The public debate about fur (and other animal products) is often distorted by confusion between two important concepts: animal welfare and animal rights. These terms sound similar and are often used interchangeably, but they describe two profoundly different ideas. Caring about the welfare of the animals we use – for food and other purposes – is very different from assigning them the rights that activist groups are now proposing.

Do you believe that farm animals should be treated humanely and spared unnecessary suffering? Then you are a proponent of animal welfare. Animal-rights advocates, by contrast, argue that humans have no right to use animals at all – not for food, clothing, or anything else. They believe that all livestock production should be shut down completely. “Not better cages, no cages at all!” is their rallying cry.

It is rare that we agree with PETA on anything, but its views on the chasm separating animal welfare and animal rights are spelled out clearly on its website for all to see:

“Animal rights means that animals are not ours to use for food, clothing, entertainment, or experimentation ... Animal welfare allows these uses as long as ‘humane’ guidelines are followed.”

Let’s see how this distinction plays out in the real world.

Eating Meat, Fish and Dairy

Animal-welfare advocates have worked for the past 100 years to ensure that the animals that provide us with meat, dairy products and eggs receive good nutrition and care. Thanks to their efforts we have humane-slaughter regulations, codes of practice and other provisions to minimize stress and suffering. This is an on-going process. For example, while modern production methods have made animal protein more affordable for millions, promoting healthy brain development for infants and children, they also raise new animal-welfare challenges.

Animal-rights advocates do not seek better conditions for farm animals. Rather, they oppose all killing and consumption of animals no matter how humanely this is done. Their openly-stated goal is to shut down all livestock farms and to end the consumption of meat, dairy, eggs, and any other animal products – even honey. They demand everyone becomes “vegan”, and argue that animal-welfare improvements only serve to justify what, for them, can never be justified, i.e., the killing of animals.

Wearing Leather, Fur, Wool and Silk

Again, animal-welfare advocates work to ensure that animals used for the skin, fur, feathers, hair, or other materials are treated humanely, with minimal suffering. Their efforts have driven North America’s world-leading trap-research program, and the development of codes of practice for fur farms.

Animal-rights campaigners oppose any use of all animal products for clothing or accessories. They often show examples of shocking abuse in their campaigns against fur, leather, and wool – which can make it look like they are concerned about animal welfare – but their goal is not better standards or regulations. They don’t believe humans have a right to use animals at all, which means no more wool, leather, fur, cashmere, down or even silk.

Owning Pets

Animal-welfare advocates believe that owning a pet is a privilege that comes with responsibilities. A pet needs to be housed, fed, and cared for properly, to ensure an acceptable level of well-being.

Animal-rights activists consider pet ownership to be a form of slavery. In their Brave New World there would be no more cats, dogs, fish, hamsters, bunnies, budgies, or other pets. In fact, the shocking kill-rate at PETA’s “shelter” confirms that it prefers to euthanize pets rather than find new homes for them, despite receiving more than $50 million annually from well-meaning donors.

Animals for Entertainment

Zoos, circuses, racetracks and other activities that use animals for entertainment are obliged, by law, to respect the welfare of their animals, ensuring they receive appropriate nutrition, housing and care.

Animal-rights activists, by contrast, want to ban all such activities. If they have their way, there will be no more animals in circuses, no more horse-back riding or dog shows, not even zoos that support breeding programs for endangered species. If giant panda conservation had been in PETA's hands rather than those of the Chinese government, it would probably be extinct by now.

Animals for Medical Research

The efforts of animal-welfare advocates ensure the responsible care of animals used for medical research. The “3-Rs” require that researchers “Replace” animals with other techniques when possible, “Reduce” the number of animals used to the minimum required to achieve their objectives, and “Refine” experiments to minimize suffering. Experiments using animals must be justified to show that the benefits could not be obtained otherwise.

Animal-rights activists want to ban any use of animals for medical research, no matter the benefits. To understand the implications of this position, consider that, according to the Foundation for Biomedical Research, “Animal research has played a vital role in virtually every major medical advance of the last century - for both human and veterinary health. From antibiotics to blood transfusions, from dialysis to organ transplantation, from vaccinations to chemotherapy, bypass surgery and joint replacement, practically every present-day protocol for the prevention, treatment, cure and control of disease, pain and suffering is based on knowledge attained through research with lab animals.” This does not impress animal-rights activists. According to PETA’s founder Ingrid Newkirk, “Even if animal research produced a cure for AIDS, we’d be against it.”

