations only and no actual furs, entrants will sketch three designs incorporating furs produced in Canada: mink, fox, beaver, raccoon, seal, muskrat, coyote, fisher and sable/marten.

Winners will then use those same furs for real at the Toronto workshop, which is scheduled for August, but no date has been cast in stone.

"Covid permitting, August is the target," says Melanie. "But of course our priority will be everyone's safety, so if we need to reschedule, we'll do so, no question."

Highlighting Sustainability, Ethics

Aside from inspiring students to get creative with fur, the competition's organisers have another very clear goal.

"This is more than just a design competition," says Melanie. "Of course the workshop will cover fashion trends and innovative techniques for working with different furs, and we want participants to explore the versatility of this unique, natural material. But just as important, we want them to understand fur's environmental and ethical credentials."

Today's fashion industry is dominated by fast fashion, she explains, much of which is made of synthetic materials derived from petroleum. Petroleum is non-renewable and therefore unsustainable, its extraction and processing are polluting, and materials produced from it don't biodegrade.

"The fashion industry as a whole is now being challenged to be more environmentally responsible, and fur is one of the most environmentally friendly clothing materials around. So the workshop will look at the sustainability of fur in every area of the trade, from farming to trapping to dressing to manufacturing."

"We'll talk about the 52,000 tons of food waste Canada's fur farms divert from landfills each year, how the manure is used as fertilizer, and mink oil makes biodiesel. We'll talk about the role played by trappers in wildlife management and the protection of endangered species. We'll talk about the importance of trapping in keeping remote communities viable. And we'll put all this in the context of a fashion industry dominated by synthetics, and of the importance, now more than ever before, of shopping sustainably. Why buy a coat for a season when you can buy one to last a lifetime?"

The workshop will also examine the ethics of using animals for human benefit, with an emphasis on the importance of animal welfare.

"It is vital that fur designers of tomorrow know the realities of the modern fur trade so they are equipped to defend what they do," explains Melanie. "They need to know why fur is an ethical choice, and why the narrative pushed by animal rights groups is so misleading.

"Today's youth are a socially and environmentally aware generation, and our workshop will give future fur designers a solid platform from which to demonstrate why natural fur is the responsible choice."

***

To learn more about donating to Truth About Fur, click here.

With the slogan #Reconnect - Time to Slow Down, a new campaign by the International Fur Federation urges designers, independent brands, fashion groups as well as consumers to change their consumption habits to help the planet. Sustainable sourcing, producing less, reducing waste, reducing pollution, buying fewer but higher quality garments, and wearing them for longer. This reflects growing criticism of the environmental harm caused by our “fast fashion” culture, while also highlighting fur’s solid credentials as a sustainable natural resource.

SEE ALSO: The sustainability of fur. Truth About Fur.

So what does it take to create a campaign like this? Truth About Fur talked with the man responsible for pulling it all together, IFF's fashion director Jean-Pierre Rouphael.

Truth About Fur: The principal video for this campaign contains a powerful indictment of the fast fashion scene: "Just spend your money, shelf it, wear it, post it, chuck it, REPEAT." As an alternative, you urge us to "Reconnect" with nature, and give it a helping hand by buying fewer garments and wearing them for longer. It's "Time to Slow Down." Support for this sentiment has been growing in recent years, and many in the trade believe fur should be part of this movement. Is it time to put it centre stage?

Jean-Pierre Rouphael: Yes, the conversation has been brewing for a while and keeps aligning closer to the fur industry's values, so the world is definitely ready for this. At IFF, we've been developing this message for the past three years, and this campaign is a continuation. In 2018, we began presenting fur as "natural" and '"kind to the planet", and promoted this heavily via Vogue magazine in eight markets. This has helped influence the media conversation about natural fur versus fake fur, and more broadly has given the fur industry a voice in the sustainable fashion conversation. Our latest campaign builds on this same message, while staying consistent and focused.

TAF: A consistent message makes sense for the fur trade, given that our sustainability credentials are so strong. But while you were developing this campaign, the Covid-19 pandemic struck. Has that changed fashion conversations at all?

Rouphael: It has definitely further prioritised the sustainability agenda and put it at the forefront of those conversations. The pandemic has shown in practice the positives that happen once we slow down - cleaner air, cleaner waters, a nature reboot. People have found a new appreciation for nature, and the industry is taking notice.

The pandemic has also changed the way fashion conversations are taking place. Before Covid, key fashion conferences were typically expensive affairs, for paying guests only. But the pandemic has pushed them to open up, so now anyone can log in remotely from home via Zoom, and be part of what were formerly closed conversations. The pandemic has also given us more free time to listen in, making it easier for us to put our hand on the industry's pulse.

Pulse of the Industry

TAF: And what have you learned? What is the "pulse" of the industry?

Rouphael: We are delighted to see that the fashion industry today is calling for the exact same things the fur industry has been advocating for many years. Quality, long-lasting, handmade, investment pieces made from sustainable materials and not depleting nature's resources. Overall, a promotion of slower fashion.

And this provided the base for our current campaign. We believe that natural fur is exactly the kind of material the fashion industry is calling for right now. For every quality the fashion industry wants to promote, a fur garment checks all the boxes.

Our task was to transform this concept into a campaign that is visual, educational, aspirational, and easily absorbable by end consumers.

"It Takes an Army"

TAF: Your behind-the-scenes photos show that a lot of people were involved in bringing this campaign to life.

Rouphael: All IFF campaigns are big collaborative projects. They start in-house, but once we've defined what we want to say, we invite outside parties to join. And when they say it takes an army, it's true! Almost 50 people were involved in different capacities in this campaign.

After the director and I agreed the visual direction to take and signed the storyboard, we set about choosing the best team, and the list was long! We needed a producer, a director of photography, lighting, retouching, hair and makeup, a casting director, a stylist, a behind-the-scenes photographer and videographer, a location manager, an editor, a copywriter, someone for voiceovers, a catering manager, and assistants all round.

Plus, of course, we needed a cast of models, and it was important to us that they represent a broad mix of ethnicities, as well as different shapes and sizes.

TAF: Didn't Covid-19 have an impact here too? The IFF is based in London. Wasn't there a lockdown?

Rouphael: It's not generally known that we actually shot the campaign in Dubai! The Covid rules were more relaxed there, and the budget was more affordable. Even so, we were all tested Covid-free prior to and post the 14-hour shoot, and had a government medic assigned to us throughout.

Still, Dubai did present some challenges. For one, we shot part of the campaign outdoors, and when the temperature tops 40°C it's not ideal for modelling fur! But the models and the team were ultra-professional, and you really can't tell from the videos and photos how difficult it was.

We also had to find a location with massive panoramic windows with green backdrops so we could shoot indoors but make it look like we were outdoors. And then there was the challenge of getting the fashion into Dubai as Covid was delaying shipments. For this reason, the stylist and I limited the number of brands we used and chose ones which were geographically closer. Still, we ended up with nine brilliant brands, and about 15 looks.

