As of late, I’ve spent a lot of time educating about, as well as defending, the consumptive practices of hunting and fur trapping on the modern North American landscape. For the most part, the response I get from the public at large is positive, reinforcing, rewarding, and immensely up-lifting. There is something truly special about seeing the look on a kid’s face when they get to pet a real beaver hide, or the emotional tension leave a client’s body when you properly educate them on their nuisance wildlife problem. The ability to assume the role of a valuable steward to our region’s wildlife and a hands-on conservationist is spiritually satisfying – and much more rewarding than just playing the self-reliant woods-bum I initially intended for myself.

Of course it should also be noted that for someone with a pro-trapping stance on the internet and in the public eye, I get my fair share of nasty comments, vicious emails, aggressive pot shots, and at times downright childish accusations pertaining to my way of life and (on some occasions) the validity of my own mental health. All I have to say is sticks and stones folks, sticks and stones.

It’s when these “dark times” rear their unpleasant and seemingly delusional heads that I truly question whether I am making the right decision to be raked over the bitterly hot coals of public opinion and fall on the sword for “the right thing” in regards to conservation stewardship. Being a voice for conservation and self-reliance is a far cry from becoming a martyr. I would prefer to avoid becoming the latter.

Fur trapping in North America is a hot-button topic – one worthy of sitting side by side with issues like politics, religion, and climate change. The only difference is the rarities in which people feel compelled to discharge such fire-bellied hate as to call for your “extinction” for coming out as a Conservative or Liberal thinker.

To make a long story short, if you’re going to be outspoken about fur trapping or predator hunting in the 21st century, you had better get your facts straight, and more importantly, grow a thick skin.

Why Bother with Trying to Have a Voice for Something as Controversial as Fur Trapping?

I get the question all the time – occasionally from like-minded individuals. The short answer I’m accustomed to furnishing is “because I care.” I care about the natural world that has surrounded me for my entire life. I care about the health and populations of the wild critters I share this landscape with. I care about the impact the human species has on the rest of our natural environment; and I care about the direction it’s headed. I also wish to share my insight of years running a wilderness trap-line, share the knowledge of animal behaviors and traits, share my experience of self-reliance and reaping my own food or fur, and share my passion for an untouched forest canopy or riverbed void of human trash and pollution. To some, this would sound like a contradiction – but try to stay with me.

I’ve lived the solitary life of a recreational fur trapper for about ten years - keeping my activities (for the most part) undercover and off my lips in public settings. I trapped and skinned furbearers like beaver and muskrats, reported catch numbers and filled out yearly observation forms for the state Fish and Game Department. I alerted state biologists to environmental changes within my natural habitat, donated to conservation efforts, and purchased my licenses and firearms which aids funding to conserve these natural resources – I did it all without expecting anything in return, other than to be left alone and to see the wild landscape New England has to offer be conserved for the next generation of outdoorsmen and women.

It sometimes seems as though I was asking for too much – as the constant barrage of attacks on hunting and trapping from hordes of people who clearly “don’t get it” seem to boil up and over more and more every year. In other words, there are a lot of people in this country who can’t seem to grasp the concept of an individual being both concerned for the well-being of wildlife, and at the same time preying upon it.

Hopefully you’re starting to understand how frustrating it is to be so dedicated to wildlife conservation, play an irreplaceable role within said conservation methods, only to be met by your fellow man with a perception of nothing but blood lust and carnage towards helpless critters. Queue the pitchforks and rotten vegetable throwing. Frankly – it pisses me off; which is why I dedicate myself to write, educate and promote trapping.

Hunters and Trappers – the "OG's" of Conservation

In the 20th century, hunters and trappers introduced the idea of conservation. A form of wildlife funding which opened the door for concepts like the Pittman-Robertson Act, and the Teddy Roosevelt era of conservation awareness – the same conservation awareness we know of today. The people behind these ideas recognized hunting and trapping – for food and fur – as an integral part of properly maintaining our natural resources and the conservation efforts for our wildlife and wild places. We knew these places and their inhabitants deserved protection from man’s modernization and progression.

How sadly entertaining it is to see man’s “progression” being used today instead to kill off these very ideas; replacing conservation with a “hands-off” approach and vilifying the hunter and fur trapper as a “cowardice trophy hunter” rather than the obvious ally to said conservation ideas.

Ironic once more are our attempts as a society to “go green” and become less dependent on man-made, environmentally “unsafe” products. Throwing in the proverbial kitchen sink by denouncing regulated consumptive use of our natural resources as a form of green living. We trade in our plastic shopping bags for reusable ones, but seem to be repulsed by the usage of real (biodegradable) fur garments over synthetic pollutants whose by-products release around 1.7 grams of “microfibers” into our streams and rivers each washing cycle.

Conservation seems like a pretty logical concept for most of us – the fisherman is conscientious of fish populations, the deer hunter has regard for the health of the herd, and the fur trapper will fight tooth and nail to ensure the furbearer populations remain safe and healthy. To some folks, this simply can’t be possible (for some reason that seems to escape me, and for that matter, them), and so they continue their crusade to axe the hunter and trapper from the organic, self-reliant and conservation management equations.

Guilt by Association?

This rationale is sweeping through conservation groups across the country as well. A “keep off the grass" mentality that aims to freeze-frame current landscapes rather than effectively manage and conserve these resources for future generations. Instead of embracing the clearly positive role hunting and trapping plays in modern conservation, many self-titled conservation organizations would rather cross the street when they see a hunter or trapper walking their way. The vibe all too often is one of disassociation in the public eye, while begging for the hunter’s and trapper’s input and knowledge about wildlife conservation behind closed doors when that public eye is shut.

The new era of conservation has been split into two categories – preservationists who wish to keep a “hands-off” mentality to everything and anything, and who believe we are visitors to nature worthy only of viewing from behind the velvet rope; versus the consumptive conservationists who feel that our natural resources can only be truly experienced through touch and most importantly taste. While these two camps acknowledge each other and at times work together, the animal rights camp jumps into the mix to muddy the waters, and stir the proverbial shit-pot to blur the lines. It's truly an absolute mess.

Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is

An example of what I’m trying to say lies right here in the “Live Free or Die” state of New Hampshire. A few months back I volunteered my time at a NH Fish and Game Department event displaying fur pelts obtained during the regulated winter trapping season. Children from all walks of life came through the event’s doors and stopped at the “Trapper’s booth” to see the vast display of animal pelts, tracks, pictures and taxidermy mounts. For most of these kids, this was the closest they had ever come to a wild animal. Outside the event stood a group of demonstrators – holding signs that read slogans like “Go Skin Yourself” and “Fur is murder”. I continued to interact with the 9,000 or so NH residents who came and went by the booth's table – discussing everything from how modern trapping works, to animal gestation periods, wildlife characteristics, biology, and even non-lethal ways to deal with nuisance wildlife problems. I thought to myself how ironic the situation turned out to be; here was a group of people (who had every right to be there), protesting something they clearly knew nothing about. Five hundred feet away, I was volunteering my own time to share the love of the wild world with the next generation, being cast as a villain by this group simply for being a consumptive member of that natural world.