Animals at Work

People have long used animals for all sorts of work: horses and oxen pull loads and plow fields; pigs root out truffles; service dogs help a range of people in need while others pull sleds and sniff out bombs; and now, falcons are taking down intrusive drones. Most people who work with animals care about their partners and provide them with excellent care, and these animal-welfare concerns are increasingly codified in regulations.

Animal-rights activists seek to end this important relationship that humans have long enjoyed with animals.

Bottom line: while “animal welfare” recognizes that animals enrich our lives in many more ways than we usually consider, “animal rights” denies that humans have any right to use animals for our own ends.

Groups like PETA blur this distinction by showing extreme examples of animal abuse in their campaigns. Their goal is not to improve the treatment of animals we use. It is to end all animal use completely.

Fur retail had a great month in March! Let's start with the Canada Goose IPO, which soared 27% on the Toronto Stock Exchange on its first day. We guess the crazy protesters outside their stores aren't scaring off investors and customers. And there are other stores celebrating, too! Sch'dy Furs is celebrating 50 years in business, and Hinsdale Furriers has made it to 65 years. And hats off to Gently Loved Furs who have made it to their 10-year anniversary and the Anchorage furriers who are adapting their businesses to the changing times.

Speaking of changing times, the Fall 2017 fashion trends are leaning towards fur, very colourful fur to be exact. We were thrilled to hear that We Are Fur counted fur on 67% of the Fall 2017 catwalk shows. What's it like to wear fur-lined shoes every day? This guy tried it out and enjoyed it thoroughly. If you are looking for some new fur, then check out one of Lysa Lash's trunk shows; this Canadian designer is well known for her personalized service in fur retail.

But not everyone is rushing out to buy furs, some people are standing outside fur stores protesting. But the fur protesters outside Canada Goose stores are the least of our worries. These activists stormed a church demanding animals be treated like Christians, while this crazy woman crashed her car into a truck carrying chickens because she is vegan. PETA says that being vegan makes you less aggressive but we are pretty sure there isn't an ounce of truth to this. And next time an activist tells you to switch to fake fur, remember to tell them the bad news: many fake furs aren't even vegan (above).

Sadly we are coming up to the key "season" for animal rights activists: the commercial seal hunt starts soon and this is the activists' main opportunity to raise money by using photos of baby seals (that aren't even hunted). If you want some facts (real facts) about the seal hunt, the Seals and Sealing website is a good start. The film Angry Inuk continues to have an impact on how people view the seal hunt, but we still need to work hard on spreading the good word about this traditional, sustainable hunt.

While we are on the subject of tradition and wild furs, these articles highlight the traditional aspects of trapping in Kansas and Vermont, and this Canadian trapper is passing on the know-how of his trade. We firmly believe that wild fur is the most eco-friendly clothing choice and trapping is an activity that must continue.

Let's end our roundup with some news stories we found extremely useful or interesting:

This article encourages farmers to be ambassadors for their trade;

Eagles are now the weapon of choice against drones (pictured above);

This is how to protect yourself against a mountain lion;

Canada Goose isn't just a clothing brand, it is a dangerous predator!

This article was first published in The Villager, March 16, 2017. 

As someone brought up in the Canadian fur trade and who has spent much of the past 35 years studying the environmental ethic of North America’s founding industry, I am troubled by the arrogance and ignorance displayed by self-appointed “animal-rights” activists protesting the opening of the Canada Goose boutique in Soho.

Responding to complaints about neighbors disturbed and consumers harassed, activists Nathan Semmel and Leonardo Anguiano recently argued in these pages that “it is solely the vile ethics of the Canada Goose corporation that brought about our presence.” (“Call of the Wild: Why we protest Canada Goose,” talking point, March 2):

By “vile ethics,” they mean that Canada Goose uses animal products — goose down and coyote fur — to make their remarkably warm parkas.

Goose down and fur are two of nature’s best insulators, but it is not surprising that these protesters object. Most of them are — or aspire to be — vegans, and embrace the radical “animal-rights” philosophy, which means they oppose any use of animals, even for food. Most Americans, however, do eat meat, fish, dairy and eggs. Most of us also wear leather, wool and silk. This does not mean we condone the mistreatment of animals. Research confirms that most people believe that humans do have a right to use animals, but only if four important criteria are respected — namely, that animals should be used sustainably, humanely, for an important purpose and with minimal waste.

Let’s see how the use of coyote fur stacks up against these widely accepted ethical criteria.

