It is minus 23 degrees Celsius (-32C with the wind-chill) but I am snug as a bug in my Canada Goose parka as I walk Maggie, our 9-year-old Labrador Retriever.
It is so cold in Montreal this Valentine’s Day weekend that I cinch my parka hood completely closed, the soft coyote fur ruff forming a cozy, protective ring around my face. The goose down stuffing keeps the rest of me warm. I wonder how our animal activist friends are enjoying the bitterly cold weather, because this is the weekend they have chosen for their National Anti-Fur Day (“Have A Heart, Don’t Wear Fur”) protests in Montreal and other cities across North America.
As a sign of the times, Canada Goose parkas are the target of choice for this year’s anti-fur rituals. Why? Because even though fewer traditional full-fur coats are being worn these days, fur is now omnipresent in smaller items, accessories and trimmings. This has made fur much more affordable, and it is now being worn by more – and younger – people than we have seen in decades. It has been democratized.
SEE ALSO: Why fur trim keeps us warm.
In response, PETA has unleashed a new campaign “juxtaposing Canada Goose’s coyote-fur jackets with a disturbing video of a trapped coyote suffering after being shot.” The video is prefaced with a “warning” that it contains upsetting images, but this has apparently not discouraged many of PETA’s fans because, it claims, the video “has received more than 16 million views.”
To drive home PETA’s message, volunteers “wearing nothing but body paint and faux-fur ears and tails” would be posing “in bloody leg-hold traps” outside retailers selling Canada Goose parkas over the weekend. According to PETA Senior Vice President Lisa Lange, “Anyone who buys or sells one of Canada Goose’s fur-and-feather jackets is responsible for these animals’ terrifying and painful deaths.”
So has PETA’s “shocking” video convinced me to give up my Canada Goose? Not a chance, and here’s why:
1. Video Shows Perfect Kill
The first problem is that PETA’s campaign video does not show a coyote “suffering after being shot”. Quite the contrary, we see the animal killed instantly with a direct shot to the head – exactly how it is supposed to be done. This is the most humane way to euthanize animals taken in restraining traps, as taught in trapper training manuals and mandated by the Agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards (AIHTS).
This is also the method proposed by the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) guidelines.
”3. Physical Methods: These techniques, when properly applied, kill rapidly and cause minimal stress. They may offer a practical solution for field euthanasia of various sized animals and prevent pharmaceuticals from entering the food chain …
… Gunshot: While a shot to the brain of an animal produces a quick and humane death (Longair et al., 1991), it is best attempted when the animal is immobilized by injury or physical restraint.”
In other words, despite PETA’s sensationalist warning – intended to shock people who have never seen an animal killed – its own video confirms that approved and humane methods are being used to euthanize coyotes.
2. Coyote Mums Not “Desperate”
PETA claims that “trapped coyote mothers desperate to get back to their starving pups have been known to attempt to chew off their own limbs to escape.” While this may have happened very occasionally with some species (e.g., muskrats) with older trapping systems, it never happens with modern foot-hold traps.
Furthermore, the whole “starving pups” scenario never happens with fur trapping for one simple reason: like other furbearers, coyotes are hunted for their fur in the fall and winter because that’s when their fur is prime. At this time of year, their young are no longer dependent on them.
3. Coyote Predator Problem
As important as the nonsense PETA does say is what it doesn’t say: It omits to inform us that coyotes have expanded their range across North America and are now so abundant that they are the number one predator problem for ranchers, preying on new-born calves and lambs. It also fails to mention the increasingly frequent reports, from Toronto to Los Angeles, of coyotes carrying away pet dogs and cats.
Several states and provinces have even offered bounties to reduce over-populated coyotes.
SEE ALSO: Will urban coyotes change the animal rights debate?
Culling must be carried out both to protect livestock and pets, and also the health of coyote populations themselves. Given that coyote populations must be managed, it is surely more respectful, and responsible, to use their fur for clothing than to throw it away.
SEE ALSO: Is it ethical to produce, buy or wear fur?
4. New Foot-Hold Traps Designed to Prevent Injuries
The foot-hold traps used to capture coyotes (as shown in PETA’s video) are not the diabolical, steel-toothed devices that activists love to hate. Their use was banned decades ago in North America.
The new live-holding (“restraining”) traps have rubber-laminated, “off-set” jaws that do not close completely. Springs and swivels on the anchoring chain and other features have also been added to prevent injuries. In fact, these new “soft-catch” traps are commonly used by wildlife biologists to capture wolves, lynx and other furbearers for radio collaring or relocation/release into areas where they were once extirpated. Clearly they could not be used in this way if they injured animals as activists claim.
SEE ALSO: Types of traps.
5. PETA Opposes All Animal Use
Most importantly, PETA’s claims about fur are not credible because PETA is not looking for more humane ways to capture or kill animals we use. PETA opposes any use of animals, even for food or vital medical research.
PETA would have us all wear synthetic materials, most of which are derived from petroleum, a non-renewable resource. This is fundamentally anti-ecological. The modern fur trade, by contrast, is an excellent example of the sustainable use of renewable (and biodegradable) natural resources, a key ecological principle that is now promoted by all serious conservation authorities.
SEE ALSO: Fur is a sustainable natural resource.
A sixth, “bonus” point is a bit more philosophical. No one is obliged to wear fur (or leather or silk or down), but many of us appreciate the warmth and beauty of high-quality natural materials. The coyote fur and goose down in my Canada Goose coat also remind me that everything we depend upon for our survival still comes, ultimately, from nature. Thus the importance of protecting natural ecosystems for future generations.
UPDATE: Animal activists lodged a complaint with the Competition Bureau (the Canadian federal regulator) accusing Canada Goose of “false advertising” for claiming on its website that its furs are collected by licensed trappers using humane methods. We are pleased to report that this complaint was rejected by the Competition Bureau. See: Competition Bureau drops inquiry into false advertising claim against Canada Goose, by Christina Stevens, Global News, Mar. 10, 2016.
COMMENTS: Comments are now closed for this post.
Let’s call a spade a spade. This is just a pathetic attempt at justifying wearing a product that is the result of horrific animal torture and suffering. Nothing more. It would not kill you to simply avoid wearing fur. Seriously. This is pathetic and sickening and transparent.
You’re selfish and don’t give a crap about whether or not any other Sentient being suffers for your choices. That’s the only excuse to wear fur. Everything else is just BS. If you wear fur, you wear suffering. Period.
Barbaric. Knuckledraggers. Empty souls. No heart. Fur wearers.
No, it would not kill me to stop wearing fur, but what would I wear in the winter? Synthetics made out of petroleum by-products? The alternatives are far worse for the planet and its inhabitants than wearing a natural, renewable resource.
You have picture of person wearing Canada Goose and a pet dog, which don’t make any sense.
It not just PETA or vegans who are against wearing real fur. There are several non-vegans who refused to wear real fur because they love animals.
Did you know in South Korea and China, dogs are being brutally skinned and murdered for dog meat festivals.
Also in China, that dog in picture could be killed for dog meat festival and fur coat.
South Korea and China has no animal protection bills and your dog could be stolen for dog meat or fur coat.
Dogs in China and South Korea are being stolen from dog loverly families’ backyard.
Imagine if you bring that dog to China, and imagine if dog meat supporters takes your dog away and kill that for your fur coat and it was sold to merchant and someone give you that fur coat made from your dog, would you wear your own dog fur?
Korean Jindo Dogs, Chinese Dogs, and Coyotes the Dogs, Wolves the Dogs, Afrian Wild Dogs are all dog families.
Korean Jindo Dogs, Chinese Dogs and Coyotes have same fate of skinned alive, tortured, etc.
Majority of animal lovers in Zoos don’t wear real fur either.
im only 19 and i wear fur
Why would you want to support animal cruelty? Think of the suffering the animals went through before being killed so you can wear their fur. It is vanity. It is selfish. It is so out of fashion.
Whether you are an animal rights activist or not, we are missing the real point of the debate. Is fur trimmed clothing or fur coats more effective in keeping you warm? A hundred years ago, there is no choice, you wear fur or you freeze, period. I am a realist so if I was around then, I would have worn fur because the other option is to stay indoors beside a fireplace in the winter. But now we have choices, most of which are cheaper and more effective than fur. The US military and all military units in the world adopted synthetic clothing to keep their troops warm in extreme cold. Google Primaloft, a man made goose down material. These materials can regulate your body temperature to a certain degree and moisture does not affect their performance. So the only reason you want fur is for fashion. That’s the reality. If you are ok with killing some animal just for want, not need, that all the best to you.