And after the actual shoot, we then had the post-production tasks of editing the videos, selecting the final photographs, and deciding the mood for retouching.

Last but not least, our website developer created a page to host all the new content, and compiled a media kit to deliver to all IFF members around the world.

Measuring Success

TAF: Once a shoot is a wrap, how do you launch a campaign and then measure its success?

Rouphael: The main objective of all our recent campaigns has been to position fur as part of responsible natural fashion, with an emphasis on its sustainability. At the same time, of course, we want to keep fur's image current and fashionable.

Every year, and depending on our budget, we work out a media plan pre-release and identify global print, digital and social media outlets we want to collaborate with, and accordingly make our bookings ready to launch. After the campaign wraps, we get all the analytics from the media with how many people clicked on the ads, how many people came to our website after seeing an ad, how many people we have reached in general, and so on. And then we report these numbers back to IFF's members.

This year, unfortunately, we don't have a budget to promote the campaign through external media (whether print or online), but we'll still be posting and boosting the campaign via our own social media. It's not the optimum way to reach the widest audience possible, but IFF has 55 member associations, and each of those has its own members, so it's amazing how far a campaign can reach when everyone is ready to share.

***

How You Can Help ...

Whether you're a member of the trade or just a fur fan with a blog or social media account, you can help spread IFF's message by sharing this campaign.

The simplest way is just to link to IFF's landing page for this campaign, where all the materials are on show and you can understand the story. To share specific materials or to combine them with your own content, they're all available for downloading from a dedicated public Dropbox link. We all have the power to influence the fashion conversation, so please, get sharing!

***

To learn more about donating to Truth About Fur, click here.

Animal rights NGOs are currently exploiting the Covid-19 pandemic to close down animal farms and prohibit all trade in wildlife. I am on the frontline of that battle. From 1982 to 1990, I headed the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Today I speak as a founder and coordinator of the Sustainable Use Alliance, which seeks to represent the interests of countries, wildlife farmers, fisherfolk, traders, hunters, trappers and others who support the wise use of flora and fauna. So, here comes our beef.

I’ve been associated with CITES for around 45 years. In that time, I have witnessed a paradigm shift. Unlike when I was in charge, in the 21st century a CITES Conference of the Parties, or CoP, resembles a religious festival. The activists that attend in great numbers are immune to rational argument because they are on a mission to save nature from humanity. During debates, especially when they win the vote, activists stamp their feet, wave banners, clap and cheer, while sometimes dressed in animal costumes - synthetic, of course. They arrive at CITES CoPs with fixed agendas, secure in the knowledge that they have predetermined most of the outcomes.

How this transformation occurred takes some explaining, so let’s start at the beginning.

Mission Creep

In the early 1970s, as a representative of the Canadian government, I played a small part in the creation of CITES, and I was proud to have been given that opportunity. Then almost ten years later, I was prouder still to be made its secretary-general. Back then I thought, as I still do, that CITES was a much-needed intergovernmental institution, which implemented improvements to the regulatory status of flora and fauna that were being endangered by international trade.

But over the decades, external meddlers took control of CITES' affairs and mission creep set in.

Species that CITES was never meant or equipped to list have been listed regardless of the consequences.

Today, numerous species that are not endangered by trade, and some of which are barely traded, have been added to the three CITES Appendices - lists of species afforded different levels or types of protection from over-exploitation.

Species such as most marine fish, that CITES was never meant or equipped to list, have been listed regardless of the consequences. Often CITES lacks the ability to implement listings effectively, or the listings undermine other more appropriate regulatory regimes. For land-based species, the consequences include depriving nations of the financial means and/or incentives to conserve species, such as elephants, rhino, giraffes and big cats.

This corrosion of CITES’s core purpose and integrity was instigated and led by NGOs.

SEE ALSO: Animal rights lies hurting African wildlife management. By Ron Thomson for Truth About Fur.

Virtue Signalling and Protectionism

There’s no doubt that CITES has been the victim of pork-barrel politics, much as was seen at FIFA, the international governing body of football. This includes vote buying, orchestrated by third parties which have taken advantage of the plight of the often chaotic decision-making processes in some developing countries. But there were two more important developments that handed the NGOs their "license" to deracinate CITES. 

First, in the late 20th century, Western powers began to feel the urge to virtue signal. Actually, this represented little more than a modern makeover of their discredited 19th-century colonial outlook. Its main purpose was to demonstrate the "moral superiority" of the old powers over "lesser" countries, located mostly in Africa and Asia. This trend later became entwined with a second key ingredient that helped empower NGOs, which was the re-emergence of protectionism. Protectionism in its original pre-1945 incarnation, of course, had long been discredited, so the modern version came wrapped in the deceitful language of conservation or public health protection.

It was the popularization of these two trendy but disingenuous mantras that opened the space for mega-rich NGOs, such as the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and the Pew Charitable Trusts, to capture CITES. This was something they were itching do anyway because they oppose international trade in wildlife as a matter of principle, and not for scientific reasons. They are driven by emotions - the same emotions that have them ranting and raving about the "immorality" of alligator handbags and shoes, or garments made from fur.

SEE ALSO: The ethics of fur. Truth About Fur.

Founding Principles Perverted

So today, we are faced with the uncomfortable reality that the founding principles of CITES have been perverted. An example of this was the listing of the mako shark in Appendix II at CoP-18, in August 2019. More than 20 million makos are neither endangered nor threatened by international trade - of which there is very little. Actually, with some worrying exceptions, most mako populations are stable or growing. But CoP-18 saw fit to ignore the compelling scientific evidence that was put before it. And this was not an isolated incident.

On 11 separate occasions, COP-18 adopted proposals for listing species in CITES Appendices against the recommendations of the CITES Secretariat. Now, of course, I’m not suggesting that the CITES Secretariat is infallible. But I have to say that at CoP-18, its recommendations mostly reflected those of the established experts.

The reality is that well-resourced NGOs, staffed by sharp-suited zealots, work behind the scenes to manipulate the agenda-setting process. They spend millions of dollars on propaganda and other initiatives designed to list as many species as possible in CITES Appendices. These NGOs, such WWF, Pew, IFAW and the Humane Society of the US, consistently secure votes in support of their preferred outcomes ahead of debates. They do this vote-acquisition work even before the relevant scientists and authorities have had a chance to make objective assessments of the efficacy of particular proposals for a listing in the CITES Appendices.

Stop Meddling in Domestic Affairs

So, after CoP-18, many Parties and trade representatives from around the world were filled with a fury that I’ve never seen before. They can no longer tolerate or ignore how a body that once concerned itself with international trade has seemingly been completely lost to reason and common sense. They want CITES to stop meddling in their domestic affairs, for instance, by banning ivory markets and/or all trade in rhino and elephant byproducts. So, responding to that welcome mood, I played a leading role in helping to create the Sustainable Use Alliance.