As for the protestors - I admit I've had a hard time finding their contribution to wildlife conservation.

Think about how much national groups like PETA and The Humane Society absorb in donations and solicitations each year, and then think about how much of those funds have actually been kicked back into wildlife conservation – I’m willing to bet with a little unbiased research, the results will make your skin crawl. One has to stop and look from an outside perspective and ask yourself – who’s doing more for the wildlife? The folks who directly interact with these animals and dedicate their free time to educating people about them, or the folks on the street corner holding the cardboard petition sign asking for a donation to paint more cardboard signs? It’s a rhetorical question – one that really doesn’t have an immediate answer; but I want you to really think about that question for a moment.

You Can't Please Everyone

I often try to rationalize the thought process of people who come right out and attack my justifications for trapping. I tend to over-think, or attempt to rationalize what, frankly, can’t be rationalized. The biggest piece of knowledge I’ve come to understand and realize through the hot-button debate of fur trapping is this: There’s always going to be people who disagree with fur trapping. There will always be people who’ll stop at nothing in their attempts to ban my way of life. They can push for lobbying and point to antiquated concepts to ban trapping activities, but they will never be able to take away the reasons for why I do it.

The solid truth is that hunters and trappers have a vested interest in wildlife and habitat conservation. We depend on healthy wildlife populations and strong habitat to continue doing what we do. These activities elicit a diehard passion for sustainability, and compose a hands-on approach to conserving our natural resources. I am in no way suggesting consumptive practices like hunting and trapping hold all the answers for wildlife conservation, but they’re damn sure better than a cardboard sign.

FOLLOW JEFF TRAYNOR'S "LIVE FREE AND TRAP" ON:

FROM OUR WEBSITE: FUR PRODUCTION: TRAPPING

July means Paris Fashion Week, and our friends at FurInsider.com did us all proud with six installments of commentary and glamorous pics of haute couture. Fur was plentiful, and hardly seems to raise an eyebrow these days – which is a good thing! Enjoy also Vogue's coverage of Fendi's haute fourrure show. Also abuzz with fur were the catwalks at FashionClash in the Netherlands.

And fur fashion has received some boosts from less-expected sources. Selfies of people in real fur are booming on Instagram, and UFC brawler Conor McGregor is a big fan of mink. Let's hope he wears this outfit when he battles boxer Floyd Mayweather Jr. on Aug. 26!

Still on fashion, we published a blog post on the fur policy at Net-A-Porter. This on-line fashion retailer sells a lot of animal products (leather, suede, shearling, etc.), but – hypocritically, we say – not fur. PETA put the word out like it's a major shift in policy, but it's not. It hasn't sold fur for years.

On the down side, former "supermodel" Gisele Bündchen has chosen to endorse petrochemical fur over the real deal. "All great designers now do beautiful #fakefur," she wrote on Instagram, even though it's patently untrue.

Trapping Know-How

It's the quiet season for trappers, so it's good there's been no shortage of reading material. A must-read for Canadian trappers is the latest list of certified traps from the Fur Institute of Canada.

The Live Free & Trap blog, out of New Hampshire, produced a magnum opus, "Rise of the dumpster cats", on the state's growing bobcat population and the conflict it's creating. And talking of bobcats, a controversial new report says management doesn't take sufficient account of bobcats' value to ecotourism. A dissenting biologist says: “Just because somebody traps a bobcat doesn’t mean that the particular bobcat was a bobcat that was going to be viewed by a tourist ...”

Bears are in the news too, with animal rights groups all in a flap over the delisting of grizzly bears in Yellowstone. On July 31, Montana, Wyoming and Idaho assumed primary responsibility for their grizzlies from the US Fish and Wildlife Service.

The Duluth News Tribune told us how researchers use foothold traps to monitor wolves (see above), and Trapping Today explained why the prices of furbearers vary not only by size and species, but also where they were trapped.

History buffs should eagerly anticipate the story of Hugh Kroetsch, employee of Hudson's Bay Company back in the 1950s, in an upcoming documentary called Last of the Fur Traders. And if you really want to get down and dirty, you might want to go rendezvous camping. Here's how to get started.

In local news: dog walkers in Erie, Pennsylvania have learned why it's not a great idea to feed coyotes; in Alberta, coyotes have been found with a tapeworm that is deadly to humans if untreated; and marten may be making a come-back in Cape Breton, Nova Scotia.

Fur Farming News

Fans of facts will want to check out the latest annual report on mink farming from the US Department of Agriculture.

We hope you will also learn from our blog post "Versatile mink oil: An under-appreciated resource". As chance would have it, there was also an excellent piece on how a mink farmer in Iceland uses his oil. Mink oil cosmetics were once all the rage. Is it time for a comeback?

In decidedly bad news, animal rights terrorists are presumed to be behind the release of 30,000+ mink from a farm in Minnesota. Thousands of the animals "freed" in this misguided act died shortly after. The reward for information leading to arrests now stands at $11,000.

Bits 'n' Bobs

We're always saying there's no contradiction in being an animal lover and a fur lover, and Aussie "socialite" Shane Pavlinovich certainly agrees! The "eccentric jewellery designer" loves vintage and ethically sourced fur hats, coats and scarves, teamed with "extravagant pearl necklaces".

And let's wrap up with a story that seems like a bit of fun but is actually not funny at all. Wildlife photographer Dave Slater is in a legal battle over some selfie pics taken with his camera by some macaque monkeys. We'd share one of the amazing pics, but it's all about copyright. Of course, PETA's involved!

Mink oil is a by-product of fur farming with a curious history that is hugely under-appreciated today. Once touted as a magical tonic for skin and hair, it’s now mostly used for less exotic purposes like leather conditioner and bio-fuel. But if you know where to buy, you can still give your complexion the treat it deserves.

Mink oil comes from the fat on a mink's abdomen. Most of the fat remains attached to the skin during pelting, and is removed during the "fleshing" process as it can "burn" the fur if not thoroughly scraped off before the pelts are stretched and dried. Each mink yields 200-300 grams (7 to 10.5 ounces) of fat. Just handling this fat tells you it's special as it melts into a pale-yellow oil that softens and soothes your hands. It's even more appealing when it's been purified and deodorised.

Native Americans would have been the first to notice how soft mink fat made their hands, but our story begins in the 1950s. After World War II, mink fur emerged as a fashion favourite, eclipsing the pre-war favourite, fox. Mink farming took off and a steady supply of mink oil was available for the first time. But who would buy it?

An obvious market was soon identified, leather conditioner, and that’s still a major use today. But the marketers had something more exciting in mind: cosmetics. Mink fur already had the luxe image, yearned for by any woman who could afford it or persuade her man to buy it. So the marketers pinned the luxe label on mink oil too, and a new range of beauty products was born.