We respectfully disagree, Jake, that warmth is the “real point” for most people. If performance were the main issue, one could argue for or against everything we consume. There is always a choice that, arguably, performs better, but there is always a price to pay. And therein lies the “real point”. Is the price we pay (the taking of animal life) worth it for a product that is warm, sustainable and biodegradable, versus an alternative that is also warm, but unsustainable and polluting?
How is a fur trim going to keep you warmer? Im shocked that so many people would even consider these coats, full the full knowledge of the pain and cruelty inflicted on animals. These days there are perfectly good synthetic alternatives, instead of opting for a coat yet another animal had to die for…
The truth about fur is you are killing them for coat decor, get a grip….it’s still wrong!!!!!!
Nice post and I loved reading your article, can you please also suggest me the best place to buy leather jackets from as I have only experienced one best online shopping site, do let me know about other site 🙂 Thanks
Hopefully you’re kidding about “nice site”
Can’t believe anyone could possibly go through reading this site and agree with this antique codgers way of thinking. Talk about some pre-ww2 life philosophies.
This man is stuck in the past; don’t let him bring you down to his level as well.
May we teach our children compassion towards all, not just when it is convenient to do so. Just because we have the ability to kill and exploit animals doesn’t mean we should.
“The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” – Mahatma Gandhi
Nazi Germany pioneered animal rights. I don’t think Gandhi would call them great.
Finding themselves in a trap is the worst possible thing that can happen to a wild animal. Terror, separation from young, elements, other predators, hunger, thirst, pain — if you like fur so much and think trapping doesn’t hurt , why don’t you slam your hand in your car door!
Only the insecure, vain, and cruel wear fur ! It’s not a fabric and if it weren’t for wild canines — you wouldn’t have your arms around a dog Alan! All dogs are descended from wolves. I’m sure you all have a financial incentive for rationalizing that fur is even okay, let alone cool!
I AGREE WITH LINDA CAMAC.
Did you realize the traps are the same ones biologists use to trap animals to rehouse them in new areas or to tag them? Yes, the same traps. So if you think it is like having your hand slammed in a car door, you are mistaken.
Canada Goose do not know where these animals come from and do not regulate the trappers, whatever they say. Trapping is unbelievably cruel and does not just kill Coyotes, there is no such thing as a cruelty free trap. Shame on you!
DId you even read my comment? These traps are the SAME ones used by biologists to trap animals to tag them or move them. They are not cruel, the animals come out of the traps virtually unharmed. At least do some research before you start spouting off on every single comment here.
oh yeah ! virtually unharmed like dislocated shoulders, intense stress, dehydration, broken teeth, hypothermia,you want me to continue… Stop spouting lies!!!
That’s a blatant lie. I know a couple trappers and they use leg traps. Stop telling lies!
Lived in the Arctic for a few years and had the honour to spend about 5 months each year travelling on the land with some great people. On one particular task, myself and about 7 local inuit had the great pleasure of guiding some scientists around the area to do some studies over a period of 14 days. There is always that one person that has a cause, but like some folks in this forum, he was so distant and ignorant to the natural resources that sustain his lifestyle down south, that he had took it upon himself to enlighten me why his vegan lifestyle was far superior and earth friendly from my barbaric ways. I will illustrate the ironies that played out for about 3 days (he silently gave up and assimilated to survive for about 12 days). He first lectured me food immoralities as we had finished skinning and carefully cutting up a caribou that we would eat that week. Our food came within our workspace, he was eating dried oranges, peanuts and other dried vegetable packages. I quickly told him look around, the nearest vegetable is lichen and the contents of that caribou stomach that some of the elders dipped liver in. What was the carbon footprint on the dried oranges and other plastic sealed products that he deemed far morally superior on the arctic tundra. I lost that argument, but had 13 more days to discuss. By night fall, his scientific brain was barely functioning due to cold; however, his hand were useless after the 4 hour journey on the snow machines. Needless to say, it was ironic when you see some local youth, inuit elders and myself take off our toasty fur mitts and then proceed to program and install this device for the poor scientist with his hands that no longer functioned due to the cold. He did give us pretty sound advice on setting this thing up and taking the ice depth measurements, but his advice on outer wear I was not convinced. Later that night, we went to set up our McPherson tent, lit the coleman stove, through down a Muskox Hide for the base layer and each of us in the tent, except my friend the scientist through down a dry caribou hide on top of the muskox hide to sleep on. (All animal hides were a great by product of a successful hunt and great food). I made the mistake year one, trip one of thinking an expensive MEC air mattress would suffice (prob because of the price). Seeing that, we offered him an extra hide, he declined, although silently at this time. As the coleman popped and went out later that night, instead of getting quieter, the tent remained quite active all night as our poor friend probably near froze to the ground. The next evening he let us set him up with some furs. I guess in the end, anyone who is about to throw stones at us folks that understand where our food and clothes come from, should first analyzis the real impacts/footprints/and “greenness” of their far superior ways. I am not a gun- often finatic, I simply live in a cold country and understand there are responsible renewable resources.
Good story. I hope that vegan realized his ways are not superior. They are kinda stupid.
They would certainly say the same to you
It not just vegans, there are some non-vegans who refused to wear real fur either because they have heart for animals.
Ah, so they are hypocrites? Ok to kill cows for burgers and leather but not mink for fur? Those people are just as bad as animal rights activists.
This old man makes me sick, seriously what is wrong with you? Right so it’s a clean shot so it gives me the right to wear this hideous Canada Goose even though an innocent animal has been shot for it. The coat that your probably wearing the animal wouldn’t of had a clean shot and would of suffered tremendously! Is it because your old and your used to old ways of fashion being a hit? Wearing a dead animal for fashion and then making it suffer for it is never the answer. Where I live you look a dickhead wearing those coats anyway, so overpriced. I’m only 15 and wise enough to know right and wrong. Torture your Labrador and then wear its skin because it’s honestly the same. Sickening, look at the example your setting to youngsters like me.
Hi Laura, hopefully we have your last point covered. See “5 reasons why wearing fur is not like wearing your pet” at https://truthaboutfur.com/wearing-fur-not-like-wearing-your-pet/
You don’t have to be a vegan to feel that killing animals in a prolonged, agonising and cruel way just to use its skin to decorate a coat is wrong. Really thought the world might have moved on from this ideology by now…
Unless you live in the Arctic or Antarctic, there’s still no excuse except BS excuses. A FUR HAG in Toronto definitely has no need to contribute to animal suffering by wearing fur.
Many industries show how their products are made, all the way from mining to the finished product.
If Canada Goose is confident in their policies and the ethics of the trade, why haven’t they released full videos or even a documentary including footage of a sentient being struggling to get back to its family before being murdered and stripped of it’s own skin. From there we would see it being sent off to a factory where a ridiculous amount of the sentient animals fur is discarded as unusable (since only the “prettiest” and most “fluffy” bits of fur are used as it’s purely for fashion and not at all for function, the function part is an absolute lie, otherwise you’d see coats with fur that isn’t all “perfectly fluffed”). From there you’d see it attached to a coat which isn’t even that warm to begin with, in an effort to enhance the appearance. It’d then get shipped to the store and purchased by people who’d rather stay inside in their warm, comfortable houses.
Essentially you’re stripping the life of a conscious and emotionally intelligent being so that you can look good while going to the store in rare -20 degree weather. I guess it’s worth taking the life of a daughter, son, mother, brother, sister, or father, in order for the hood of your coat to feel gentle against your face. That makes sense indeed!
I should note that I used to wear a Canada Goose coat, and through the last several years I acquired a sense of empathy and intelligence which urged me to donate my coat to someone homeless and purchase another.
This isn’t an advertisement, as there are many options out there and my suggestion/selection isn’t the only brand out there. However, Wully Outerwear jacket, made in Toronto, is quite exponentially warmer than a Canada Goose coat has ever been for me. It’s not even close. Canada Goose is a garbage product for the premium at which they sell their products.
You are wrong, not many industries show how their products are made. Canada Goose has already been extremely transparent about their production process, more so than most brands.
Most rational people are not kidding themselves when they consumer or use animal products. We respect that a life has been taken for it, and we appreciate that. But that does not mean that everyone can stomach what goes on behind the scenes. A video of a coyote being trapped would be FAR less graphic than say a cow or a chicken going to slaughter. Do you demand that everyone who eats meat watch cows being slaughtered? Just because some of us don’t want to watch the graphic details of a cow being slaughtered, a closeup of woman giving birth during a complicated labour, or maggots devouring a giant carcass, doesn’t mean we don’t know what the process is. Many of us are smart enough to understand that fur = dead animal.