Formed in Geneva in February 2020, the Sustainable Use Alliance brings together a diverse group of representatives of countries (10 so far) and trade bodies from around the world. The SUA is not a tight-knit organisation, but a loose grouping that is open to debate and disagreement. What unites the SUA’s ranks is a shared commitment to the founding principles of CITES, with the goal of restoring its integrity.

It will take a major, well-planned endeavour to ensure that the animal rights NGOs do not win this war of opinions and consequences.

And thanks to the Covid-19 pandemic, the need for our initiative is now more important than ever. It doesn’t take a genius to predict that in the next few years, the fear of zoonoses - diseases or infections that are transmissible to humans from other vertebrates - will feature prominently in the debates within the fora of CITES and elsewhere in society, as a fierce spotlight is shone on all trade in wildlife.

It will take a major, well-planned endeavour to ensure that the animal rights NGOs do not win this war of opinions and consequences. Because, make no mistake, the utopian view of the world pushed by animal rightists threatens more than international trade in wildlife, and the vital incentives this brings for science-based conservation. It also endangers every aspect of humanity’s relationship with nature, and the many benefits that the wise use of wildlife delivers - including my leather shoes and fur hat.

***

To learn more about donating to Truth About Fur, click here.

The American fur trade played an important role in the country's history, and continues to provide employment for thousands of citizens today. In celebration of America's Independence Day this July 4, let’s meet just a few representatives of the modern fur trade!

Read on to hear from furbearer biologist Bryant White, who considers trapping a vital tool in the managing of wildlife. Next up is Bob Zimbal, whose mink farm in Wisconsin has been operating for sixty years. Then we're off to the Big Apple to talk with fur designer Maria Reich, who calls small businesses like hers "the heart of New York." And rounding out our series of July 4 interviews is another New Yorker, garment manufacturer Nick Pologeorgis, whose family history has been the American dream!

.

Bryant White – “Trapping Is Essential to Wildlife Management”

Bryant White is the Furbearer Research Program Manager with the Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies (AFWA), currently based at the Arizona Game and Fish Department headquarters in Phoenix. Much of his work involves research related to Best Management Practices for the conservation of furbearing animals.

How is trapping regulated to ensure that it is done humanely and sustainably?

“Everything is based on research,” says Bryant. “Trapping seasons are opened only when the young of the year are autonomous and have set out to establish territories of their own. When necessary, harvest quotas protect vulnerable species. Types of trapping devices and how they may be used are also regulated, to ensure animal welfare as well as the safety of pets and the public."

And what does he think the public needs to know about trapping?

“I think we have to help the non-trapping public to understand that trapping would be important even if no one wanted fur,” he says.

“Regulated trapping is now an essential element of responsible wildlife management in the USA. Many people don’t know that modern traps are used to capture animals, unharmed, to apply radio collars for research -- or to reintroduce species (wolves and river otters) into regions where they were previously eradicated."

We need to do a better job informing people of the important contributions that trappers make to our conservation efforts!

“Trapping is also essential to protect some thirty endangered species of plants and animals. Whooping cranes, for example, would almost certainly be completely extinct in the USA within two years if we didn’t aggressively trap predators like coyotes and foxes in their nesting areas. Endangered sea turtles are also protected by trapping raccoons and foxes that seek to dig up their eggs. Wolves must be managed to protect livestock, while beavers can cause millions of dollars of damage to forest habitat, water supplies, agricultural land, roads and other property by flooding. Skunks and raccoons in cities carry lethal diseases (rabies) and dangerous parasites, such as roundworm, which can migrate out of the intestines and can affect many organs and tissues, including the brain. They can be lethal."

Bryant believes that harvesting meat and fur from the wild is just as ethical as buying leather shoes, a steak dinner, or a can of chicken soup.

“What is important is that we hunt and trap in a responsible and sustainable fashion. Some people question the ethics of trapping animals for fur, but the fur trade actually helps us to protect furbearing species by giving them economic value. It’s all very good to say we care about wildlife, but when the tough decisions get made, economic value does matter. When someone comes to cut down the forest to build a new shopping mall, we can say, whoa, this forest does help the economy, it provides local income and resources from hunters and fishers and trappers – let’s leave it alone."

SEE ALSO: The ethics of fur. Truth About Fur.

“Not least important, it’s hunters, fishers and trappers who pay for the state agencies that monitor, manage and protect wildlife populations and their habitat. They pay with their hunting, fishing and trapping licenses. Without these revenues there would be no funding for the wildlife agencies that manage most of the wildlife in this country!

“From our perspective, as biologists and wildlife agencies, trappers are managing wildlife and doing essential conservation work. We need these people and we should respect what they do. We have done opinion research and 80% of Americans say that it's OK to trap to protect habitat, it’s OK to trap to protect endangered species, it’s OK to manage wildlife to control disease or protect property. We need to do a better job informing people of the important contributions that trappers make to our conservation efforts!”

SEE ALSO: Reasons we trap. Truth About Fur.

.

Bob Zimbal – Third-Generation Mink Farmer

Raising mink is a lifestyle as much as a job, says Bob Zimbal, at his family farm in Wisconsin.

“When we come out in the morning, we look forward to feeding the animals and taking care of their needs,” he says.

“Sixty years ago my grandfather and my father started Zimbal Mink. Mink had not been domesticated for so very long, so there was a learning process how to care for the animals and feed them. As I child, I always helped on the farm, and my father taught me to pay attention to the animals and look at their health and each individual mink’s needs.

“The great thing about raising mink is that we can feed them proteins not used for human consumption, the parts of food animals that people don’t eat. So we’re recycling what would otherwise be wasted. All our mink feed is processed on-site, in our own feed kitchen, so it’s as fresh as possible.

“We work with nutritionists, because throughout the year, the minks' needs are always changing. When a mink is reproducing, its requirements are different than when it’s growing or furring. So our food is sent weekly to a laboratory to have it analyzed to make sure that we’re meeting the needs of the mink."

SEE ALSO: A year on a mink farm. Truth About Fur.

“We have a brand-new, state-of-the-art facility. We can open the roofs and sides and the air will flow through the building, to keep it cooler in the summer. But also we can close it up in bad weather in the winter to protect the animals from the environment.

“This facility is designed to make the mink comfortable, but also make it efficient for the people that are caring for the animals. So the way the bedding is put into the pens, the way they are kept clean – things like that are designed with what’s comfortable for the animal, but also what is efficient for the employees."

There’s a lot more involved in producing beautiful mink than most people understand!

SEE ALSO: Facts about fur farming. Truth About Fur.

.

Maria Reich – “The Fur Boss”!

Maria Reich -- aka “The Fur Boss” -- is the dynamic CEO of ER Fur Trading, Oscar de la Renta Furs, and Reich Furs in New York City.

“This is the heart of the fur fashion business in the US,” says Maria. “There are more than 1,500 people working in fur and affiliated businesses in New York City.”