Sustainability: Only part of the natural surplus produced in abundant wildlife populations is used for fur today, never endangered species. This is assured by strictly enforced state, national and international regulations. Coyotes are highly abundant and expanding their range across North America; they are, in fact, the number-one predator problem for ranchers in many regions. There are also increasingly frequent reports of coyotes devouring pet dogs and cats. And even if we did not use fur, coyotes (and other predators) often must be managed to protect nesting birds, the eggs of sea turtles, and other endangered species. When fur prices do not provide sufficient incentive to control coyote populations, several states (and Canadian provinces) have been obliged to offer bounties. But if we have to cull some of these animals, surely it is ethical to use them.

Humaneness: Millions of dollars have been invested over the past 35 years in scientific research to ensure that humane methods are used to capture wild, furbearing animals. Many coyotes are now taken with quick-killing devices. Others are taken with live-holding traps designed to minimize injuries to the animals. These are the same traps used by biologists to capture and release wolves, Canadian lynx and other animals, unharmed, for radio-collaring (for research) or reintroduction into regions where they were previously eliminated. Clearly, these are not the diabolical instruments that activists would have us believe. Nor are nature’s ways of controlling wildlife populations — starvation and disease — necessarily preferable. A coyote with sarcoptic mange (a parasitic mite) may scratch itself raw for weeks before dying. Nature is not Disneyland. If humaneness is the concern, modern trapping methods may actually reduce suffering, by maintaining more stable and healthy wildlife populations than would occur naturally.

Important Use: Animal activists claim that the killing of coyotes or other animals for fur is “unnecessary”, and therefore morally indefensible. Leaving aside the tricky question of determining which, if any, products are really “necessary,” humans do need clothing, and fur is a natural, long-lasting and ultimately biodegradable material. By contrast, fake furs and other synthetics promoted by animal activists are generally made from petrochemicals, a nonrenewable resource. More troubling, recent research reveals that synthetic microfibers can cause considerable harm to wildlife. According to EcoWatch: “When washed, plastic microfibers break off and a single jacket can produce up to 250,000 fibers in washing-machine effluent. Less than 1 millimeter in size, they make their way through wastewater plants and into marine environments where they have been found to enter the food chain. Microfibers make up 85 percent of human-made debris on shorelines around the world, according to a 2011 study.” Perhaps natural fur and down are not such frivolous choices after all.

No Waste: Most of us are comfortable wearing leather because it is “the envelope that dinner came in,” but we may wonder what happens to the rest of the animals that provide fur. In fact, beaver and muskrat are often eaten by northern Cree and other trappers and their families in remote regions where store-bought food is very expensive and alternate income may be hard to come by. Raccoons, opossums and other furbearing animals also provide food in more southern regions. And while coyotes and other predators are not usually eaten by humans, their carcasses are returned to the bush where they feed birds, mice and other animals through the winter, when food is scarce. Nothing is wasted.

This short review shows that the North American fur trade does satisfy the four criteria that determine whether the use of animals is morally acceptable for most people.

Furthermore, while we all “care” about nature, most of us now live in cities with little direct knowledge about what really happens in the wild. Activists protesting against Canada Goose, for example, claim that “trapped coyote mothers leave behind starving pups.” They are apparently unaware that trapping occurs in late fall and winter when the young of the year are no longer dependent upon their parents.

Trappers, by contrast, live close to nature and have the knowledge — and a direct interest — to sound the alarm when wildlife habitat is threatened by industrial activity. It is trappers, for example, who lobby and work with timber companies to maintain uncut forest corridors for wildlife around waterways or important nesting areas. It is the destruction of habitat — not hunters or trappers — that threatens the survival of wildlife.

While animal activists like to see themselves as “progressive,” their words and actions reveal an arrogant disregard for the knowledge and values of the hard-working rural people who feed and clothe us.

None of this means that anyone is obliged to wear fur. But it does cast doubt on activist claims to have a “moral” justification for imposing their personal choices on the rest of us. If those promoting the radical “animal-rights” philosophy want to maintain any credibility, they would do well do show more tolerance toward those who make different choices. Too often, while preaching “compassion,” their actions seem to be driven by ideological fundamentalism, aggression and “alternate facts.” Surely, we have enough of that already in Washington.

If you haven't visited www.truthaboutfur.com for some time, you're in for a pleasant surprise: North America's premiere fur website has been completely rebuilt to better answer the key questions that people are asking about the modern fur trade.

Truth About Fur was created to inform and reassure consumers, retailers, designers, teachers, journalists, political leaders, and anyone else interested in getting the facts about this remarkable heritage industry. Through expert interviews, media coverage, and in-depth articles, the Truth About Fur website is a fact-driven resource about the trade, hence the tagline All Facts, No Fiction.