Is Wully transparent about their production process? It starts at the oil field, then onto the tanker or pipeline. (Enter photos of animals killed by oil spills here.) Then the petroleum is refined and after those complicated processes, it gets turned into plastics. (Enter photos of pollution, giant factories, water contamination, etc…) Then the fabric is made and turned into a garment. Every time you wash it, picture small particles of plastic entering the waterways. Do you eat fish? Good news, part of your Wully jacket is probably in the fish, because scientists are finding plastic particles in fish as far as the Arctic circle. Final step is the landfill – where the fur coats will biodegrade normally in less than 100 years, the Wully jacket will remain there, probably intact for 500 years, and then need a further 1500 to decompose. Even once it is decomposed, there will be particles of the plastic in the earth or water, so future generations can eat animals or grow plants that contain those particles of your jacket.
Lastly, I don’t know where you live or if you have ever spent more than 10 minutes outside in freezing weather, but Canada Goose jackets are WARM. Way warmer than that synthetic garbage you are wearing. You can say what you want about fur but there is no denying that nothing beats it when it comes to staying warm. You are a liar if you say your plastic Wully coat does the job better.
Canada Goose coats are warm, yes. However, Primaloft was developed for the US army. I think it speaks volumes that the US army would choose Primaloft over down. I have first hand experience in Canadian winter weather with the Wully and with the Goose. I wore the Goose for 6 years and it did me well, but right off the bat, you can feel the difference that science makes. Primaloft / Wully Outerwear destroys the performance of skin or light feathers, whether it’s your own or an animal that makes up the outer layer.
Wully Outerwear coats / Primaloft material(s) meet several environmental standards.. You fail to see the bright side of a coat lasting for thousands of years: the coat lasts for thousands of years. A Goose coat does not last nearly as long, and you wont get nearly as much use out of it. Natural is not always better, that being said, if you’re one that calls man-made objects “unnatural” then you shouldn’t ever call mass producing and manufacturing packed down feathers and fur trim to be shipped across the globe natural. Goose feathers are a great natural insulator, for Geese, and fur/skins are wonderful insulators, for the different species they grew on from the time they were magically brought into the beautiful wonder that is life and existence.
I understand that you know that things come from “dead animals” but either you’re a sociopath or you’ve found a way to suppress the empathy because you learned at a young age it’s better for you to do so. Perhaps I am the one who loses (along with the intelligent animals) by having such (unfortunately) great empathy and emotional depth.
By the way, Canada Goose straight up says that they cannot trace where their fur comes from, they just buy it from whoever is trapping and murdering at the time.
One thing that always gets me with terrible irony, is that if there was some person going around skinning and murdering humans, everyone would be freaking out – but because we can’t understand, and we look different than another intelligent species, it’s not as perceivably horrific. Most of us are able to shut off our empathy by means of hypnosis through advertisements, drugs, and constant psychological stimulation in our society today. It’s one thing if you require(d) something like an animal hide to survive winter and you’re not around modern civilization, when it’s kill or be killed it’s a different set of rules… but it’s another that humans will buy animal hides and fur trims in order to not feel slightly chilly when going to the grocery store or the bar or wherever their gluttonous desires take them. The fact that most of these people aren’t at all even doing any research to see if anything new has been developed that would save a future sentient being from becoming an accessory, proves that there is no “honour” or “respect” from the consumer to the beautiful being for giving their lives so you can stand in line at a Bieber concert in the winter.
Our society is so twisted up in it’s own gluttony that we make up delusions in order to write a post defensibly online and pretend that what we’re doing is ok. I guess we’re all a little bit sociopathic. Some just more than others.
Anyone who compares using animals for clothing to killing humans loses all credibility with me immediately.
Besides, Primaloft is not biodegradable.
Hello, may I ask why you feel this way about comparing animals and humans? Humans (homo sapians) are in fact animals and belong to the animal kingdom (Animalia). We are just very intelligent animals. So I don’t see a problem with comparing human animals with non-human animals?
Anyone who supports animal abuse and cruelty to profit from their suffering….. loses all credibility with me immediately.
Sorry wack-a-doo but You’re wrong.
There are more then a handful non-natural alternatives to Killing anything to wear for heat.
Just take time to research instead of posting foolishness.
I have done my research. Name me two non-petroleum alternatives to animal products we can wear comfortably in the freezing cold. These materials have to be ones that are available to buy in stores. And go!
There are many plant based materials being researched and developed for cruelty free clothing. Unfortunately, they don’t receive the same kind of subsidies that animal killing industries receive, thus, it takes longer to develop and find private investors. The products are coming and hopefully they’ll kill the animal carcass clothing industries.
One cruelty does not cancel out another, animals are killed for food which is regrettable but necessary, these animals are horribly killed to decorate a coat, in other words for vanity, Im amazed you need this explaining to you….
I wouldn’t believe anything that Canada Goose releases. It would just be marketing, not the real story. We need undercover investigative journalists to bring the truth about Canada Goose to the world.
Rest assured, you will be disappointed by the “truth”. Do you think Canada Goose is running concentration camps for coyotes and dreaming up the most brutal but cost-effective ways to kill them? It’s not.
Canada Goose will do whatever it takes to make the most profits from exploiting animal suffering. We all know it’s all about the profits, no matter the consequences or suffering caused.
Correction: We don’t “all know” Canada Goose is “all about the profits, no matter the consequences or suffering caused.” Do you have any evidence to support this statement? Meanwhile see our other comment about the mistake of thinking the pursuit of profit is inherently evil. It’s just the way capitalism works, and we are all part of it, whether we like it or not.
Funny, The Lies About Fur has turned their reply option off. Canada Goose only cares about profits and doesn’t give a crap about animals. Just admit it. It’s a symptom of our sick corporate capitalist society. If they knew they could sell human skin for profit legally, they’d do that too.
Now you’re exaggerating, but you know that 🙂
there is more hot coats for winter. i live in montreal. i wear MEC and no cruelty is made to my brothers animals.
You are kidding, right? Do you know what your MEC jacket is made of? It is made of petroleum by products, a totally non-renewable resource that is terrible for the planet and its inhabitants. Every time you wash your fleece is pollutes the water with particles of plastic, which are now in the ground, water, and animals. And when you get rid of it, it sits in a landfill for 1000 years. Please, do some basic research before thinking wearing petroleum is “cruelty-free.”
I’m going with wool which when sheered properly doesn’t harm the animal and never kills it. There is a big difference between animal product (like milk, wool, or antlers) and killing an animal. I don’t wear fur or petroleum based clothes and manage to stay warm in wool. I consider this check mate so don’t even respond. Once the game is over it’s over.
There is no explanation for the Fur trade other than vanity. There is fake fur and other materials that are just as good. Saying we should murder animals “Becuase they look pretty” shows what a heartless monster you are. No one needs fur. We kill animals on a farm because we need FOOD. Killing for fur is killing for the sake of killing and so its not excusable in any way. If you are insistent on REAL fur you simply enjoy the blood of animals. I think anyone who wants fur should be forced to murder it themselves, then see if your vanity can stay alive. When one of the biggest sellers of these kinds of Jackets say “Well clients think they are pretty, they want to be sexy” you know the customers are the biggest self-centered Narcissists pricks in the world.
I not changing this comment either may anyone who insists on REAL fur burn in the fiery pits of hell along with those coats of yours.
You say there is “no explanation … other than vanity” for people wearing fur. Hopefully you can find the time to read some of the posts on our blog, since explaining why we should wear fur is our primary mission. A good starting point would be “5 reasons why we must wear leather and fur” at https://truthaboutfur.com/5-reasons-must-wear-leather-fur/
What a pathetic argument. We need food, yes, and we also need protection from the elements (winter coats.) We don’t need meat (people can live on a vegetarian diet) and we don’t need fur (people can keep warm by wearing petroleum by-products such as fleece.)
There is only one type of person who thinks it is ok to kill animals for meat but not for fur: a HYPOCRITE. Either you are against using animals or you aren’t. You don’t get to pick and choose because you don’t want to give up burgers (which you should be killing yourself, I guess?)
No one is going to ask you to change your comment because it looks good for anti-fur people to sound like idiots in the comments section. Meanwhile I will enjoy my steak tonight and I’ll keep warm in the snow with my fur parka.
God I hope you don’t have any pets. Because if it gets too cold or you get too hungry you just may turn on your dog. That goes for the hypocrite who wrote this article. Poor Maggie. She is only still alive because her owner has OTHER animals to wear and eat! I cringe to think that people like you still exist in what is supposed to be a progressive society.
Have you tried wool? You don’t need to kill for that!
@ AnimalLover; As a citizen of society that has survived close to 6 thousand years our mandate was decreed by God the fella who also talked about the flames of hell in Revelation 21:8, [note that it discuses idolatry, Eg possible animal worship above that of human life!] Lest we forget Genesis 3:21: For Adam also and for his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins and clothed them.