“Our company was started by my late husband’s grandfather, Charlie Reich, who arrived here from Poland in 1938. He fought in World War II, and then returned to start Reich Furs. His great-granddaughter, Samantha Ortiz, is now president of the company.

“I am a single working mom, and small businesses like ours are the heart of New York. We are a design-driven company and we directly employ 20 people, but we also work with – and provide work for – many other New York Garment District companies: designers, manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers.

Every scrap is used for something and never goes to waste. We are constantly finding new ways to use and re-use fur!

“We are a fully integrated company. We do everything here, from developing new designs, to producing apparel and accessories, which we offer directly to consumers.

“When it comes to fur fashion, there are plenty of misconceptions. It is more than just a luxury product, it is also a highly regulated and sustainable industry.

“Many of our clients come in with their great grandmother's fur coat, wanting it restyled and modernized. There are not many materials you can do this with. We also up-cycle a lot of our furs. Every scrap is used for something and never goes to waste. We are constantly finding new ways to use and re-use fur!"

Whether she’s designing a new collection or sharing her life with over 40,000 Instagram followers, Maria is constantly striving to inspire.

SEE ALSO: New York fur ban: Furriers fight to save sustainable industry. Truth About Fur.

.

Nick Pologeorgis – Living the Dream

Nick Pologeorgis is a leader of the New York trade and one of North America’s foremost high-fashion fur manufacturers. He also serves on the boards of the Fur Information Council of America and the International Fur Federation.

Nick’s father, Stanley, started Pologeorgis Furs in 1960, after arriving in New York from Crete. He apprenticed in a fur workshop without pay and became a master fur craftsman. He was one of the first furriers to forge relationships with top international designers, collaborating with Pierre Balmain from 1970.

Nick joined the business when he finished his degree in finance at Boston University, in 1984. His sister, Joan Pologeorgis, who graduated from New York City's Fashion Institute of Technology, serves as vice-president in charge of production and is co-owner. It has been a family-owned and operated business for over 60 years.

“We love fur; we love making beautiful clothing with one of nature’s most luxurious materials,” says Nick.

The Pologeorgis story is the American dream. My dad built our company from nothing, through hard work and dedication.

Pologeorgis has made furs for a long list of celebrities, including Elizabeth Taylor, Aretha Franklin, and Rihanna. “We made a beautiful white mink for Serena Williams,” he recalls.

“The business never stops changing. Fur is now used for accessories and for home furnishings, making it much more accessible to more people. Fur is even used to make felt for hats, and for rugs.

“Lifestyle is very important now too. There will always be the beautiful, classic garments, but you also want to have fun, not-so-precious pieces. The biggest trend is the mixing of fur with ready-to-wear fabric. How it all goes together is important.

“The Pologeorgis story is the American dream. My dad built our company from nothing, through hard work and dedication. Hard working, industrious immigrants continue to form the backbone of the fur market today. The fur trade supports thousands of families in New York and across America.”

***

To learn more about donating to Truth About Fur, click here.

HAPPY CANADA DAY 2020! On the first day of July each year, we celebrate the uniting of three British colonies – the Province of Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick – into one federation, the Dominion of Canada, on July 1, 1867. It’s also a fine time to reflect on the unique role played by the fur trade in shaping our country.

Historians recall the role played by Europeans searching for fur in opening up our vast lands. But we should also remember that fur trading had been practiced here for hundreds, if not thousands of years before Europeans arrived.

When French navigator and explorer Jacques Cartier first visited the island of Montreal in 1535, he found Montagnais hunters from what is now northern Quebec already trading fur for food produced by Iroquoian farmers in the St-Lawrence valley.

Fur trading between First Nations and Europeans began when French fishermen came to exploit the vast stocks of codfish off Newfoundland and in the Gulf of St-Lawrence. When Cartier landed on the coast of northern New Brunswick, in 1534, he met Indigenous people who clearly had experience with Europeans, holding up fur pelts on sticks and eager to trade.

SEE ALSO: The country that fur built: Canada’s fur trade history. Truth About Fur.

In the five centuries that followed, Canada’s fur trade came to reflect the country’s cultural mosaic at its best: First Nations, French, English, Scots, Jews, Greeks and many others have worked together to build this remarkable heritage industry with its dynamic tradition of competition and cooperation.

But the fur trade is not just our history – it’s very much a part of modern Canada. More than 50,000 Canadians participate today in the many aspects of our industry, so let's take this occasion to meet a few of today's Fur Trappers, Farmers, First Nations, Manufacturers, Designers, and Retail Furriers.

CANADA'S RETAIL FURRIERS

Dan Kahnert – The Industry’s Link with Consumers

(Click here for an expanded version of this interview.)

Like so many in the industry, Dan Kahnert’s relationship with fur is a family affair.

“My great-grandfather learned the fur trade in Germany and came to Canada in the late 1800s. His son, my grandfather, moved to Toronto where he would travel around taking orders, and then cut and sew coats in his home. It was my father, Allan, who opened our first showroom on Avenue Road in 1957, where Kahnert’s is still located.

“I would help out at the store on weekends, and decided by the end of high school that I wanted to join the family business. That’s what I did in 1984, after completing my degree in economics and business at the University of Western Ontario. I arrived home with all my college furniture and everything on April 30 and began working full-time in the store the next day; it was storage season and there was no time for a break!

“We worked hard, six days a week, but I enjoyed the challenges of running a business, being our own bosses, analysing problems and implementing a plan. My older brothers, Bernie and John, were already working at the store with my father, and John and I still run the business together today. It really helped that dad was very open to letting us try new ideas, like when I brought in computers in the 1990s.”

What does Dan like best about being a retail furrier?

“In addition to working with my brother and running our own business, what I enjoy most is the opportunity to meet lots of new people. While not every customer is easy, as everyone working in retail knows, generally we meet lots of very nice people. When we say, ‘It’s been a pleasure doing business with you,’ it’s not just a cliché, it really is how we feel.”

We are on the front line with consumers, and we are proud to do our part to promote fur on behalf of all the people who make up this uniquely Canadian heritage industry!

And how has the business changed over the years?

“There’s no way around it, aggressive animal rights campaigning has hurt us. Most people still love fur, but the activists have made them feel nervous about wearing it. Some of these intimidation campaigns are really a form of violence against women, which is very sad,” says Dan.

“Unfortunately, we have difficulty getting across our messages about the real environmental advantages of wearing fur. Fur is a sustainably produced, long-lasting, recyclable and biodegradable natural material. Animal activists have created very damaging confusion about the real environmental issues. It makes no sense telling people to use petroleum-based synthetics instead of long-lasting natural and biodegradable materials. The saddest thing is that most consumers we speak with do appreciate the warmth, comfort and beauty of natural fur, but they feel intimidated.