Mink Oil Beauty Products

This was in keeping with the times. In Europe, the centre then and now of the cosmetics industry, companies were paying chemists to try anything that might unlock the secret to youth, including animal fats and a range of questionable animal extracts – hormones, embryos, placentas. So it really wasn’t surprising when, in 1949, a Paris-based company called Stendhal launched “L’huile de Vison” (The Oil of Mink).

The market was cool at first. Department store R.H. Macy introduced a mink oil cream in 1951 but found it a tough sell, and wondered if women might fear growing fur on their faces!

But things took off in the early 1960s with Stendhal’s "La Ligne Vison" (The Mink Line), featuring mink oil in pure form and in sunscreen, eye shadow, skin cream and soap. Competitors followed suit, adding mink oil to lipstick, cleanser, moisturizer and hair products.

A range of benefits, summarised here by Pureminkoil.com, were claimed:

• Mink oil supplemented human sebum (our natural skin lubricant and waterproofing) very well because its composition is so similar. Our skin absorbs it quickly and deeply because it passes through the pores rather than the epidermis. Our skin is moisturized and nourished, and left velvety to the touch, never sticky or oily. Hard spots are softened, and wrinkles are prevented.
• Mink oil was not associated with any allergies so it was perfect for hypoallergenic cosmetics.
• Mink oil formed a barrier that slowed the loss of both water and sebum from the skin. This meant your skin remained moist for longer after applying makeup.
• Conditioners and sprays containing mink oil increased hair body, suppleness and sheen, and improved the texture of damaged hair.
• Pure mink oil was so stable it could be used for two years after opening a bottle. Cosmetics containing it also stayed fresh longer.
• The mink was the "only animal in the world exempt from suffering any kind of skin diseases," and this "outstanding ability to heal on its own and their luxurious fur is distinctively related to its nourishing substance stored in its subcutaneous (under the skin) fatty layer of their skin."

We're not sure about that last one, but if mink oil cosmetics are so great, why are they hard to find these days? Maybe modern, high-end cosmetics work just as well and are cheaper to make or have a longer shelf life. Maybe also it’s because mink fur lost some of its near-mystical celebrity status in the 1990s, so mink oil’s greatest marketing strength faded too. And perhaps also it's because consumers, while still valuing natural ingredients in their cosmetics, now often prefer plant extracts to animal sources.

Whatever the case, most mink fat today has a less exotic destiny.

RECOMMENDED READ: Mink oil by Cosmeticsandskin.com

Still Prized

As any livestock farmer knows, efficiency is the key to profits, so it is important to use as much of the animal as possible. While it's rare for farmers to be paid for mink fat or oil today, they appreciate that the value of this resource lowers the cost of handling mink carcasses. The mink carcasses are usually composted into fertiliser – either on-farm or in separate facilities – or used to make bio-fuel. Mink oil is also used for bio-fuel, either alone or mixed with other animal fats. (The fat may be composted too, but it slows the process down.)

In regions where mink farms are clustered, the steady supply of fat is especially prized. Bio-fuel producers know that its protein level is higher than other animal fats, and that means more energy per unit. A good supply also makes refined and purified mink oil a viable business for use in cosmetics, leather conditioning and other purposes.

And that’s why North America’s biggest mink oil producer is based in Nova Scotia, the heartland of Canadian mink farming. Spec Environmental Solutions, which also composts mink carcasses, renders the fat at 70°C, producing some 500,000 lbs of mink oil last year.

Spec refines some of its mink oil for specialty markets but sells most in raw form to companies that further refine it for sale to end users. Most ends up with tanneries to make leather pliable and waterproof, but consumers also buy it to condition leather saddles and baseball mitts, to waterproof boots, and other uses. These are niche markets, but they can only grow with the growth of on-line shopping.

SEE ALSO: Why American mink is the world's favourite fur

Strict EU Regulations

In Europe, another centre of mink farming, the story is a little different. Strict EU regulations governing the disposal of carcasses mean that almost all mink carcasses, along with the fat, are turned into bio-fuel. Composting is rare. There are a few producers of mink oil, though not on the scale one might expect given Europe's position as the centre of the world's cosmetics industry and its biggest market. In the Netherlands, we're told, there are a handful of producers, and there's at least one each in Belgium and Iceland.

In Iceland, the Einarsson family farms horses, sheep and, for the past 34 years, mink. But it's always been a problem knowing what to do with the mink carcasses, since there's no local composting or bio-fuel production.

Making pet food is an option they're considering, but their breakthrough has been production of mink oil conditioner for leather shoes and saddles, and a range of lotions and creams, under the brand name Gandur.

Gandur had an unusual start in life, resulting in two product lines, one for humans and one for animals. "It all started when my mother decided to try to make a lotion for our horses, for when they develop sores around the hooves," explains Einar Eðvald Einarsson to the Iceland Monitor. "My brother is a vet and through him we tested it on more horses. One thing led to another and we started selling it."

Then humans started using horse hoof lotion for their own "various skin conditions" and a new product line for humans was born. Today, Gandur mink-oil products for humans are sold in pharmacies in Iceland, Sweden and Denmark.

"This is not a question of a great profit," Einarsson tells Truth About Fur. "This is a question of finding a use for a material that would otherwise be thrown away here in Iceland. We firmly believe this is of benefit for our environment."

So how does he feel about the merits of mink oil? Mink fat is high in omega fatty acids, he says, and more like the fat of a fish than that of a land animal. “The fat of the mink is much like our own fat, different from most other animal fats. The chains of fatty acids are very long and that’s why they are able to penetrate the skin so well. “

And there speaks a man who knows. Don't you owe it to your skin to find out for yourself? In the case of mink, it seems, beauty is indeed more than skin deep!

***

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

A few weeks ago, online retailer group Yoox Net-A-Porter made headlines for all the wrong reasons. The group’s websites – including Net-A-Porter (a leading luxury retail platform) – announced that they would not include fur in their offerings. Here are three things you need to know about the Yoox Net-A-Porter fur policy.

1. This Is Not News

The Net-A-Porter fur policy has been in effect for years, and its sister websites, Mr Porter and The Outnet, have also not sold fur for years. Net-A-Porter also doesn't want its staff wearing fur at work-related events, though we couldn’t help but notice that its editor-in-chief, Lucy Yeomans, was praising her fur-trimmed Canada Goose jacket on Instagram not long ago. So while its poorly-informed fur policy is certainly disappointing, it is not news.

2. It's Hypocritical

These websites do a huge business in accessories, notably bags and shoes. And guess what most bags and shoes are made of? Whether it’s leather, suede, lizard, snakeskin, or calfskin, these websites have no shortage of animal products.