Now the hopeful part is that in Revelation Chapter 11:18 [it talks about a time of judgement and reward]… and shouldest destroy them who destroy the earth. As some one who decree’s we must all wear Vegan Approved, Cruelty Free Clothing i think your sitting on the wrong side of the fence, promoting faux fur which relies on Oil wells, pipelines and Petro Chemical Plants.
Now if the 8 M deer hides were brain tanned and used for clothing, the kill from an average deer hunt in America that would alleviate lots of Field Critter Kill from some of your anti animal fabric alternatives. The animals and birds poisoned and mangled by mono-cropping far outweigh those harvested for meat and hides. Roadkill of deer averages 1.5 M yearly causing human deaths, injuries and vehicle damages. Tell me Animal Lover if 8 M deer are NO longer hunted, How Much more Road Kill will there Be?
The civilized theme is to practice Good Stewardship, do you agree? It is also expedient to take opportunity of any Value Added Products, do you agree? In regards to the AR’st Dogma that using wool is a vegan sacrilege, my view is that using the wool, dairy products, then the meat and hide is more responsible than lets say Toxic Silk and Bamboo fabric which require the Clear Cutting of Forests that evicts the forest critters pushing them into populated areas where pets and human attacks are on the rise. Please study the impact of Toxic Silk, I live it, having inhaled Carbon Disulphide in Pulp Mill emissions.
If you’re going to bring up the Bible, I hope you’re not wearing 2 materials/fabrics at once, because that’s a sin. Or did you skip that Bible verse, because you don’t feel like obeying it?
This article is terrible – and quite misleading. Of the five reasons given, only one defends the practice of killing coyotes for fur. Apparently, they are a problem for ranchers, and carry away household pets in cities.
The link they reference states the following, which the article neglects to mention:
“[Coyotes] are abundant throughout their range and are increasing in distribution as humans continue to modify the landscape. The species is very versatile, especially in their ability to exploit human modified environments.”
Thus this article’s own source indicates that coyotes are becoming more widespread because humans are modifying the landscape. It seems unethical to justify mass killing of coyotes for the dubious reason of population control, when humans are the ones causing the population increase.
The remainder of the article is similarly garbage. It suggests PETA in incredible because it opposes use of all animals. Not wanting to harm animals for personal benefit is hardly an ‘incredible’ position. But in any case, the video shows what it shows, and the article doesn’t disagree with the fact that coyotes are killed for their fur. Whether you find PETA credible as an organization doesn’t change the facts. You know an article is weakly argued when it has to rely on such diversionary tactics.
The only thing weakly argued is your comment. It IS incredible that PETA opposes all use of animals, animal research has saved lives and they want to ban it, amongst other things. And your argument about human modifying the landscape, yes, it is true. But what are you suggesting? We cull humans so the coyotes can take over? You freely criticize the article and don’t mention a single solution.
your argument is weak because you see the world as black and white. The choices aren’t fur or petroleum products. Have you heard about wool?
Wool? Hmmm yes, maybe I have heard about it. Last time I checked, the opposition against using animals wasn’t just about killing them, it was about keeping them in farms and raising them for the sole purpose of meat or clothing or entertainment or animal testing. So while you might be ok with wearing wool (which is a fantastic fibre and can definitely protect you in mild winters) animal rights activists are not ok with it.
So you support animal suffering as long as you benefit from it Alexandra? Do you work for Canada Goose or the fur industry?
Is this question well conceived? You ask, “So you support animal suffering as long as you benefit from it Alexandra?” Any consumptive use of animals by humans inevitably involves a trade-off in which the level of animal suffering is deemed acceptable given the benefits to humans. The alternative – supporting animal suffering when there are no benefits – is unacceptable to anyone in modern, civilised society. So of course there must be benefits.
So, coyotes caught in leg traps is considered “a trade-off in which the level of animal suffering is deemed acceptable” in The Truth About Furs eyes? How about mink that are anally electrocuted to kill them….. for fur? Acceptable in The Truth About Fur eyes? Your alternative explanation is a pathetic excuse. There is no need in modern society to cause intention animal suffering for fur. The only reason you do it….. is for $$$$$$$$$$$$$.
Some short answers for you … (1) Yes, we consider the minimal suffering caused by modern foothold traps to be acceptable given the benefits they provide. (2) Mink are not anally electrocuted. As far as we know, gassing is the procedure used on every mink farm in North America. (3) Of course the profit motive underpins much of the fur trade, or any other trade, but please don’t fall into the trap of thinking that this is inherently evil. It’s what makes the capitalist world go round. People need to eat, and food costs money.
I live in Quebec at -32 you can wear syntetic jackets by companies such aa North face. So thats a bad excuse.
You probably oppose to seal fur, at least the meat is eaten. Cayotes are just skinned & the rest thrown in the garbage.
But maybe you have a point. Too many cayote, too many seals as the eco balance is wrong.
So perhaps we should round up cayotes & fly them to the seals!
Killing animals for fur finding fake excuses to justify is terrible. You are not a good person. You are promoting the killing so your opinion is not welcome. Perhaps you should migrate south with your guns
They write all the time about seal skin on this blog, maybe you should bother to read it before you presume they oppose it. They definitely do not oppose it.
And of course you can wear synthetic jackets in minus 32 but they aren’t as warm and they are made of petrochemicals. I prefer natural, sustainable products over petrochemicals.
Too many humans. What do you propose be done about that?
I’m pretty sure two of my cats were lost to coyotes. I don’t have proof that the coyote got them, but it’s the most logical theory I’ve got. I’d had one cat for almost ten years, and the other for almost nine, and they were indoor/outdoor. One night in March 2015 the first disappeared, and then a month or so later the other disappeared. I swore I’d never let the other cat outside after what happened, but she loved it out there so much that I just couldn’t force her to stay in. Around this time a bunch of people, including me, had seen a coyote/coyotes sniffing around the area. Maybe the coyotes are innocent, there were also sightings of foxes at the time, but I’m keeping my suspicions all the same. I love animals, and admire what PETA does to an extent, BUT I do feel that a line needs to be drawn somewhere.
So because a coyote MAYBE ate your cat (which should never have been left outside UNSUPERVISED), all coyotes should DIE to be turned into coats? That seems reasonable! (not). How about we draw the line at meeting your cats’ needs for stimulation RESPONSIBLY?
Didn’t finish reading all your reasons because the first two are just plain pathetic! There will never be enough of a just to support this horrifying idustry. It’s all a here to make a profit off of you. First how dare you! Having a dog that is part of the coyote family. They are all have a ancestry connection. Second there is no humane way of killing a being. So what you’re saying is if someone goes up to you and says hey let me rape but I’ll do it humanely bc I will say sorry at the end. Or please let me rob you , promise you won’t get hurt. And over populating, please the human population is becoming over populated . Do you see people being eliminated . They are not being over populated ! There are many people that keep warm without having the need to wear fur!Stop trying to find excuses to make yourself feel better.
You always know you are dealing with a psychopath when they start comparing the fur trade to rape. You are screwed up, lady.
I’m laughing so hard at you calling people psychopathic while you’ve spent what seems like quite a significant portion of your time defending the needless use of helpless animals for their fur. You seem lonely, maybe make some friends so you don’t have to argue with strangers on the internet for human interaction lol.
I am a contributor to this blog and I enjoy refuting the pathetic arguments from the animal rights activists. But don’t worry, I only do this during my working hours and in my spare time I have lots of friends to hang out with. Instead of concerning yourself with my social life, maybe you would like to add something of value to the conversation? Or is that too much to ask?
Easy for you to say when you are the HUMAN and not the coyote in the equation. Do you understand the concept of extending your compassion to all SENTIENT beings? Or is that concept a little to advanced for you in light of your barbaric and antiquated views?
The concept is not too advanced for us, we simply choose to believe that humans deserve to be treated better than animals. I wouldn’t think twice about killing an animal who was attacking my child, I wouldn’t think twice about using life-saving medication that was tested on animals, I wouldn’t think twice about killing a cockroach, and I wouldn’t think twice about buying a long-lasting, natural, biodegradable, locally-sourced fur coat to keep me warm in winter instead of buying petroleum based synthetics.
Don’t just accuse Animal Rights Activists. Some commenters might be non-vegans who opposite fur industry as well.
So glad that so many people speak out against this!
While I don’t agree with harassing people(because not everyone is educated) and I can see some reasons to wear fur, I still disagree with most of the stuff on that blog.
First of all, most people don’t live and work in freezing areas. Most people that buy those products, buying them either out of ignorance or because it looks nice. You would be lying if you would deny that the vast majority of fur buyers buy and wear it because of fashion reasons.
As for the CG topic: I gladly support local businesses and producers and gladly pay more, especially when I receive a good quality product.
But if that product contains unnecessary cruelty, that company won’t see a penny from me.
I know that CG also sells products that don’t have real fur trim. But if I buy one of those, my money would still flow into the cruelty.