“We have adapted, of course: we will sell our customer a shearling coat – because, ironically, shearling is not seen as fur. Or a fur-lined coat. We have also added cashmere and other cloth coats, with or without fur trim. Not because there’s anything wrong with fur, but because fur has been tangled up in a very complex societal discussion about using animals, which includes everything from medical research to circuses to eating meat. Fur, unfortunately, has become a scapegoat, because we are really a very small-scale industry; we don’t have the financial or professional clout that large corporations can muster to tell their story when they are attacked.”

And the future?

“I don’t think fur will ever really go out of style, because it is so in tune with growing environmental concerns. We have to keep working on telling that story, but ultimately it is up to the consumer to make an educated decision on the benefits of buying fur products ” says Dan.

“But, bottom line, as a retailer your success depends on satisfying your customer. We are located in a wonderful residential neighbourhood and therefore do not rely on tourist sales that might occur in downtown Toronto. We rely on community word of mouth with support from our online business. We have one of the city’s best collections of high-quality coats, and we work hard to take good care of every customer. We are on the front line with consumers, and we are proud to do our part to promote fur on behalf of all the people who make up this uniquely Canadian heritage industry!”

SEE ALSO: Fur retail: The art and science of making sales. Truth About Fur.

CANADA'S FUR DESIGNERS

Farley Chatto – Stylist to the Stars

If you’ve never heard of Farley Chatto, then you’re probably not in tune with fashion, and couture in particular. But if you love couture and Canadian design, Farley is probably a household name. Not only is he an internationally recognized designer, he is also a stylist for celebrities. He consults with Hollywood A-list hit TV shows and movies, including Suits, Christmas Chronicles, American Gods and more. As a Toronto resident, he is proud of his Canadian roots.

Farley’s love for fur began in his childhood. In winter, his father would pick him up from school wearing a muskrat-lined Royal Canadian Mounted Police hat. He remembers touching it and loving how soft it was, and thus began his love affair with fur. As he grew up in the 1980s, the fur was a staple as a must-have luxury item on TV shows.

“In the 1980s, Dynasty was a top-rated show depicting the lives of the rich and powerful, where fur and excessive fashion were a big part of the show’s popularity,” he recalls. “Then, one day, I  asked my mother if I could have a sheared beaver bomber jacket for winter. Sadly I didn’t get the coat, yet I was hooked on the tactility of fur!”

People forget that this country exists because of fur. Fur is the fabric that bundled our nation together.

Farley continues to be proud that fur is as Canadian as apple pie is to Americans. Because fur is a staple in the fashion industry, he was anxious to incorporate it into his designs when he entered the field.

“Being a Canadian designer can be challenging,” he says. “I’ve been on the scene for 32 years, and the beginning wasn’t easy.  I applied and was accepted to three fashion schools here and in the US, yet I decided to remain true to my roots and stay here. People forget that this country exists because of fur. Fur is the fabric that bundled our nation together.”

When asked on advice for young designers with interest in fur, Farley’s motto is: “If you have an opportunity, take it! Sign up for courses, join workshops, learn with First Nations people, put yourself out there.”

Wherever Farley travels, whether to teach or research, he touts the sustainability of fur fashion to others. As he says, it’s #furtastic.

Shawna Ujaralaaq Dias – Traditional Fur-Trimmed Parkas with a Modern Twist

As a child, Shawna lived for several years in a tiny settlement in Wager Bay, above the Arctic Circle on the extreme northwest coast of Hudson’s Bay.

“My grandfather had run the Hudson’s Bay post that was built there in 1925; there were only 15 people when my parents were living there, all family,” she says. “They would take the dog team to visit with other families nearby.

“It was a great life. My father hunted and trapped – foxes and wolves — and we were always outdoors, active and healthy – not like the kids who sit in front of computer screens these days!

“We kids would help to clean and scrape skins, and I began sewing by the time I was seven. I was using a sewing machine soon after that.”

The family moved about 300 kilometres south to Rankin Inlet, a small town (population 2,800, in 2016), so Shawna could attend school, but returned to their camp in Wager Bay each summer to hunt, fish and reconnect with the land.

“I didn’t even speak English until we moved to Rankin,” says Shawna. “We spoke Inuktitut, and I was lucky to learn all the traditional ways. These are the traditions I celebrate in my sewing.”

Now married with three grown children (18, 21 and 24) and a government job, Shawna never stopped sewing, and about ten years ago started her own business.

There is so much skill and creativity in the communities, and now with the Internet we have access to the world!

“People would see my fur-trimmed parkas and ask if I could make them one. Now I show new parkas on my Facebook page, and they are usually sold within 48 hours. Even though we live in a remote community, the Internet puts us into contact with customers across Canada and even in the US or beyond!”

Shawna now has more than 6,000 Facebook followers, and in 2017 she began selling dressed fur pelts, in addition to parkas.

“A lot of the ladies in small northern communities are sewers, but they often have difficulty finding fur pelts to work with. They really appreciate being able to get dressed furs from me up here.

“I like to promote the work of other ladies too,” said Shawna. “There is so much skill and creativity in the communities, and now with the Internet we have access to the world!”

So: with a government job and a growing sewing business, does Shawna still have time to connect with the land?

“For sure, we still go out to our hunting camp most weekends, and every summer. My husband only came north about 20 years ago, but he learned many hunting and trapping skills from my dad, and he loves the life here. My boys also hunt caribou and seals. We have a good life, and I am happy to be able to share some of the beauty of our Inuit culture with my sewing.”

CANADA'S FUR MANUFACTURERS

Christina Nacos – Re-inventing Fur for the Next Generation

Some people are born into the fur industry, some people choose it. For Christina Nacos, it was both.

Her father, Tom Nacos, is a legend of the Canadian fur industry. After learning the trade in his native village of Siatista, in the mountains of northern Greece, he emigrated to Montreal in the 1950s and proceeded to build one of North America’s most important fur manufacturing and retailing empires.

Christina crossed the ocean in the opposite direction, living in England for several years, where she worked in advertising. She returned to Canada in 1998 to work with Natural Furs, one of her father’s companies, and as one of the younger people leading a major company in the industry – and one of the very few women – she quickly began exploring ways to adapt fur for young people like herself.

“I think that each generation learns from their predecessors, but then has to make the industry their own, adapting fur for their time. That’s how fur has always evolved,” she says.

Under Christina’s leadership, Natural Furs was one of the first companies to participate actively in FurWorks Canada, an innovative project coordinated by the Fur Council of Canada to modernize fur fashion, mixing fur with other materials for a sportier look that reflected more modern, active lifestyles. Natural Furs was also a strong supporter of the Fur Council’s “Beautifully Canadian” collective branding initiative.

Christina is a strong believer in the important role of industry associations, especially in a sector made up of hundreds of small family businesses; she has served as vice-president of the Fur Council for many years.

As society thinks more deeply about the challenge of shifting to a more sustainable economy, fur will make more sense than ever.

Christina’s latest project to bring fur fashion into the 21st century is a major push to promote recycled – or “upcycled” – fur, to make fur more accessible and avoid waste. Branded as FURB Upcycled, the collection is attracting younger women who may never have worn fur before.