While this isn't the first “fur-free” company to sell animal products, it’s still misinformed and hypocritical. There’s no rational reason why anyone would stop selling fur and continue to sell leather, suede, shearling, and other animal skins ... and silk, made from larvae that have been boiled alive.

If your company mandate has to do with animal welfare, then it would make sense to limit your offering to materials produced with high animal-welfare standards – and there would be plenty of fur that could meet that criterion. But the Net-A-Porter fur policy in its current form is completely misinformed and utterly hypocritical.

3. The Reasoning Is Nonsensical

Just like each of us has a right to wear or not wear fur, stores have the right to sell or not to sell it. They aren't even obliged to give a reason for such decisions. But if they do decide to explain, would it be too much to ask them to give a logical reason?

Yoox Net-A-Porter's official statement said that they "remain more focused than ever on our commitment to create a sustainable future." But avoiding a natural, renewable material that is produced responsibly and sustainably cannot logically be part of a sustainability initiative. The use of the word "sustainability" to explain this policy is absolutely absurd. The very definition of sustainability is "avoidance of the depletion of natural resources in order to maintain an ecological balance," which would mean that materials from renewable resources, such as fur, leather, and suede, could and should be central to such a policy.

Meanwhile, Net-A-Porter continues to sell fake fur, polyester, and other synthetic materials, all of which are petroleum-based and neither renewable nor sustainable at all.

SEE ALSO: THE GREAT FUR BURIAL: HOW FUR BIODEGRADES AFTER ONE YEAR

We respect any retailer's freedom of choice and we have seen hypocrisy and misinformation about fur before. But we do expect a large and respected organization such as Yoox Net-A-Porter to base its business decisions on accurate information and responsible choices.

Canada is celebrating its 150th anniversary of Confederation this year, and with it comes a lot of stories about Canadian fur history. If you want to learn about how the country was founded on the fur trade, then check out our piece entitled The Country that Fur Built: Canada’s Fur Trade History (pictured above). Life on the Line is an excellent interactive piece about whether trapping is outdated or a part of living heritage. (We all know it's the latter.) Other articles about Canadian fur history include this story about a man who ran a Hudson's Bay store in the remote North and a profile on a fur trader from the 1800's. Some people are going beyond the typical Canada Day celebrations, like this guy, who is paddling from Banff to Montreal to reconnect with his Metis ancestry.

While we are all celebrating this industry's heritage and Canadian fur history, there are some who are still trying to stop us, and everyone who uses animals as clothing or food. Yes, the animal rights activists are at it as usual, and now they are protesting fashion designer presentations, holding vigils for chickens, marching for an end to slaughterhouses (never gonna happen), vandalising statues, and disrupting army medic training. (Honestly, who doesn't want our armed forces to have the best possible medics on the ground? Jerks, that's who.)

Thankfully the media are not fooled by their actions. This piece explores how PETA uses deception (pictured above) and fake animal abuse videos to further its cause, and this article exposes how to tell if you are being manipulated by animal activists. This op-ed explains how the forces that shut down Ringling Bros. want to end a lot more than animal abuse, and this one looks at how the very farming developments that vegans oppose are what allowed them to be here today. A very worrying piece about how the SPCA spends more on lawyers than animals is sadly a common theme with animal rights or protection groups – many of them spend very little of their donations on the causes they are supposed to be fighting. But it isn't all bad news – Domino's Pizza has taken a stand against the activists by saying it will never cave to extremists and it trusts farmers to know what is best.

The thought of pizza makes us hungry, but how about pasta instead? One of our favourite Canadian chefs, Eric Pateman, has been cooking up a delicious seal Bolognese, and the Globe and Mail did a Q&A with Dion Dakins, who talks about whether seals are too cute to eat. Sealing is about more than sealers, of course, which is why we wrote about the other people involved in this trade. Since we are on the topic of wild meat, there's good news in Oregon where it has now been made legal to harvest roadkill.

Let's end with a few tips for summer

Need some new sandals? These fur ones by Zizi Donohoe (pictured above) were made for 7-Eleven.

Want to keep your pets safe? Keep them away from beavers.

Better watch out for bobcats, too, since their populations are rebounding after a decades-long hunting ban.

Need a coffee date this afternoon? If you are in San Francisco you might be able to have coffee with a rat. (Seriously.)

Want to keep the kids busy with a science experiment this summer? Try and replicate our fur burial experiment. It will teach them about biodegradation and the benefits of real fur!

Need a caddie for your golf game this summer? This furry guy has got you covered.

As Canadians prepare to celebrate the 150th anniversary of Confederation (July 1, 1867), and also the 375th anniversary of the founding of Montreal (May 17, 1642), this is a fine time to recall the unique role played by this country’s fur trade history.

In fact, fur trading had been practiced for hundreds – probably thousands – of years before Europeans arrived on these shores. Montagnais hunters from what is now northern Quebec, for example, were already trading fur pelts for corn, squash and other foods produced by Iroquoian farmers in the St-Lawrence valley when Jacques Cartier first visited the island of Montreal in 1535.

Fur trading with Europeans probably began when French fishermen crossed the Atlantic to exploit the extraordinary stocks of large codfish off the coast of Newfoundland and in the Gulf of St-Lawrence. When Cartier landed on the coast of northern New Brunswick, in 1534, he met Indians who clearly had experience with Europeans – they held up fur pelts on sticks, eager to trade.

It wasn’t until Samuel de Champlain built his habitation, in 1608 – to found what would become Quebec City, nucleus of New France – that the North American fur trade began in earnest. In the two hundred years that followed, furs provided the incentive to explore the vast interior of the continent ... and for a long series of wars and skirmishes to control it.

In 1627, Cardinal Richelieu granted a monopoly on fur trading to The Company of 100 Associates. Monopolies were sought to justify the risks involved in purchasing and transporting trade goods from Europe, and (hopefully) returning with furs more than a year or two later. But monopolies could also thwart innovation, with serious repercussions.

Radisson & the Hudson's Bay Company

One of the most dramatic examples is the story of Pierre-Esprit Radisson. At 15 years old, Radisson was captured by Mohawks and lived in their village on Lake Champlain long enough to learn their language and woodcraft – skills that served him well when he was able to escape and return to Trois-Rivières. In 1654, with his brother-in-law, Médard Chouart des Groseilliers, he explored far to the west, into the James Bay region, returning with a rich cargo of furs, and the bold idea that vast new fur supplies might be more easily secured by bringing ships directly into the interior of the continent through Hudson’s Bay.

New routes, however, threatened the politically well-connected merchants who controlled the French fur trade. Radisson and Des Groseilliers were briefly imprisoned and their furs confiscated. When their efforts to plead their case at Court, in Paris, failed, Radisson and Des Groseilliers eventually found their way to the English Court of Charles II. There, with support from the dynamic Prince Rupert, a cousin of the King, a group of influential investors was convened and The Company of Adventurers into Hudson’s Bay was born.