In addition to a redesign, the website has new features and content aimed at dispelling myths about the trade and giving a human face to the people who work in it.

• A video, entitled “The North American Fur Trade in 2-Minutes Flat”, explains the processes from raw materials to finished products, as well as facts and figures about the trade.

• The new Ethics of Fur section shows clearly that the modern fur trade satisfies the ethical criteria generally accepted by society as the basis for when and how we use animals.

• The life cycle of fur production is explained in detail in the section How Fur Is Produced.

• The Fur Family Album features both archival and submitted photography of the people who make up the trade, including trappers living off the land, third- and fourth-generation farmers, and highly skilled craftsmen.

• The Q&A section covers those questions most often asked about the trade, with responses from experts including veterinarians, trappers, farmers and biologists. Questions include: Is trapping humane? Are animals skinned alive for their fur? Does fur-dressing harm the environment? The main activist criticisms of the fur trade are also analyzed and refuted with facts.

• The blog features weekly articles covering a variety of topics including current issues affecting the trade, profiles and interviews with key players.

• Two new Chinese-language versions of the site are now available (in traditional and simplified characters), and a French-language version will be launched soon.

• Now mobile-compatible, the site will be easily accessed directly from our social media platforms, including our Facebook page which now has over 45,000 followers.

“For much too long, animal activists directed and dominated the public discussion about the ethics of using fur. With our completely re-engineered website and social-media platforms we are giving a voice to the real people of the fur trade,” says Alan Herscovici, Truth About Fur’s senior writer and researcher.

“We urge everyone in the trade to visit the new fur website, and to use this powerful new tool whenever questions about the environmental, animal-welfare or ethical justification of the fur trade are raised.”

TruthAboutFur.com is produced in cooperation with the main North American fur trade associations and auctions, and with support from the International Fur Federation (Americas).

At a time when we, as consumers, are being urged to “care for our planet” and make environmentally-responsible choices, we should take a closer look at wild furs. And the closer we look, the more impressive are the environmental benefits we see. While all the furs we use today are eco-logical, wild furs are to clothing what “organic”, “free-range”, and “100-mile-diet” are to dinner.

Here are 5 top reasons why wild furs are an excellent choice for anyone who wants to adopt a “greener” life-style:

1. Like all fur, wild-sourced pelts provide a naturally warm, lightweight, durable, and ultimately biodegradable clothing material. After all, fur evolved over millions of years to become one of the most effective insulators we know.  And, of course, fur is also remarkably soft, comfortable and beautiful!

2. The wild furs we use today come from abundant populations, never from endangered species. Trapping is strictly controlled by state and provincial governments to ensure that we take only part of the surplus produced by nature. Most species produce more young each year than their habitat can support to maturity. We can use part of that “surplus” without depleting the population. In financial terms, it’s like living on the “interest” that nature provides, without depleting our “capital”. This is known to environmentalists as “the sustainable use of renewable natural resources”, a key conservation principle promoted by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and other conservation authorities.

3. The populations of many furbearing species would have to be controlled even if we did not use the fur. Overpopulated beavers flood roads, fields, and forest habitat. Raccoon, coyote and fox populations must be controlled to protect sea turtle eggs, ground-nesting birds and other vulnerable or endangered species. Rapidly expanding coyote populations are also the number-one predator threat for sheep and cattle ranchers. Raccoons, foxes and skunks can carry rabies and other dangerous diseases into urban areas. When animals must be culled to protect property, to prevent the spread of disease, or for any other reason, it is more respectful to use them. Furthermore, without a market for fur, these management efforts would have to be financed by tax-payers.

SEE ALSO: WILDLIFE CONTROL EXPERT OR TRAPPER? WHO YOU GONNA CALL?

4. More than 35 years of scientific research and trap testing ensure that the most humane possible methods are used to capture furbearing animals. In fact, government-regulated trapping now often helps to reduce suffering, by maintaining healthier and more stable populations of wildlife than would occur naturally. If humaneness is a concern, modern trapping techniques are generally preferable to disease, starvation, and the “boom-and-bust” cycles that are nature’s ways of pruning back overpopulated beavers, muskrats, and other species. While farm-raised fur animals receive excellent care, some people feel more comfortable knowing that the animals we use live freely in their natural state until the moment when they are captured. In this sense, wild fur is the ultimate “free-range” clothing material.