“We noticed that many young people were attracted by the nostalgia of remodelling furs they had inherited from their parents or grandparents. It’s a way to reconnect with the past, and it’s totally in synch with current efforts to prevent waste and use sustainable materials. Often we’re using the fur inside the garment, to maximize its warmth and functionality. We’re mixing upcycled fur with other materials, and exploring a more laid back, Scandinavian aesthetic.

“My sister-in-law, Sarah Nacos, has now joined me in the company. She’s 28, and brings the sensibility of an even younger generation of women to our designs,” she says.

“Each generation brings something new to fur. Young women today love the echo of the past in an upcycled piece, and they appreciate the durability of fur, which prevents waste – all important sustainability virtues.

“As society thinks more deeply about the challenge of shifting to a more sustainable economy, fur will make more sense than ever,” she says.

So Christina Nacos is continuing a family tradition in the best possible way: by totally rethinking how fur can be adapted for the next generation.

CANADA'S FIRST NATIONS

Robert Grandjambe – Deeply Connected to the Land

Robert Grandjambe Jr. is a Woodland Cree from Fort Smith in the Northwest Territories, whose roots go back to Fort Chipewyan, Alberta, where generations of his family trapped to survive. For many southerners, and city dwellers in particular, his deep connection to the land may seem like a dream lifestyle, and sometimes even hard to understand, so it helps that he is committed to explaining it to anyone who will listen.

Trapping is a perfect example. “I think people need to better understand the importance of what trappers do, because I don’t think they get it,” he says. “We must educate people to understand that everything the trapper does contributes to a natural and sustainable way of life and the environment, and is crucial for the culture and health of our communities.”

Robert started learning trapping from his father when he was six years old, and now he’s determined to pass on everything he’s learned. Out of trapping season, when he’s not working as a contractor, he does presentations in schools about culture, craft-making, hunting and gathering, and of course trapping. Also receiving a solid grounding in what it means to live on the land is his toddler daughter.

“As a father you want to leave a legacy,” he says. “I want to give her all my knowledge and experience from the trapline, and from there she can choose her own path. So I will continue to bring her into this world, so she can understand and know it well.”

Among the lessons that Robert passes on is the importance of supporting your community at large, and for him this means providing food – as much as he can, be it moose, ducks, bison, bear, geese, or any of the other wild bounty the land provides. He views food as “the thing that brings us all together at the same table and sustains us, no matter who we are or where we come from.”

We always ask ourselves, how can we do it better when it comes to animal treatment?

As for trapping, one important aspect that is close to Robert’s heart – as it is for most trappers – is animal welfare. In part this might be because his great-great-grandfather trapped in the early 1900s alongside Frank Conibear, one of the founders of the humane trapping movement, who in turn learned much about respecting animals by working alongside Indigenous people.

Robert is adamant that concern over animal welfare is not a recent development forced on trappers by the animal rights movement. “We always ask ourselves, how can we do it better when it comes to animal treatment?” he says. “The standards have improved dramatically over the years and we still strive to keep improving. As trappers, we always focus on only taking what we need, and making sure we respect the animals and the environment.”

As for the future of wild fur, Robert has a positive outlook, despite the many challenges facing trappers. He may not have all the answers yet, but he’s confident the pieces are all there to make it happen.

“I truly believe trappers and wild fur will always have a place in this world,” he says. “We needed it once just to survive, but today it is about much more than that: It’s about social and cultural values, family values, our health and well-being, and protecting nature, ecosystems and the environment.”

SEE ALSO: “Trapping is beautiful” says proud Cree Robert Grandjambe. Truth About Fur.

SEE ALSO: Letter from a Cree trapper: Nature is our refuge from Covid-19. Truth About Fur.

D’Arcy Moses – First Nations Heritage Inspires Modern Fur Designs

(Click here for an expanded version of this interview.)

If you are looking for a designer who incarnates the Canadian fur trade’s rich cultural mosaic, D’Arcy Moses is an obvious choice. Adopted at birth and raised by a non-native farming family in Camrose, Alberta, D’Arcy set out to connect with his aboriginal roots after he left home. While his background sometimes left him feeling uncomfortable (“like an apple, red on the outside, white inside”), in Vancouver he met Leonard George, chief of the Tsleil-Waututh Nation, who assured him he could have the best of both worlds. “He told me, ‘You have the First Nations culture and you have the non-aboriginal culture. You can utilize that, because you can mix between cultures at ease.’”

D’Arcy’s chance to apply his unusual heritage to designing clothing came at the Toronto Fashion Incubator, and in 1991 his work was featured at the Toronto Festival of Fashion. Then he was invited to Montreal by the Fur Council of Canada, and began working with one of the country’s most important luxury apparel manufacturers, Natural Furs.

The unique, aboriginally inspired collections D’Arcy developed went to high-end retailers in North America, Europe and Asia, and a retrospective collection of his work was recently added by the Government of the Northwest Territories to its permanent collection of Indigenous arts and crafts.

Progressives who want to ban fur need to look at the whole ecosystem, the broader impact of industries, not just the individual animal.

Then in 1996 his life took another unusual turn. After CBC aired a documentary about him, he received a call from the Pehdzeh Ki First Nation, in Wrigley, NWT. Moses is a common family name there, and they had been looking for him. So D’Arcy left the glamour and hectic pace of international fashion to settle in the home he had never known. His business experience landed him a government job, but sewing and designing were never far from his mind.

Twelve years later he had saved the funds needed for his current project: a workshop in Enterprise, NWT, a community even smaller and more remote than Wrigley. “I needed somewhere I wouldn’t be distracted from my design work,” he says.

And the work has been abundant and diverse. In January, D’Arcy participated in a residency at the Banff Centre for Arts and Creativity, and he will return to Banff to lead a workshop for Indigenous design students from around the world. “We will be using traditional techniques to re-purpose fur, leather and other natural materials,” he says.

“Many people in my community still hunt and trap, and their attachment to the land is very strong. But natural materials like fur are also important at a time when people are increasingly concerned about protecting our natural environment. So-called ‘fast fashion’ is killing the Earth.

“Progressives who want to ban fur need to look at the whole ecosystem, the broader impact of industries, not just the individual animal. When we look at the whole picture, from sourcing to use and maintenance, through to disposal, it is clear that we should be using responsibly and sustainably sourced natural materials – wool, leather, fur. The First Nations understood that we are part of nature and that we have an obligation to use resources with respect. I hope that my designs, marrying traditional and modern themes, can help people remember these important lessons,” says D’Arcy.

SEE ALSO: D’arcy Moses’ big bet. Up Here, October 2015.

CANADA'S FUR FARMERS

Tom McLellan – Mink Farming Maintains Proud Rural Heritage

Tom McLellan, a third-generation mink farmer from Ontario, feels tremendous pride when he speaks of his family’s history and their contribution to the early agricultural economy in Canada. “It is comforting to know that my family has been a part of what helped shape Canada into the nation that it is today,” he says.