Under the Royal Charter granted on May 2, 1670, Prince Rupert and his partners became “true lords and proprietors” of all the lands drained by Hudson’s Bay, about 1.5 million square miles – one of the largest real estate deals in history. This immense territory, which came to be called “Rupert's Land”, included about 40% of today's Canada and significant parts of Minnesota and North Dakota. (While no longer directly involved in fur trading, the Hudson’s Bay Company is the oldest, continuously-operating, joint-stock company in the world. The 1670 Royal Charter is now on display at the corporate headquarters, in Toronto.)

The next 90 years were marked by intense competition between French, English and American fur traders. LaSalle and other French adventurers had established a string of trading posts and forts down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico, controlling “Louisiana” (named in honour of Louis XIV) and hemming in the fast-growing New England colonies. By 1739, furs represented 70% of the exports from New France. But danger threatened, as the American colonies challenged French control of the Mississippi and points west, while the Hudson’s Bay Company intercepted fur supplies that had passed through Indian trade networks to Montreal and Quebec.

The North West & American Fur Companies

The conflict came to a head with the British conquest of New France, in 1760, but this did not diminish the ferocious competitiveness of the lucrative fur trade. English, French and, especially, Scottish entrepreneurs set up the North West Company (1779), in Montreal, and pushed deeper into the continent through the St-Lawrence River and the Great Lakes, challenging the (London-based) Hudson Bay Company’s monopoly. Competition also intensified south of the St-Lawrence, with the founding of John Jacob Astor’s American Fur Company (1808). In search of new fur supplies, Astor pushed westward; his Columbia River trading post at Fort Astoria (1811) was the first United States community on the Pacific coast.

The current western border between the USA and Canada reflects, to a great extent, the fur territories once controlled by the American Fur Company and the Hudson’s Bay Company. (The HBC was merged with the NWC in 1821.) In fact, it is not at all sure that the young Dominion of Canada – formed in 1867 with the confederation of the provinces of “Canada” (Ontario and Quebec), Nova Scotia and New Brunswick – would ever have expanded to include British Columbia and the Pacific Coast, had not the Hudson’s Bay Company pleaded the importance of maintaining the lucrative Vancouver Island fur trade under Canadian control.

Many North American towns and cities began as fur-trading posts, but probably none was more influenced by the fur trade than Montreal. Montreal became the continent’s most important fur-trading entrepôt because Champlain recognized its strategic position at the intersection of the St-Lawrence and Hudson (via Lake Champlain) river systems, and because the rapids at the west end of the island (Lachine) prevented European ships from venturing further upstream. The Fur Trade Museum, in Lachine, housed in a stone fur warehouse built in 1803 by North West Company stockholder Alexander Gordon, is an excellent place to learn about Montreal’s fur-trade history.

"Beaver Club" Dinners in Montreal

Traces of fur trade history are everywhere in Montreal. One of the city’s oldest remaining buildings housed the convent of the Grey Nuns, who supported their missionary work with fur trading. Beaver Hall Hill, in the downtown core, was the site of “Beaver Hall”, the home of Joseph Frobisher, one of the North West Company’s leading partners, and the host of many of the company’s raucous “Beaver Club” dinners. Perhaps most significantly, the internationally respected McGill University was founded with a £10,000 grant from James McGill, a leading fur trader and founding partner of the North West Company. The university’s main Sherbrooke Street campus stands on the site of McGill’s “Burnside Farm”, which he bequeathed for this purpose.

Montreal’s fur trade remained important into the modern era: the Hudson’s Bay Company’s warehouse and auction sales were located on Dorchester Street (now called “Rene Levesque”), until they were relocated to Toronto after the election of the (separatist) Parti Quebecois government in the late 1970s. And Montreal became one of North America’s most important fur-manufacturing centres (like New York and Toronto), with the arrival in the first decades of the 20th century of hundreds of skilled (mostly Jewish) fur craftspeople – including my own grandfather, who arrived here in 1913.

After the Second World War, the North American fur-manufacturing sector was further strengthened by immigration from Kastoria and other villages of northern Greece where fur-working had been a way of life for centuries. Montreal was also the gathering place for thousands of North American and international fur designers, manufacturers and retailers who attended the association-run Montreal NAFFEM for thirty years, until 2013.

Canada's fur trade history reflects the country's cultural mosaic at its best: First Nations, French, English, Scots, Jews, Greeks and many others have worked together for hundreds of years to build this remarkable industry – a dynamic tradition of competition and cooperation that is well worth remembering as we celebrate these important anniversaries in the history of Montreal and Canada.

The fur industry is proud of the many ways in which fur is eco-friendly, including that after decades of use, fur biodegrades. In contrast, when fake fur made from petrochemicals reaches the end of its typically very short life, it goes to sit in a landfill until the end of time. Or does it? In pursuit of the truth, we decided to do a little experiment: the Great Fur Burial.

On May 14, 2016, we took a mink stole and a fake fur vest, cut them into equal-sized pieces, and buried them. Above is how the pieces looked on burial day. The plan was that after three months, six months, and then once a year for five years, we would unearth one piece each of the mink and fake fur to compare degradation rates. This experiment is hardly scientific, but it only has to show one thing: do they rot, or not?

One Year Later ...

Last week we unearthed one of each fur sample, now one year old. Here is the burial site prior to exhumation.

From our last dig, we had a good idea what to expect. The synthetic fur was easy to find, whereas the real fur, once located, called for delicate work with a wooden spoon and fingers to ensure it didn't turn to dust.

Here are the two samples once they were dug up, fake on the left and real on the right. The fake fur appears to be in good condition, while the real fur is seriously degraded, to say the least!

We gently shook off the dust and dirt from the samples, so we could get a better look.

A closeup of the front of the fake fur shows that the "hair" is still in very good condition, aside from the fact that there are roots growing through it. With a bit of shampoo, it might almost be ready to wear!

A closeup of the backing of the fake fur also shows it to be in good shape.

In contrast to the fake fur, the real fur is degraded to the point of being unrecognisable, and only has any integrity at all because of some binding and thread. When you look at the sample close up you can see a few hairs of fur left and some remnants of the leather, but the bulk of the sample consists of thread (cotton), the binding (either silk or synthetic) and roots. This is a very strong indicator that real fur biodegrades much faster than fake.

Summary

Equal-sized pieces of real and fake fur were buried side by side to test the common claim that real fur biodegrades while fake fur does not. After one year, the real fur is in an advanced state of degradation, with the hairs reduced to a few fine wisps, and a few shreds of leather held together by thread and backing. The fake fur, however, shows very little evidence of degradation, biological or otherwise. In fact, it is nearly intact.

As far as the real fur is concerned, we consider this experiment to be conclusive already, and a year from now, when next we exhume our samples, we fully expect to need a magnifying glass and tweezers to find any. But as far as the fake fur goes, the experiment has only just begun. Will it degrade at all, and if so, will it take five years, or until the end of time?