That trapping isn’t humane is clear, but fur farms(even the ones featured on this blog) are not much better, the are actually actually worse. Not much better than the battery cages for the chickens.
Talking about fur farms; a little experience from my childhood: When I grew up, there was a mink farm not too far where we used to live. There was that wall in front of it, so you couldn’t see what was behind it. But there was always that disgusting musky smell. Asked my brothers where that smell came from and they responded that it came from the minks. Since I was too young and didn’t know at that time what they looked like(actually thought they were birds), my brothers decided to climb over that wall and show them to me.
The farm looked basically like any generic fur farm. Since I was so small I didn’t know their fate, I admired the cute minks that were trapped in those tiny cages. Then the owner showed up. He was so angry that he released his dog! Released a dog onto a group of children! How brave is that? We hardly made it out of it, since we were close by.
Luckily, that farm (among many others in germany) shut down later on.
The whole fur industry is a dirty business and there are far more negative reasons than good ones. besides that, majority of furs come from asian countries, since it is cheaper. In those countries there are no laws and animal welfare. Which means the animals suffer even more and often get skinned alive.
Sure, fur looks nice, but is it really worth the suffering and death of an animal? Especially when it gets killed just for the fur alone?
Would love to write more, but don’t want to waste too much of my time here, since the owner of that blog has made up his mind and seems to be a fur farmer himself.
I don’t understand what you are getting at. You think it is weird that a farm smelled bad? ALL farms with animals semml bad. You are upset that a farmer used a dog to scare off trespassers? Keep in mind that fur farmers take trespassing very seriously, as many trespassers are there to release their animals.
And as far as the “not needing fur” argument goes, I will agree that many people who live near the equator do not need fur coats. But anyone who lives somewhere that drops to freezing needs a winter coat. Even if it just above freezing, I still need my fur when I am standing in the dog park for an hour, or waiting for the bus. And aside from other animal skins or by-products, there are NO viable alternatives. So unless you want to wear a coat made of petroleum, you’ll choose fur.
Needing a coat and needing fur is different 🙂
North-face has a jacket called ‘Thermoball’ that comes highly recommended and is cruelty-free.
I would love to see GHG reports and compare CG with non-animal brands (not all of them are made from Petroleum so you’re generalization is unwarranted). I have seen info about a lot of jackets that come from recycled water bottles and fishing nets that are diverted from landfill, and they keep you very warm.
Source : I’m an environmental sustainability consultant.
Can’t argue with someone that loves the feeling of dead animal fur against their face (and I’m not talking about their pet dog)!
Nor can we argue against those that profit from using and treating animals as nothing more than commodities, instead of the Sentient beings they really are. Of course people who profit from oppression and suffering are going to defend what they do….. until the last drop of blood spills from the animals they kill.
What a strangely ignorant article that does not take into the account the wider fur trade and the market that these particular jackets have created – cheapened versions, the feeling that it is ok to wear fur – there might be some sort of argument for a regulated trade but there majority of fur is from unregulated markets in China and Eastern Europe. This is a very narrow minded article coming from someone who is clearly unworldly and ill-informed.
It’s hard to follow your logic. Canada Goose, or any other Western brand, has done nothing to create cheaper, unregulated fur markets in China and Eastern Europe. The fur trade in these parts of the world has been around for many hundreds of years. The fact that China and Russia are the two strongest fur markets today is not because Westerners told them to wear fur. They’ve always worn it.
Marisa: I am happy that you acknowledge “there might be some sort of argument for a regulated trade”. Yes, fur trapping is extremely well regulated in North America, and that is where the coyote fur on Canada Goose parkas — and most commercially-used wild fur — is sourced.
Marisa, Not everyone lives in the modern world and may have a square shape not able to fit into your vision of a round peg. Unworldly people still have a need to provide for their families sustenance. The majority of the global population do not have the employment and educational opportunities that we have in North America.
Notwithstanding that many never felt comfortable in School, possibly having that square peg feeling, but they felt very comfortable in the forests and learned that trapping was an economic opportunity. In Northern Canada and Nunavut, if you are not employed at the Airport, School or Band Office, financially you are Up the Creek Without the Proverbial Paddle. Beaver, seal and rabbit are also palatable meats that can sustain a body while creating income from the pelt.
Sadly the ignorance and arrogance of Peta and the European Anti Fur Movement have plunged these Peoples who survived in one of the Planet’s harshest climates into poverty. They survived and were introduced to the Fur Trade by caucasians from Europe. Trapping was the first Commercial Opportunity in North America.
And surprisingly the Inuit engineered the first Kayaks without University Degree’s, built with a framework of whale bones and covered in waterproof seal skins. Now some of the negative commenters here own polyethylene kayaks requiring possible Arctic Oil Drilling for the required feedstock. There have been an estimated 57.000 whales sighted in the Churchill area of Manitoba where people go to watch Polar Bears. I suggest that some natives start a Heritage School building kayaks the self sustainable way, with whale bone and seal skin, that can be auctioned off to the purists with deep pockets.
Lady, you’re a kook. Coyotes are closely related to dogs, how can you justify loving one and wearing another? Think about it for one second, what if someone came up and shot your dog. Would you fine with it, even your dog died instantly? Killing someone against their will so that you can STEAL their fur is inhumane. It boggles my mind that you don’t see that. They make synthetic fur that is every bit as warm and durable as real fur. Animals need their fur, YOU don’t. Stop trying to justify killing animals so you steal their skin. It’s really not nice, and if your dog knew what you were up to, he’d be disgusted with you.
Thank you for taking the time to express your opinion, Michelle. A few thoughts. You ask how we can love our dog while wearing coyote fur? Well, don’t people love and care for their parrots (budgies, canaries) while eating chicken (turkeys and ducks)? (In fact, my budgie also likes eating chicken.) I understand that you probably don’t eat animals either, and that’s your choice…but there’s no denying that humans have always eaten animals, just as animals eat other animals. So there is nothing “natural” about your choice…it’s a viewpoint and a choice…and others have different views that can also be explained, as we have tried to do in this blog post and throughout the TruthAboutFur website.
They obviously dont care about the suffering of an animal that last maybe days trapped and in agony , and will always bring the “eating of meat” into the argument, which has nothing to do with it. Ive always said people who wear real fur are that ugly inside and out they need the skin of another to feel good.
Well, that argument about covering up our ugliness can be made for any kind of clothing.
Michelle: you conclude by saying that if my dog knew what I was up to “he’d be disgusted with you.” But that’s the point: dogs (and other animals) do not “know” in the way that humans do. So much of the stress and fear that you project onto animals simply doesn’t exist. (PS: my dog also doesn’t concern herself much about the other animals that she very much enjoys eating.)
alan, I wish there was an Up-Voting System here. But otherwise the site is very well designed. Receiving New Posts and Follow Up comments is great.
Michelle F, My first dog had rabbit fur and partridge feathers laying in the yard almost every morning. He loved catching his own wild meat. He also would go nose to nose with bears keeping them away from our home.
I guess in my planetary location there were Pulp and Paper Mill towns with vast distances in between communities. Guess what kind of products these mills make. Google products made from pulp fibre. You will be shocked, and guess what forest animals are evicted with the Clearcutting of Forests required to feed these hungry mills.
Everything from Iron Mines, Steel Mills, Casting Plants and Oil Wells are needed in the Full Cycle Cost of these processes needed for our modern world. Oop’s Vegan Approved Rayon and Bamboo Fibre also require the Clearcutting of Forests along with the poisonous Neurotoxin Carbon Disulphide which poisons workers in the Industrial process.
And what i find most confusing is that using Wool is a Sacrilege in AR’st Vegan Dogma. They call it Animal Exploitation.
I think you’re the kooky one here lady. If someone came and shot my dog it would be a different story, do you know why? I’ll enlighten you on why. My dog does not parade around the place killing other dogs and cats around my neighbourhood. Coyotes are considered pests. They also aren’t an endangered species. I’d love to know why fur activist come after Canada goose specifically.. why not the brand Mr. and Mrs.? Did you know that company makes jackets that are lined inside with rabbit fur and hoods of coyote, and raccoon. Or how about mackage or Rudsak? Some of the companies I just mentioned are made in China. At least this is made in Canada and the materials would be far more regulated than any Chinese factory. The choices of others should not affect your life directly whatsoever. And if it does then you should reconsider your life purposes.
Why wouldn’t you wear dog fur trimmed coats? What’s the difference? Dogs aren’t that far removed from coyotes. You could have old yeller carved up and throw his carcass over your shoulder and proudly display your fashion sense. What’s the difference? Oh, right, speciesism.