“My father and his father before him loved working with animals and, being a part of Canada’s agricultural development just made the work even more satisfying. Now my sons are learning about fur and our connection to the birth of our great nation. It’s a wonderful feeling,” he says.

We are always studying the science behind mink farming to improve the health of our animals and make them comfortable and happy.

The early days of the fur trade focused on trapping, and the beaver pelt was the motor of the economy. By the end of the 19th century, Canadians were pioneering fur farming as the way to produce uniform, high-quality pelts without overexploiting wild populations. Over time, farmed mink became the most popular fur for consumers who appreciated the warmth and luxury.

“Improving the quality of the fur and keeping our animals healthy is what keeps us going on a daily basis,” says Tom. “We are always studying the science behind mink farming to improve the health of our animals and make them comfortable and happy.”

Canadian mink farmers are proud to produce some of the finest furs in the world, and also of their commitment to animal welfare. They follow codes of practice developed by the National Farm Animal Care Council, and their farms are certified by independent auditors. This Canadian heritage industry is proud of its past and, equally important, is well positioned to continue supporting rural communities.

SEE ALSO: Facts about fur farming. Truth About Fur.

Joe Williams – Continuing a Family Tradition

What makes someone get up early each morning and put in long days on the farm?

“We are proud of the care we provide for our animals,” says Joe Williams who, with his two brothers, runs two mink farms in the lower mainland of British Columbia.

“It’s a family tradition, and fur is part of Canada’s heritage,” says Joe. 

“Canadians pioneered the farm raising of furbearing animals, foxes on Prince Edward Island and mink in Ontario, and we are proud to be part of that heritage.

“My father started his first farm in 1990, and I would help him on weekends and after school,” he recalls.

“For sure it’s lots of hard work, but it’s rewarding. I like working for myself and being outdoors and caring for the animals. There’s a satisfaction in following the full cycle with the animals, from breeding season, to whelping and ensuring the pups are healthy, right through to the final product.

“I am also lucky to be working with my brothers,” says Joe.

What would he like people to know about mink farming?

“I would like people to understand how hard we work to keep our mink healthy and content. Every day we are adjusting their care and nutrition, depending on the time of year and their growth cycle. The proportion of proteins and fats and other elements are adjusted depending on whether the mink are being prepared for mating or whelping or growth. We are learning all the time.

“And then we are maintaining pens and barns and equipment; mixing feed; planning genetics for the next mating season, working to improve our herd.

“There’s a lot more that goes into this than most people understand. And, honestly, if you don’t care about the health and welfare of the mink, you really can’t do a good job; it will show in the quality of the fur you produce.”

Fur makes more sense than ever in our eco-conscious times!

And what would Joe say to a consumer considering the purchase of fur apparel or accessories?

“I would like consumers to know that fur is produced responsibly and sustainably. Mink are carnivores; they are fed left-overs from our food production system, the parts of chickens, pigs, fish and other animals we don’t eat and would otherwise end up in landfills.

“We basically recycle those ‘wastes’ by feeding mink to produce a warm, beautiful and long-lasting natural clothing material,” says Joe.

“At a time when we are all looking for ways to ensure that our lifestyle choices are helping to protect nature for future generations, I would like consumers to know they can wear fur with pride. Fur is an important part of our Canadian and North American heritage. And fur makes more sense than ever in our eco-conscious times!”

SEE ALSO: A year on a mink farm. Truth About Fur.

CANADA'S FUR TRAPPERS

Katie Ball – Trapper, Designer and Advocate

When Katie Ball is not out on the land in Thunder Bay, Ontario, she's either designing and making fur garments at her own Silver Cedar Studio, or she's advocating for the fur trade on behalf of the Northwestern Fur Trappers Association, the Ontario Fur Managers Federation, the Northwestern Ontario Sportsmen’s Alliance, and Fur Harvesters Auction. Only a person with fur coursing through her veins could build such a résumé!

"The love of Canada and our national heritage is nowhere better reflected than in the fur trade," says Katie. "For me to be a part of this incredible industry is beyond humbling. Spending time out in the wilderness and being at one with Mother Nature and learning from my father is where my pride begins.

"I know that we are using the most humane methods possible, and respecting the delicate balance of nature to ensure viable populations for years to come. So I take pride in carrying on my family traditions, while playing the role as a steward of the land. There is no better way to spend one's time than with family, doing what you love."

Katie then takes this a step further, turning raw pelts into stunning fur garments.

"For me to be able to take this passion and turn it into a creative, fashionable yet functional wild fur product to be enjoyed for generations to come, is also a gift I hold dear," she says. "Nature and the fur trade itself have been major influences in my daily life that allow me to translate them into usable pieces of art and heritage. Being able to express myself through my creations has allowed me to grow as an individual."

Standing side by side with some of the most respected people in our industry that I call family and friends, is what lets me know I am where I belong.

"However, true pride shines brightest within the fur community if you ask me. The camaraderie between trappers and their families is unrivalled. The way we share our knowledge with one another, as well as the willingness to help educate newcomers, strengthens our friendships and grows our community as a whole. Trappers and their families are a closely knit community no matter where you go. There are always friendly smiles and stories to be heard."

Completing the picture, as it were, of a lady who lives and breathes fur, is Katie's involvement in advocacy.

"Finally, knowing that I have the backing from my local trappers council, as well as the Ontario trappers, is where my creativity, passion and strength come together. Helping fight for the rights of trappers, all the while educating the public about why the fur trade is so important to Canadians. Standing side by side with some of the most respected people in our industry that I call family and friends, is what lets me know I am where I belong.

"So be it on the trapline, in the studio, or at a board meeting, I know that what I do and love makes a difference. By being a part of this vast community and historical trade, with so much more to be shared and done in the near future, I cannot wait to see where we as a whole will take it.

"This is how we grow as a community, and these are just a few of the many reasons why I am proud to be a trapper."

SEE ALSO: "Fur is in my blood" says Katie Ball, trapper, designer, advocate. Truth About Fur.

Robin Horwath – Trappers Are "Great Stewards of the Land"

Hailing from Blind River, Ontario, Robin Horwath started helping his father on the trapline at the age of 12. In so doing, he became the next torchbearer of a family tradition that dates back to both his grandfathers.

"As we go through life, it is not always clear at the time what or who influenced us along the way," he says. "When my Grandpa Temple died at the age of 99, I saw a photo of him in an album for the first time. It was taken in 1928, and shows skunks and muskrats hanging on a shed, all skinned, boarded and ready to sell. Today, that photo is on my desk at work.

"When I was still nine or ten, I remember both him and my Grandpa Horwath telling me that they both had trapped skunks and muskrats. At the start of the Great Depression, they were paid $3 a muskrat and $5 a skunk. When I saw the picture of Grandpa Temple, it brought back all the stories they had told me as a child.