Read the first three installments of this experiment:

The Great Fur Burial, Part 1: Burial
The Great Fur Burial, Part 2: After Three Months
The Great Fur Burial, Part 3: After Six Months

SEE ALSO: New study compares natural and fake fur biodegradability. Conducted by Organic Waste Systems, Ghent, Belgium; commissioned by the International Fur Federation and Fur Europe, 2018.

Undercover videos from animal rights groups came under attack last month for being dishonest and unfair. This is definitely not news to any of us, but it is nice to see the media paying attention. This article questions why the undercover videos showing "poor" treatment of a dog on the movie set of A Dog's Purpose were not released until a year later, to coincide with the movie's release. Suspicious at best. This piece explored the concept that the activists are not interested in the truth about what goes on at farms, because they only release highly edited videos, which are not representative of the truth.

In other activist news, a woman in a dinosaur suit turned herself in for scaring the horses pulling carriages in New York. We still don't understand how scaring and harassing animals can be part of a campaign to protect them. Vice published an article exposing an FBI investigation into animal rights groups, and this piece looks at how veganism comes at a price. If you care about protecting the fur trade against animal rights activists, read our definitive guide on how you can take action to support the people of the fur industry.

Sealing Season Here Again

May was a month for hunting seals, and this is a great piece on why support for sealing needs to be renewed (pictured above). Meanwhile The Guardian published a piece on the why sealing is misunderstood, and this op ed gives us reasons why we need to save our sealers.

There were some great features on trapping last month of which these are our top three picks. Vice published a story of a woman who left the city to trap on her family's trap line. And there were two "a day in the life" pieces, one about tagging along with a beaver trapper and another following a Labrador trapper.

Are you sad about putting your furs away for the summer? Vogue gave us some great tips on wearing fur for Spring (pictured). If you are shopping for new furs, then this shopping guide provides a great list of tips. Bad news if you were looking for a very particular, special vintage piece. The fur coat that was worn on the Titanic and then on a lifeboat already sold at auction, for a cool $80,000.

Let's end with a few good tips:

Buy Domino's pizza and thank them for supporting the farmers

Don't buy Lush cosmetics as they are apparently kicking farmers out of their store.

We suggest you stay away from sea lions, or risk being pulled into the water like this girl.

When you are shopping for your next Bentley, make sure it isn't one with mushroom leather seats (pictured). We think buying a car with vegan leather is a really fungi bad idea.

The sealing industry, like most industries, employs many more people than simply the primary producers. The same can be said for the fur industry in all its aspects. The hunting and trapping industries are no different, nor are the industries that raise cattle, pigs, lamb, sheep or any other animal utilized by humans for food or other products. The saying "no man is an island" applies also to industries.

While sealers are the primary producers in the sealing industry, by no means are they the only economic participants. Economists measuring the value of an industry take into consideration all those whose economic activities are dependent on, and contribute to, the work of the primary producers. This is usually referred to as “spin-off economic benefits”. It makes up the total value of an industry.

The same kind of economic analysis applies to all the industries mentioned above. A cattle ranch, for example, does not operate in a vacuum. It is dependent on many others, and in turn provides income for those who interact with it ranging from the ranch hands to the grocery stores to the furniture or clothing stores who sell the various products a cattle ranch provides. In fact there is a complete chain of people whose contributions and earnings make it possible for any primary producer to survive. Hunting, trapping, fur farming and so on – it is all the same. It is people earning a living.

Harp seals off the Canadian east coast number about 7.5 million animals and are not now nor have ever been placed on any reputable list of endangered or even threatened species. The same applies to other seal species hunted by Canadians.

There are many thousand, mostly rural, Canadians (Americans, British and Europeans) who are dependent on sealers, hunters, trappers, ranchers and others mentioned for parts of their income. Rural people rarely have “salaries” so their income is dependent on bits and pieces of work much of which comes from primary producers who raise animals for slaughter or kill them personally. The work of these people enables the primary producers to operate their enterprises and provide the others in the chain with an essential part of their livelihood. It is a circle of interdependence.

Parts of the income of these people are threatened by attacks on the sealing industry which is the primary target of the animal rights corporations. But sealing is not the only target. Sealing is merely the main target – a prime fundraising source for these multi-million-dollar American-headquartered corporations. Their goal is the elimination of human use of all animals for any purpose. Attacks on sealing are the driving fundraiser to facilitate attacks on the fur industry, hunters, trappers, ranchers and farmers who raise animals for food and other products. The end result, if these animal rights corporations are successful, will be the elimination of work for all people in all these industries.

Who are these people whose work enables the primary producer to operate successfully?

Sealing Industry: A Cross Section of Society

In the sealing industry they are the people who sell fuel, groceries, insurance (both personal and vessel), rifles and ammunition – sealers shoot about 99% of the seals they kill – and tools of the trade to sealers who go to sea under adverse conditions. Not to mention shipyard workers who repair damaged sealing vessels. For other primary animal-based industries, the people involved may do the same and other things, but the principle is the same.

They are truckers who transport seals from landing ports to the plants and buy gas and food in the process. Furs, cattle, pigs, lamb, sheep and other animals also have be transported from one place to another by truckers.

They are the plant workers who process the seal pelts (hides) and the plant owners who sell the resulting skins and oil – oil which other plant workers in other places turn into omega3 capsules. The other industries discussed also need primary plant workers and a complete chain of people supplying the trades needed to make their products available to the market.

They are the people who create things. They are clothing manufacturers who produce coats, boots, shoes, hats, gloves, slippers, purses, ties, wraps, etc. They are makers of sofas, chairs, saddles, automobile seat and steering wheel coverings, and so on and so on. All this from the pelts they buy and transform into products for sale to the general public. Seals or cows or pigs or lambs or sheep, the same process applies.

They are food processors, food trucks, grocery stores, caterers and restaurants who sell seal meat they have purchased from sealers or plants; or other meats obtained from other animals bought from other sources.

They are artists and artisans who create products from seal pelts and a wide variety of other animal hides and sell them through galleries, wholesalers, retailers, or directly to customers.

In short, they are a cross section of society. They are men and women with a common dependence on the activities of the sealers and all animal-based primary producers for portions of their annual income.

They are men and women working to provide food and necessities for their families.

Inuit Reject EU "Exemption"

Anti-sealing propaganda, anti-fur propaganda, is an insidious thing and unless countered by a critical press and politicians asking hard questions, it will continue as long as it is profitable. Animal rights corporations have hundreds of millions of dollars so it is little wonder they have politicians to do their bidding. It is little wonder that media, starved for copy, are in their pockets as nothing sells like "cute" animal stories.

It is time for politicians and media to remember the immortal line of Pogo: I have met the enemy and he is us.