You may like to read this post, in which we explain what we think are the differences between pet dogs and coyotes: https://truthaboutfur.com/wearing-fur-not-like-wearing-your-pet/ But you’re right on one point. Speciesism is alive and well in so many aspects of our lives, and that is not likely to change. It is interesting that many opponents of fur have no trouble classifying pigs as food animals, despite the evidence that they are highly intelligent and sentient animals.
Thank you for admitting that speciesism is a problem and that the fur industry is an industry that actively participates and promotes speciesism.
Did we say the fur trade “promotes” speciesism? I don’t think so. But like almost everyone, we acknowledge that it exists and is part of our condition. We certainly do not agree with the Animal Rights adage, “A pig is a dog is a rat is a boy”.
That picture of you wearing a dead coyote, while warmly embracing your beloved dog, makes me sick to my stomach. Speciesism at it’s finest. It’s truly a shame that you cannot find it in your heart to extend your compassion to all animals.
No, you don’t get to live in a modernized world and logically justify the use of these animals when there are synthetic materials available. Fur and down is not necessary unless you are in an isolated tribe with no other choice. This goes for all animal materials- leathers, furs, feathers, food. Animal agriculture is the #1 cause of habitat loss and greenhouse gas emissions. If we stopped exploiting all animals the way we do we wouldn’t even have this debate. Coyotes aren’t overpopulated, we are. If we want to continue sharing this earth with any kind of animals (humans or not) we need to seriously fix our relationship with all of them.
You hugging your dog in your down and fur coat is laughable. Before you say it, I have read your article about loving pets vs. other animals. The truth is, you can only empathize with those who do you a personal service. Those who give you companionship or endangered animals that you want to be able to keep looking at on TV. You only recognize the suffering or death of an animal if it is a loss to yourself. I care about and respect all animals and people- not just the endangered ones or my pets. Realize that it is you that are lacking in this empathy and those of us calling you out on it possess an understanding that you do not- all life is equal and all unnecessary suffering is wrong. Use your gift of human intelligence and empathy.
AH, I love the anti-fur person who comes whining about the environment and then suggests synthetic alternatives. Emily, do you have any idea what synthetic fabrics are made of?
And I am not confirming your “#1 cause of habitat loss and greenhouse gas emissions” statement (as I have not had the chance to verify this, but you should know that the fur trade in North America uses about 7-8 million animals a year, whereas 12 billion are killed for food. So the fur trade is hardly the major contributor to these problems, if they are actually as you suggest.
Do you go onto food blogs and tell them they have no empathy if they use meat or dairy?
Actually, yes I do know what synthetic fabrics are made of. Polyester. Which is now being composed of normally recycled fibers.
Taking out thousands of coyotes, as this company does, does reduce predators. Now think about the prey. The prey that these coyotes attack, their populations will rise and then every other animal below will decrease and eventually the ecology of this system will reach a point of a positive feedback loop. This event will then cause the eventful loss of every species in the area. But, yes, please tell us how this works.
It works like this: in the past, coyote populations were kept in check by other, larger predators, especially wolves. But because humans have pushed wolves out of most of their traditional range, coyote populations have exploded…and humans are now the only predator left to control them.
So, you’re admitting that humans are the problem, not the coyotes?
Actually, your statement about animal agriculture being “the #1 cause of greenhouse gas emissions” is completely false. Fossil fuel-based energy is responsible for about 60% of human greenhouse gas emissions, with deforestation a distant second at about 18%, and animal agriculture between 14% and 18% (Sources: World Resources Institute, UN Food and Agriculture Organization, and Pitesky et al. 2009).
Your claim about habitat loss is also wrong; in fact, one of the advantages of cattle ranching is that bovines can graze land that is too hilly, arid, cold, rocky or fragile to till for crops — like large parts of the plains of western Canada and the United States where cattle use the ecological niche once occupied by indigenous wild bovines (aka bison).
Emily, maybe this singer killed by coyotes would love to be hugging possibly a child she dreamed to have. Claiming animal sentience and rights does not cut it in my orbit.
Coyotes kill Toronto singer in Cape Breton – Nova Scotia – CBC News
Oct 28, 2009 – A 19-year-old folk singer from Toronto has died after being attacked by two coyotes in Cape Breton Highlands National Park. Taylor Josephine Stephanie Luciow, who went by the stage name Taylor Mitchell, died overnight at the QEII Health Sciences Centre in Halifax.
This is a tough subject for sure. I hate the thought of animals being killed off for fashion. It is icky. And the wolf and coyote overpopulation is because of human disturbance. And yes, synthetic materials come from big oil corporations, which is not great long term either.
What I really take issue with, is that Canada Goose takes credit for helping Canadian native communities. This is definitely shaky ground. Mass producing anything from Mother Nature is absolutely against the native way. I can speak to this because I work closely with Cree and Blackfoot Medicine men/women and elders. Manitobah Mukluks are an aboriginal company and they do not use real fur. The leather they use for their products would be from an animal that a tribe member has earned the right to kill, and they would use the entire body of the animal for other purposes. I wonder what Canada Goose does with the bodies of the coyotes? I doubt they use them. They then pray to thank to animal for its life. I really doubt the majority of Canada Goose customers actually stop and think about what went into their $700 jackets.
Colonization has created a big mess. What should Canadians support? Mass production of animals or more big oil? It is too bad we have become a culture of consumers. I really wanted one of these coats at one point but I am put off now. I really hope they trapping coyotes humanely. Mass production just seems so wasteful and unnecessary. It is too bad we have become a culture of consumers and have created this mess for nature that we don’t think twice about. I do hope we can find a solution.
Linds, I could never understand why the generations before us who lived a Subsistence Lifestyle used to cull porcupines. One winter about 2 decades ago i had time to do extensive snowshoeing on a mountain behind my home. The birch trees were 85% damaged by porcupine. That means NO birch veneer logs for furniture or lumber. All they would be good for is firewood that emits Particulate to the atmosphere at a level 20 X more than coal fired power plants.
Porcupine is eaten by humans and the quills are used by First Nations artisans. Thus my handle;
Omg…you are just making yourself feel better. If your dog knew what’s hanging around your neck he would walk away from you and never come back. You’re an hypocrite if you say you love animals. I stopped reading your story after your first so called reason for not ditching your dead animal jacket. Ugly people wear fur, please never come to my country because gladfully here we’re not promoting this kind of animal abuse!
Estelle, could you share the name of your country? Thanks.
She is just a vegan peasant, irrelevant malnourished opinion
Estelle, wolves were peeing on my basement wall one winter wanting to kill and eat my dog who had a thick long wooly coat. She never liked staying in the house and very rarely in her dog house. Wolves may have eaten her mother as she had vanished. I could only allow her pup outside when i was going outside.
In a nearby community an old wolf was eating cats and dogs one winter. Alpha male wolves at some point may lose their position as leader of the wolf pack. This leaves them in a position of fending for themselves, so the easy option of moving into a residential area and taking pets is quite viable. Or they may start taking small livestock. When you witness 17 wolves running down a deer, chasing it onto an icy lake your perception of nature has an awakening. And about a hungry wolf taking cats and dogs in a community, you worry about young children playing outside.
Sir you are the most stupidist and abonominal low of a being . I hope ur dog fur jacket keeps u n ur dog safe while on the other end of the world south of bejing China is a shit fest for the meat trade and the by product of the fur . U r a disgrace to man kind if u think like this . Please please change . People like us will be happy open our arms to u .. please open ur mind and soul . World peace isn’t a joke
deniz r, You are denigrating Cultural Practices. You are judging peoples choice of diet and clothing. This is a form of Food Racism. You can continue to believe in your Cruelty Free Diet while the farm tractor tilling the croplands mangles moles, voles, lizards, gophers, rabbits, deer etc. Have you ever watched the Carrion Cleanup Crew following farm equipment tilling and harvesting their crops?
Your choice of diet is not exempt from Collateral Damage, aka Field Critter Kill.
As an omnivore who eats a Balanced Diet with 3/4 of my plate covered in vegetables it does less damage to field critters because i choose to eat Self Propelled Ruminants with a hankering for wild meat.
It is inhuman to justify your own laziness and ignorance in wearing a trapped animals fur with false acusations like coyote overpopulation and what not. These animals are just out there doing there thing. We need to do ours better, we are the overpopulation problem to them.
That’s great, the alternative … just keep doing it. Thanks for the reality and justification of a very gray area. I reckon Maggie is at a great age to make a hood trim that doesn’t do anything in keeping you warm. Labrador Retriever jackets, that’ll keep you snug Alan. Better yet, what about a Labrador Retriever toupe?
We hope this post will explain why we don’t make clothing from our pets: https://truthaboutfur.com/wearing-fur-not-like-wearing-your-pet/
Loved this article have been trying to get your point across on their website for ages. Not sure what people really don’t understand. It’s a renewable resource it’s abundant and if they are going to get killed (which they are) I like that the fur is being used. Thank you so much for this article.