"My father was a great influence also, as he taught me to hunt, trap and fish as I grew up, and learn our family's traditions and values.

"So I am proud to have carried on my family's way of life. I have followed in the footsteps of my grandfathers and father, joined by my brother and my son. And hopefully my two young grandsons will want to do the same in the future."

Aside from the personal pride Robin has in continuing his family's heritage, he's also committed to serving others in the trade. Today he is both general manager for the Ontario Fur Managers Federation and a board member of the Fur Institute of Canada. So what path did he follow to reach this point?

"After studying in Iron Bridge under trapping instructor Walter Tonelli, I got my first trapping license in 1981 to help my father on his registered trapline, and I've held one ever since. In 1995 I became a director for the Blind River Trappers Council, and in 1996 I studied to be a trapping instructor in Thunder Bay as part of a program run by the Ontario Fur Managers Federation and the Ministry of Natural Resources. And by 2010, I was the OFMF's general manager!"

If you are a trapper, don’t be afraid to introduce someone new to what and why we trap. And if you are not a trapper, take the opportunity to ask if you can tag along.

So what motivates him to give so much of his time in the service of others?

"I am very proud to be a part of Canada’s fur trade," he explains, "and I have had great opportunities in my life to be able to help promote, educate and train people in its traditions and heritage. It is amazing when you think that the Hudson's Bay Company received its royal charter in 1670 - so 2020 is the HBC’s 350th anniversary, making it one of the longest-running corporations in the world. Trapping is what drove the exploration and development of this great land we call Canada.

"I never thought when I started trapping that I would end up representing trappers provincially and nationally on behalf of the OFMF and the Fur Institute. It's a great privilege."

So what advice does he have for others looking to get involved in promoting the fur trade?

"I dream of the day when trappers once again are recognized and valued by the general public as great stewards of the land. Trapping is a vital tool for managing furbearers to achieve healthy sustainable populations, to protect infrastructure, and control the spread of disease, which is important not just for the animals but also for humans.

"So if you are a trapper, don’t be afraid to introduce someone new to what and why we trap. And if you are not a trapper, take the opportunity to ask if you can tag along to see what it is all about for yourself, so you can make your own informed opinion on why trapping needs to continue."

SEE ALSO: In their own words: Fur trappers on Ontario's oldest profession. TVO.org.

***

To learn more about donating to Truth About Fur, click here.

The fact that several high-profile clothing companies recently stopped using fur in the name of "sustainability" -- not to speak of political bans on the sale of fur products in California -- highlights the public confusion about the challenge of managing our wildlife resources at acceptable ecological and societal levels. The disconnect created by misinformed activist campaigns poses a huge and persistent challenge to professional wildlife biologists everywhere.

Few areas of wildlife management in North America are as challenging as furbearer management and the traps that are so critical to this management. No subject is more contentious or misunderstood than the need to manage our wild furbearers.

SEE ALSO: Humane trapping research program leads the world. Truth About Fur.

While we work from an extensive platform of experience and constantly evolving science, we know that we are but players in an emotional theatre on the large stage of public discourse. We very much need not only science and devotion, but also public understanding and support to conduct our work successfully.

The management of furbearers is an integral and critical thread in the finely woven and complicated tapestry of environmental management in North America. Trapping is critical to these efforts.

While, at times, a ban on the harvest of certain wildlife populations is appropriate, recently, more often than not, we have fallen victim to our successes and are forced to manage surpluses. There is no better role model of successful and sustainable wildlife management in North America than that of our furbearer resource.

SEE ALSO: Reasons we trap. Truth About Fur.

Cyclic Populations

All wildlife populations are naturally cyclic – they rise and fall over time, triggered by a variety of factors.  The downside of that cycle isn’t pretty or humane – think mange, rabies, starvation, habitat destruction and increased prey populations. 

Wildlife biologists in North America work diligently to manage all wildlife populations at ecological and socially acceptable levels. Wild furbearers are no exception. The public have little tolerance when these populations reach unacceptable levels. Think rabies transmitted by overpopulated raccoons. Or property flooded by hyper-active beavers.

The real question, then, at the heart of this challenge is not whether some furbearer populations must be managed, but whether excess animals are used for public benefit or left to rot in the wild. Pest control activity or natural mortality will dispose of them if they are not used for public benefit. But pest control will be at the tax-payers' expense, while disease, starvation and predation, though natural, cannot be considered humane.

This is a zero sum game!

From Watershed Managers to Aquaculturists

The groups that rely on the stable and manageable levels of furbearers are extensive and economically impressive. Watershed managers, farmers, orchardists, park managers and the forestry industry are just a few that rely on population controls. Aquaculturists, for example, are predictably unforgiving of otter populations that consume their profits.

Certainly, no group has a more compelling need for control than biologists dealing with surplus populations that threaten their work. Plover restoration, for example, is a cogent example where numbers of predators like foxes and raccoons need to be carefully controlled at complemental levels. Even in predator research, high populations of furbearers like foxes and bobcats can become problems. Public health officials also look to biologists and traps when dealing with public health issues like rabies.

Increasingly, pet owners have become involved in this debate as well.  There are towns and cities in the United States today where small dogs and cats can’t be left unattended outdoors lest they fall prey to hungry coyotes.

SEE ALSO: Will urban coyotes change the animal rights debate? Truth About Fur.

It is disheartening that we have been ineffective in making the wider public aware not only of our challenges, but also of the great opportunities for public benefit that wise and careful furbearer management provides. It is particularly disheartening when merchandising and fashion executives, unaware of the opportunities these resource programs offer, ditch wild fur in favor of petroleum-based synthetics (aka: plastics).

Claiming recognition for environmental vision by rejecting wild fur would be comic if it weren’t so tragic and illogical. 

It’s even tougher to watch that lack of awareness exploited by animal rights activists. The exploitation of corporate ignorance is maddening and enormously disappointing to professional biologists. The history of wildlife management is littered with the unintended consequences of emotionally driven management initiatives. 

One must wonder, is single species’ advocacy one of ignorance or arrogance? Is it possible to be so fanatical in pursuit of one species, one suite of species, or a critical device (traps), that advocates are blinded to the ecological niche that these animals have in the complex ecosystem? 

Claiming recognition for environmental vision by banning wild fur would be comic if it weren’t so tragic and illogical. 

In Search of a Common Language

The United States and Canadian governments, in recognition of the importance of this issue, have appropriated millions of dollars to establish humane standards for these critical programs. Numerous states and the Canadian provinces and territories have invested similarly. The evolving improvement to international humane standards in foothold traps is evidence of the success of this effort. This joint Federal/State research effort, enhanced with the on-going information sharing between the US and Canada, is often cited as one of the largest wildlife research efforts ever undertaken in North America.

Perhaps someday all of us who love animals (all of us in these debates certainly do) may find a common language in this discourse and reach a level of rapprochement that will allow for mutual respect – not only for one another, but also for our wildlife resources.

***

To learn more about donating to Truth About Fur, click here.