Anti-sealing, anti-fur, anti-animal-usage corporations constantly make pious, politically correct statements that they are not against sealing or other forms of hunting by indigenous peoples. However, Inuit organisations – including the Inuit Circumpolar Conference – have rejected the EU “exemption” on their seal products as being economically meaningless, paternalistic, and colonialistic.

The recent World Trade Organisation (WTO) enquiry found that the EU “seal ban” was illegal, but to protect the so-called “morals” of EU citizens, the ban would stand. An interesting decision given that many countries within the EU legally kill seals as do Americans and Russians. They both also ban Canadian seal products. Of course they all also kill all the other species Canadians kill. Hypocrisy reigns supreme.

SEE ALSO: EU SEALING POLICY IS HYPOCRITICAL, ANTI-DEMOCRATIC

When the WTO uses questionable “moral standards” based on propaganda as a basis for upholding individual state bans they have declared to be illegal, all importers and exporters of all products based on animal killing should be worried. Today's bans are on seal products, but tomorrow's will be on what? Products derived from cows, pigs, lamb, muskrat, mink, wolverine, beaver, etc.? Sealers are today's victims. Tomorrow's could be you.

Canadian sealers, Canadian furriers, Canadians in all animal-killing industries simply want all citizens of all countries to have their democratic right to choose for themselves to use, or not to use, animal-based products, and not have that right denied by bought politicians.

History proves that when propaganda triumphs, democracy loses.

Attacking the sealing industry or any of the other animal-based primary producers is attacking all of the people involved in the chain.

When scientifically established quotas ensure the stability or growth of a species' population; when laws, licensing and training ensure humane killing; when there is no question of a population being either endangered or threatened; when markets are viable and ensure an income to the workers; the only possible objection can be an "animal rights belief" – a belief held by less the two percent of Western society. Sadly, animal rights advocates and their celebrity friends “own” both the media and international politicians, and the result is a huge threat to the livelihoods of many thousands of Canadians, Americans and other rural peoples.

Unless you take George Orwell’s Animal Farm literally, no species is more equal than the others. There is no “Aryan” species. No industry is an island. It is more like a continent.

The sealing industry is a continent populated by citizens victimized by propaganda and political correctness as expressed by the one per-center celebrities in the thrall of the animal rights corporations.

What are you doing to protect fur and the industry? The fur trade has faced many difficult challenges over the past few years. These include fast-changing lifestyles, new and cheaper (and usually synthetic) clothing materials, vertically-integrated companies, multi-national fashion-marketing giants ... and, of course, sensationalist animal-rights campaigns that spread disparaging and false information about our industry.

The fur trade has done a remarkable job of dealing with these challenges, especially considering its small-scale, decentralized and largely artisanal character. The increased use of fur in small pieces (vests, jackets), trim (on parkas) and accessories (hats, scarves, handbags) has made fur more accessible to more, and younger, people than ever before. We see more fur now on the catwalks and in the streets than we have for decades.

Nonetheless, we know we still have lots of work to do. Animal activists continue to spread misinformation that can confuse consumers. Their latest strategy is to pressure fashion and outerwear retailers to drop fur from their inventories. And such pressures can be very difficult for consumers and retailers to resist, especially if they are not sure whether the fur trade is responsibly managed.

The truth, like it or not, is that our industry is too small to expect our professional associations and breeder groups to solve these problems alone. We all have to pitch in to protect fur tradespeople and get our messages out to consumers, designers, retailers, media, politicians, and the general public.

Here are some ideas about things that YOU can do to help.  And we’d love to hear some of the other things that YOU are doing to let people know about our remarkable, heritage industry.

If you are a fur designer, manufacturer, wholesaler or retailer:

• Be active online. Comment on news articles and on social media, presenting polite and knowledgeable arguments to defend the trade. Even if people don’t comment back, people are reading. Let’s present ourselves as an industry that is confident about its processes.
• Answer customers' questions honestly, and if they press you about issues, respond accordingly. Have the information ready and know the facts. Our industry has often been misrepresented, so we need to be especially open with our customers.
• If you have a company website, add our link to your website so people can click through to get facts about the trade, and refer customers/associates/suppliers to TruthAboutFur.com
• Add the video The Fur Industry in 2 Minutes Flat to your website using this embedded link: <iframe width=“560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sydmyD8ouxM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

If you are a trapper:

• Take guests out on the trap line from time to time. It may slow you down, but it is worth it. Read more on taking people out on your trapline.
• Volunteer to hold classes and teach people about what trappers do.
• Educate the young. The key to sustaining this wonderful activity and to protecting fur trapping is to get young people interested in it.
• Be active online about what you do, how you do it, and why you do it. Trapping is very complex and it is important to understand the benefits trapping brings to wildlife populations and how licenses fund responsible conservation.
• Ally yourself with hunters and fishermen. Sportsmen need to work together to strengthen and protect their rights.
• For strong debate arguments, check out our Q&A section about trapping.

If you are a fur farmer:

• Open your farm up to visitors. Inviting people onto your farm gives you the chance to educate them on how the industry works, and show you have nothing to hide. Contact your local or national fur farming association (Canadian Mink Breeders Association or Fur Commission USA) for information on how to organize such an event.
• Answer questions. Fur farming should be easy to defend. Animals must be treated well in order to have nice fur, and even the activists can't deny this obvious fact. If people have questions about the animals’ pens, food, and health, be honest and tell them what you do and why you do it.
• Remind people that fur farms are an integral part of the human food chain, and that the animals eat leftovers from chicken farms and fisheries.
• Be active on online. Many farmers show photos of their animals and the daily life of farm work. Being open and transparent about your work is key to ensuring we protect fur farming and get people to support it.
• Ally yourself with other farmers and support the farming trade. Sticking together is key to protecting the farmers of North America.
• For strong debate arguments, check out our Q&A about fur farming on our website.

For everyone who supports or works in the fur trade:

• Be active online! Comment on articles and social media. Share the truth, dispel myths, and remind people that there are lots of us that support the trade.
• Work hard to debunk myths and share positive fur trade information on all of your personal networks.
• Check out the Truth About Fur website to brush up on the facts, and refer people to it if they have questions about the trade.
• Support brands who sell fur, and try to avoid brands who have an anti-fur stance.
• Buy fur! Whether you are buying new, vintage, a coat, or an accessory, one of the best ways to support and promote this remarkable heritage industry is to buy and wear fur products.
• Support real animal welfare and conservation, not “animal rights”! Make sure you know the true agendas of any charities you support. If you care about pets, always donate to your local shelter and not the national “animal-rights” groups such as PETA and HSUS. Read up on charitable donations.
• When you wear fur, tell people why you do it. Be vocal about your support of the trade and don’t shy away from expressing it.

Stay in touch! If there is an important issue we need to address quickly, contact us by email, Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram. Do you have an amazing story to share? We want to post it in our Truth About Fur blog. Help us be the go-to place to represent the true image of the industry. Send us your beautiful pictures. We welcome your comments and contributions.