Only lowlifes make excuses for the fur industry. Cruel, greedy, arrogant, and selfish lowlifes.
GW, Vegan, AR’st approved fabrics, Eg. Rayon and Bamboo require the Clearcutting of Forests evicting forest critters. Full Cycle Costs are never considered for all the Carbon Inputs to mine iron ore for logging equipment and Pup Mills. They would never consider all the Air, Water and destruction of forest lands for these two fabrics. Oop’s and they use a Neurotoxin, Carbon Disulphide which poisons workers in the Mill’s and Fabric Processing.
Humans are animals, and we act as animals, hunt for food and hunt to stay warm. It’s survival instinct and has happened for many years. Taking down greater animals that would attack and kill and also protecting our own kind.
In 2016 times have changed greatly, we have advanced and there are so many other ways we can stay warm..
What I don’t understand here is the blogger has no issue with the killing of coyotes for fur, yet you are love your dog, imagine if he had been skinned and warn around for fashion? How would that make you feel. No life is greater then another.
Put yourself or even your dog in that coyotes position, he has the same senses you have, fear, stress, anxiety and can you imagine being trapped and someone handling you in humanely.
I can understand that we do need to survive, just like other animals do. But we’ve gone far beyond where we were and there are better ways to do this.
I always look at both sides of a story here and I am hoping you can see differently soon like i did.
Ian — I have written a new post to explain why I do not think it makes sense to say “How can you love your dog but kill coyotes for fur?” Check it out here: https://truthaboutfur.com/wearing-fur-not-like-wearing-your-pet/
Ian, Eg. Deer have become feral in some areas, recently in the US 8 Million deer were killed by hunters. Another 1.5 Million were involved in Vehicle Collisions causing bodily harm in many cases. Reason would stand that if 8 million deer were not hunted vehicle collisions would be at much higher numbers.
The Feral Hog problem in Agricultural Areas where they destroy crops is another issue. Thank God there are Omnivores that eat wild meat. They are also aggressive towards humans and pose safety issues for children in rural areas.
Ian, your emotions have been affected by your acceptance of sentience and animal rights. Some advocates of these beliefs feel they have evolved spiritually above lessor beings who are quite happy living their inherited omnivorous lifestyle making full use of all the By-Products from living animals, e.g. dairy, honey and eggs. Using wool is also a No no and the belief that eating honey is animal exploitation, when the Money from Honey subsidizes the Pollination of the Plant Based Diet that you may follow.
this article misses the point. instead of wearing coyote around your neck, why don’t you kill your dog and sent its pelt to Canada Goose and have them fit it to your hood. That way you can memorialize him forever and actually support all the beauty nature provides. plus you’ll be helping with the dog population. Dog fur keeps dogs warm, it will keep you warm as well. Your dog isn’t wearing Canada goose to keep it warm.
Don’t pretend like you live off the land because you don’t. Its dangerous to support companies that mass produce items that use fur. #1 you think I only have a small piece on my hood, in reality the mass production of these coats is ripping through a ton of animals just so you can use your hood 3 times in Montreal. wear a scarf.
#2 living off the land and appreciating nature would require YOU to go and kill your own coyote, eat it, feed your family and make a coat out of it because you live in an igloo and that’s the only warmth available to you. Don’t pretend to be like your ancestors. you don’t have an idea of what that was like
3# you wouldn’t kill your own dog just to have it around our hood. so why kill one of natures dogs. Just because the coyote isn’t part of your family – doesn’t mean it ok.
Finally – you will continue defending yourself. This isn’t completely your fault. The company does all the dirty work and presents you a gorgeous warm coat. how and why would you feel any responsibility to how the jacket is produced. its so far removed that you have no idea just how barbaric it is to kill an animal.
My guess is if you were standing with a gun over a trapped coyote and thought to yourself that the ONLY reason your about to pull that trigger is so that you can wear its skin around your hood (and only a small piece) you’d rethink that decision and probably think maybe you can find a better alternative.
Because, the truth is – that coyote fur is not imperative to your survival. You will not die if you don’t have it like our ancestors would have.
This is merely a fashion decision.
That’s why its pointless.
disclaimer: I actually have a Canada Goose jacket. And I bought it because I thought the fur looked really nice and stood out from all the other coats out there. Admittedly, it is the warmest jacket I’ve ever owned. I still have it. I wish I was more informed 10 yrs ago when I bought it. I will never support the fur industry anymore.
This is one of those things that we will look back on decades from now and think wow how were we so stupid.
“disclaimer: I actually have a Canada Goose jacket. And I bought it because I thought the fur looked really nice and stood out from all the other coats out there. Admittedly, it is the warmest jacket I’ve ever owned. I still have it.”
You are kidding, right? You’ve just gone and dissed Canada Goose and then at the end of your comment you mention that their coats are great. I think you might actually be the definition of hypocrite.
Alexandra, I was illustrating that I had bought one of those coats 10 yrs ago when I knew less about how the coats were made. I was illustrating that I had bought the coat because of a fashion decision and therefore showing that those who are ill informed today are likely making their purchase for the same decision.
But if they take the time to understand why that is the absolute wrong decision, like I have, they’ll realize that it’s okay to make the decision today to stop supporting this company.
I don’t have the jacket anymore.
– typo in my original post.
I still have it = I don’t have it.
That may have thrown you off.
Myron — I have written a new post to explain why I won’t wear my dog’s fur instead of coyote fur. Check it out here: https://truthaboutfur.com/wearing-fur-not-like-wearing-your-pet/
You sir are a complete [expletive], it’s 2016 there is no reason whatsoever to use real fur, as there are now synthetic alternatives, which other companies use. Why should an animal suffer just because truly ugly people want to wear their skin.
Hi David, I’ve allowed your comment but removed your one expletive. If you wish to comment in future, please be polite. Hopefully you will find time to read several posts on our blog presenting our views on synthetic clothing. Here’s a good place to start: https://truthaboutfur.com/5-reasons-must-wear-leather-fur/
David king, You are not thinking critically, all the feedstock and Industrial Process requires Damn Pipelines delivering Crude Oil from Oil Wells to Refineries and Petro Chemical Plants to make those other Petroleum Based Fabrics that are Vegan Approved., like the faux fur synthetic alternatives that you are promoting.
David king, The Sinthetic alternatives you applaud are pathetic;
How your clothes are poisoning our oceans and food supply …
https://www.theguardian.com › Environment › Sustainable development
Jun 20, 2016 – Microfibers – tiny threads shed from fabric – have been found in … The fibers’ size also allows them to be readily consumed by fish and other wildlife. … in 2015, after polyester, the primary component of outdoor fabrics like fleece, … to figure out the impacts that our materials and products – at every step in …
Inside the lonely fight against the biggest environmental problem you …
https://www.theguardian.com › Guardian Sustainable Business › Marine life
Oct 27, 2014 – It is not news that microplastic – which the National Oceanic and … such as fleece jackets or polyester base layers, are contributing to a major environmental threat. …. the sources and impacts of synthetic microfibers in the environment, ….. shrimps and farmed fish) then public opinion and pressure from the …
What Do We Know About Tiny Plastic Fibers in the Ocean? – Patagonia
Jun 20, 2016 – … will be more plastic than fish in the sea”—and notes that plastic packaging … These synthetic microfibers can end up in the ocean, on beaches, and … We also know we sell a lot of fleece; what we produce, combined with all the polyester and nylon … Fabric construction appears likely to impact shedding.
Patagonia’s New Study Finds Fleece Jackets Are a Serious Pollutant …
Jun 20, 2016 – He then ran a polyester fleece jacket through the wash and filtered 1,900 … and research is underway to find out how the plastics affect humans. … The role washing machines play in microfiber pollution is also a … Clothing company G- Star, which integrates synthetic fibers sourced from plastic ocean debris …
I like how this guy is wearing fur and hugging a dog at the same time. Would you wear a coat made from your dog? A dog? No? If you wouldn’t kill a dog then why a coyote? Think about that coyote’s life was ended just so you can look “beautiful”. There are plenty of things to wear that don’t require killing animals. Peace
He loves his dog. Why would he kill his dog for its fur when he can use fur from a coyote instead? He enjoys fur, and that’s fine. But it would be weird to kill one’s pet for its fur. Nobody does that. Your argument doesn’t make any sense.
You just proved the point.
No one kills their own animal to wear it’s fur because they feel an emotional attachment to it and don’t want to cause it pain. – so why would you kill another animal.
That’s like saying it’s okay for me to kill you just to make a wig out of your scalp and that because we have no relation it doesn’t matter to me.
You live in a bubble. Remember “The Matrix”? You’re the guy who chooses the wrong pill. You can justify yourself all you want, you’re dead wrong. I’m not a member of PETA, I’m not even a vegan, but your whole point of view is linked to a time when we couldn’t recognize that animals are intelligent beings and that we are all animals. Wake up!!!
We most certainly are animals, which is why we can and must depend on nature like other animals do. Most species produce more young than their habitat can support to maturity; the ones that don’t make it feed the ones that survive. We are part of that system — like other animals — but the difference is that we can control and improve our actions to ensure that we are using animals in a sustainable and humane way. The responsible and sustainable use of nature is the keystone of modern conservation policy, as promoted by the IUCN.
alan, excellant response, using the Circle of Life with a Balanced Harvest. I am really annoyed by the Bambi Sympathetics that feel it is their duty to feed wild deer, who then rise in feral numbers. Then they complain to Wildlife Management when a wolf pack kills deer in their yard. I as a gardener who has his crops raided by deer am told that I should invest in 9′ high fencing.
alan herscovici, keystone used in your Comment has some serious implications this past week. Being given the Green Light by the new President of the United States. All the AR’st and Vegans should be behind this decision in full support of the completion of the Keystone XL Pipeline.
More Oil is needed for all their Cruelty Free Vegan Approved Fabric’s. The Faux Fur they boast of here is derived from petroleum products. They are void of any capability of Critical Thinking, of what the costs are to the environment and those animals evicted in the Oil Extraction, Pipeline Corridors etc.
They allow their emotions to be held hostage with no thought as to the damaged land, pollution, Carbon use necessary for their favoured synthetic fabrics. I have been exposed to the Neurotoxin, Carbon Disulphide working on a new Air Emissions Project, used at a Pulp Mill necessary for Rayon [Clear-Cut Forests] and Bamboo fibre. I would trade time in the woods trapping any day Vs the carnage caused to human health and degraded environment by the Industrial Process’s needed to produce their vegan approved, cruelty free fabrics.
There are other ways to stay warm, rather than wearing a product that came from a murdered animal.
Of course there are other ways to keep warm, but none is more ecologically sustainable — or as beautiful — as fur.
The reason you won’t give it up is because men don’t have the ability to empathise with others. That’s why 98 per cent of wars, rapes and genocides are caused by men. Men are vermin.
Well, scientific research into gender differences in our ability to empathise certainly does place women above men. Some have linked this to the traditional role of women as primary caregivers to children, and the need this entails to understand others’ facial expressions, etc. Men, meanwhile, have been cast in the role of providers of food (including meat) and raw materials for clothing (including fur). Perhaps it has been to the evolutionary advantage of humans that men be able to suppress their empathy for animals, otherwise early humans would have starved or frozen to death.
Oh dear God, some poor lost soul who actually thinks that evolutionary psychology is somehow respected by mainstream scientists. Sigh. I feel sorry for you.
or otherwise early humans could have excelled by making better choices that would have catapulted our specie is a healthier direction.
early humans rarely ate meat, we ate more vegetation.
our society is a product of mass production – the way we eat and live today is so far removed from how it was.
So maybe if we ACTAULLY maintained our lifestyles of the past we’d have less problems today.
just a thought.
Myron, I would love a Bison Robe as a bed covering. Maybe i could turn the thermostat down to save on fossil fuel heat. The Inuit who have survived in the planet’s harshest climate for centuries before colonists arrived perverting their diet and forcing them off their Traditional Harvesting Areas, into government built house’s, sometimes hundreds of miles away. They were happy heating their Igloo with a whale oil lamp cuddled up in their furs.
They were doing very well on their meat centric diet and used everything from the animals for their sustenance and warmth. Why is it that heart disease is almost non-existent in the Arctic, Greenland and Icelandic peoples? Could it be the animal & fish based Omega 3’s?
Your really stretching it when you state “we ate more vegetation”, which must be what you read in PCRM literature, or your alleged memories from a past life?
Envision this Myron, if the Bison had not been exterminated, we could forage, fish and hunt without our menial 9-5 job, and wait for the massive herd of Bison to come thundering by, take what we need to sustain us through the winter months, including fur robes instead of Poly-fleece Dacron hollow-fill sleeping bags. Use a horse the Spaniards brought to the shores of North America and have a grand old time.
We would not have to worry about those Pipeline Right of Ways cutting up our Prairie Grasslands, but then you would only approve of synthetic Oil Based sleeping gear, Right? so trapping trumps your vision in a Sustainable Lifestyle. And all the wild meats, beaver, elk, moose, deer, rabbit, squirrel etc. don’t rely on the mono-cropping of soybean to make the faux tofu meats i see in the Vegan Section.
Go back to your era caveman.
What are you talking about? Wars are also caused by women. Back in the days of European monarchy, from 1480 to 1913 there was a 27% increase in wars when a queen was in power versus a king [Source: Oeindrila Dupe & S.P. Harish, New York University]. And in the present day, we have Hillary Clinton in the United States who wants to wage more war in the Middle East. That said, being a man or woman has nothing to do with being more or less violent or empathetic. If anything, the author simply sees things from a more rational point of view when it comes to utilization of fur.
The Clinton comment was uncalled for and unsourced. It undermines your argument because it’s a hypothetical. Just choose Queen Mary or something.
I hate men, I am sorry that you may have been traumatized and now are spewing Misandry. One of the first trappers i met was a woman, who was a wonderful person who did a very fine job of raising 9 children. Did you know that woman are the perpetrators of 80% of IPV. Google it, and learn of the real scientific data, that mainstream media don’t dare publish because of the Right Fighters Backlash.
I am a seventy one year old woman. this year i have been verbially abused by two different ant-fur person.
one was a women who screamed at me while i was
walking calling me a fucking ugly bitch screaming at
the top of her voice at me i really thought she was going to hit me. i have a mink coat which is 20 years
old and i do wear it when it is very cold. also, at the
supper market a man came up to me and accused me
of killing animals while following me round the store
telling me i would burn in hell. he even came up to
me at the check out counter and kept abusing me
verbally. i was very afraid he would follow me out.
even the store clerk was bulled by him. If this is the way these these activist act i don’ t think it is the way to get their message out
So much for activists claims to be “compassionate”!
These people are insane narcissists that have lived their entire lives in a bubble. I’d find it entertaining if they went to communities above the arctic circle and tried to talk smack to the people living there for using animal products to stay alive.
There is no real reason to try justifying yourself to these people. They are idiots brainwashed by peta and don’t understand how evil peta actually is.
youre probably right. those that lvie in the artic circle have a stronger leg to stand on.
the woman stating her age just illustrates her ignorance. It doesn’t matter if youre 20 or 90 yrs old. in fact the older you are, likely the more ignorant. we are living in the world your generations created – and your generation really mucked it up.
If constand education doesn’t work, then nature if take its course and kill off the old foggies where their old school ignorant mentality will be laid to rest forever.
Myron, don’t be so sure. As a 23 year old female vegan, the only education I’m getting from reading these comments is that PETA people are jerks. I’m learning from everyone’s attitude here. And frankly, it convinces me to quit veganism so I don’t get associated with such a negative stigma. The only people mucking things up right now are animal activist-nazis. They may treat animals okay, but they treat people horribly.
Janice, I commend you for your observations here. There seems to be a Cult Like Stronghold with SOME AR’st and Vegans. Some go so far to wish death and violence to the omnivore majority. Some cheerlead acts of violence, Eg. the Frisco Cattle Truck Bombings. Some have talked of physical violence to humans in other Blogs. It becomes troubling, someone in the Super Market should have called the Police over the verbal abuse and threats directed towards frances lucas.
Not all anti-fur peoples are from PETA or vegans. Some non-vegans are against wearing real fur because they know it’s not warm or fashion.
The only case of trapped animals suffering for days that I’m aware of was staged by animal rights whackos:
The Canadian Association for Humane Trapping produces a film entitled They Take So Long to Die. Scenes of animals suffering horribly in inappropriate traps are subsequently aired on CBS television. It is later learned that the animals had actually been caught in the wild and released into a compound to be trapped and filmed at leisure. The film is withdrawn from circulation, but the footage appears in another film, Canada’s Shame, produced by the Association for the Protection of Fur-bearing Animals. https://furcommission.com/saving-society-from-animal-snuff-films/
KaD, There are lot’s of irrational acts done by animal activists. In Newfoundland they released mink at a fur farm. The mink who never lived in the wild were killing pets for food and turning into fur pancakes on the highways.
So, you’re saying that hunters that use leg traps check them every single hour of every single day….. to prevent the animals who get trapped in them….. from suffering for extended hours? Don’t lie. Trappers often don’t check leg traps for days, leaving whatever animals that get caught in them to suffer in extreme pain for extended hours and often days.