Some of our useful resources include answers to the most frequently asked questions:

• Are animals skinned alive for their fur?
• How are farmed mink killed?
• Is fur processing bad for the environment?
• How are fur animals trapped in the wild?
• What happens to the rest of the trapped animal once the fur is taken?
• Do fur farmers and trappers get a fair price for their products?

Of all conflicts between advocates of sustainable use of wildlife and advocates of animal rights, none has been more enduring than the sealing issue. For more than 50 years, sealers have been on the front line in a war to decide how we manage our wildlife – so long, in fact, that there is a danger their supporters will lose interest. To everyone who recognises the importance of keeping this traditional harvest alive, I say, renew your support for sealing. It's needed now as much as ever.

Sealing was not always the cause célèbre of the animal rights movement. Back in the 1960s, when the anti-sealing campaign began, the prime target was whaling. Despite the little-known fact that the whaling industry had already halted the excesses of its past, animal rightists (and not a few conservationists) were determined to shut it down completely. And they nearly succeeded.

This cleared the way for the anti-sealing campaign to grab the headlines – something it has been doing ever since. Half a century on, the beleaguered sealers are still fighting, with the current battleground being the EU.

SEE ALSO: CANADA CELEBRATES ITS FIRST NATIONAL SEAL PRODUCTS DAY

What makes the sealing story so remarkable is that it has lasted this long. Most of the credit belongs to the sealers themselves – both indigenous communities of the High North, and the descendants of settlers – for their refusal to die. Thanks also must go to a handful of governments for their unflinching support.

The sealers, of course, are fighting for the future of their cultures and one of the few livelihoods available to them. Anyone who has visited the northern reaches of the world will understand why. We are struck by the natural beauty of the rugged landscape, the purity of the air, and the abundance of life in the oceans. This beauty continues to exist because people maintain traditional ways of life, and central to this is utilizing local natural resources, including seals. Fishermen and hunters tackle the seas and the ice to bring home their catch, and what they don’t consume, they sell.

This beauty continues to exist because people maintain traditional ways of life, and central to this is utilizing local natural resources, including seals.

Governments, meanwhile, have supported the sealers for a variety of reasons. They recognise their right to self-determination, they want to keep people “on the land” (not flooding into overcrowded cities), and they recognise the role played by wildlife use in ecosystem management. Because seals consume commercial fish and forage species, and sustain others such as sharks and orcas, governments are increasingly focusing their research on the impact of seals and seal harvesting on the ecosystem as a whole.

This approach reflects a need to ensure that seal populations will continue to thrive. It also ensures that we live up to a moral responsibility to understand the impacts of harvesting choices on other species. This can mean limiting seal harvesting or encouraging it, depending on particular regional circumstances.

Finding the right balance between prey and predators makes the marine ecosystem more productive and preserves its biodiversity.

Veterinarians, too, have supported sealers by denouncing the message of animal rights groups that sealing is inhumane. The most common method for harvesting seals is using a rifle, while use of the "hakapik", a traditional harvesting tool, is increasingly rare today. Veterinarians consider both to be humane because they consistently cause instant unconsciousness before death.

The sealers have also received broad support from advocates of sustainable use with no direct interest in sealing. Croc farmers, kangaroo meat harvesters, you name it; across the globe, wildlife users have thrown their support behind the sealers. Meanwhile major conservation groups such as the IUCN and WWF have acknowledged that sealing does not pose any conservation issues.

Yet despite the perseverance of the sealers themselves and the breadth of support for sealing, all is not well in paradise. The relentless attacks from groups with seemingly inexhaustible funds have tested our support to the limit and found it wanting. Proof of this is the fact that sealers are still losing ground with the recent closure of the EU market (except for that reviled exemption for products from indigenous communities). The enormous potential US market, meanwhile, is just as far off as ever. The US has banned all marine mammal products since 1972, and no one, not even the governments of sealing nations, is willing to mount a serious challenge to this ban.

SEE ALSO: EU SEALING POLICY IS HYPOCRITICAL, ANTI-DEMOCRATIC

So to any wildife user wavering in their support for sealing, I recite the classic poem of German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller:

“First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak for me.”

As advocates of sustainable use, we should be enormously thankful that, against all odds, the sealers have survived the last 50 years. But we must not take their survival for granted. They are under constant threat and cannot be allowed to disappear, if for no other reason than that we may be next.

FROM OUR WEBSITE: IS IT ETHICAL TO PRODUCE, BUY OR WEAR FUR?

It's seal hunt season and with that comes the onslaught of lies and propaganda surrounding the hunt. This article describes how PETA is hurting the Inuit with its anti-sealing campaign while this one covers the food insecurity faced by the Inuit (pictured above) because of the decline of the seal skin trade. But it is not all bad news for the seal hunters; the Norwegian hunt has renewed interest thanks to a documentary, Angry Inuk, the Inuit seal hunt, which is having a very positive impact. And the lies about the suffering of the animals during seal hunt season are being exposed by articles such as this.

Since we are on the topic of animal rights, let's see what activists have been up to in the last month. Foie gras protesters outside a restaurant in the UK haven't given up, even though their antics seem to have resulted in increased trade for the restaurant. PETA found itself locked out of a LVMH shareholder meeting (boohoo for them). This Member of Parliament in the UK, whose party advocates veganism, was caught eating fish and has had to issue an apology. And we loved this article exploring the issue of white privilege in the vegan movement. Our blog finally put pen to paper on the very important and often confused issue about the difference between animal welfare and animal rights philosophies. (We'll give you a hint: the first is great, the second isn't.)

On the fashion front, this article does a good job explaining how a fur coat now represents status in menswear. Or you could just wear fur on your eyelids – mink, to be precise – as it is very popular in the world of eyelash extensions. If you are looking for some home decorating ideas, then look no further: this penthouse is practically covered in fur. Here's an important story for our vintage fur retailing readers: this store owner in San Francisco is being charged for selling endangered furs because she didn't realize that the laws changed last year. Speaking of old furs, here's how to make them last: store your furs properly (pictured above).

There's been no shortage of trapper features recently, and our picks include a feature on the Yankee trapper in Arkansas and this Yellowknife trapper following in his late father's footsteps. Since we are on the topic of tradition, read about Canada's trapping traditions here or learn about a new innovative fur product (pictured above) and the wonderful history behind it in this Truth About Fur guest blog post by Brenda Dragon. Good news for Northwest Territory trappers: the last set of auction results were very promising.

Next time you get in a debate with someone claiming there are "benefits" to fake fur, you may want to show them this article. It's yet another piece describing the serious environmental damage caused by synthetic fabrics.

Let's end this month's round up with some of our favourite animal stories.

This 15-foot python scares the heck out of us.

This beaver has added cattle herding to his list of skills (pictured above).

It's usually deer that get hit by cars, but in Canada, they've got humans getting hit by deer.