5. Many furbearing animals also provide food for aboriginal and other trappers and their families. Beavers and muskrats are important food sources for the Cree people of northern Canada. Raccoons, opossums, and other species are also eaten in many parts of North America. Animals that are not eaten by trappers and their families are returned to the bush where they feed mice, birds and other animals through the winter, when food is in short supply. Nothing is wasted.

Wild fur also provides important income for aboriginal and other people living in rural or remote regions where employment opportunities may be limited. Not least important: the income from wild fur depends upon maintaining natural habitat, and thus provides an incentive for maintaining wilderness areas. One of the unintended consequences of anti-fur campaigning is that, by eliminating markets (for sealskins, for example), they force aboriginal communities in northern Canada to open their territories to more oil and gas exploration, mining and other activities that can seriously disrupt wildlife and their habitat. In fact, trappers in many regions are working with government and industry to minimize the negative impacts of logging and other resource exploitation. For example, they lobby to maintain corridors and buffer zones of uncut timber around lakes and streams that wildlife depend upon, and they identify the nesting areas of eagles and other sensitive species so they can be protected. We all care about nature, but trappers are our eyes and ears on the land – the people who can sound the alarm when nature is threatened.

As this brief summary shows, wild fur is an excellent choice for anyone who cares about nature. Ironically, the “faux fur” and other synthetic textiles promoted by many “animal-rights” activists are usually made from petroleum, a non-renewable resource. But because most people – and most media – are now in big cities, the trappers’ story is rarely heard.

FROM OUR WEBSITE: FUR PRODUCTION: TRAPPING

F is for February, Fur and Fashion so let's start this month's roundup with some fur fashion news. We loved this article about why Russian women love fur, and while there is certainly an element of glamour attached to fur coats, the message is overwhelmingly about warmth, something a fake fur will never be able to provide.

As well as being winter, it is also runway show season, and where there are fashion shows, there are furs. If you want a fashion update but aren't looking to buy new, check out our guide on recycling old fur coats, or if you want an option that is super low impact (pardon the pun) then why not look into roadkill furs? Our fur coat of the month was definitely this teen's seal skin parka. It looks great and we love the story behind it.

On the subject of seals, one of Canada's most outspoken seal hunt activists, throat singer Tanya Tagaq, was temporarily banned from Facebook over a seal skin photo. She was quickly reinstated and an apology followed, so this would hardly be called a win for the animal rights activists. Speaking of losers, we love this Super Bowl ad about the Humane Society of the United States (above), and the fact that the noise levels of anti-fur protests are now being monitored. Wait? Don't you want screaming lunatics shouting at you on your way home? No, and it seems that animal rights activists ARE getting more aggressive. Here's why.

In other animal rights news, activists are trying to get London Fashion Week to ban fur (unlikely to happen), the video depicting "abuse" on the set of A Dog's Purpose was proven to have been misleading, and we've found this great website exposing Trip Advisor, the travel reviews website, for working with PETA. They are refusing to let people book holiday activities that involve animals. Well, I guess we can all go to another website to plan our holidays, right?

It's a good thing that coyote fur fashion trims have become so popular on parkas and coyote fur sales are rising, as we need a reason to keep trapping them. Coyotes in California (above) have gotten so brazen they are attacking giant dogs, on leashes! There were two legal victories for trappers last month: a judge dismissed a lawsuit over incidental lynx trapping, and Republicans in the US backed off their plan to sell 3.3 million acres of public land.

Some other things we learnt in February:

Ultra orthodox Jews are an unexpected ally for pro-fur advocates.

This is model behaviour for hunters who are being harassed by anti-hunters.

You can get clothing made from knit dog fur.

Bison are back in Banff, and we hope they stay.

Stay warm out there, friends!

Have you ever wondered how to recycle old fur? Remodelling is a great way to breathe new life into an old fur coat or jacket. Whether it is an old mink coat in pristine condition, or a vintage piece that has seen better days, most furs can be recycled in some way. Just see these before-and-after photos (above) of a coat remodelled by Natural Furs of Montreal.

Here are five things you can do with an old fur coat or jacket.

Recut into a New Shape

This could be something simple like shortening the coat to make it more modern, changing the sleeve shape or just taking off the sleeves to make a vest. Alternatively, you could attempt something a bit more dramatic, like recutting the piece entirely. Fur is unique in that a good coat can be completely transformed into something new using the "letting out" sewing technique that is exclusive to fur. Expect to pay $500 and up for a job like this, and make sure you choose a furrier who is experienced in remodelling and knows how to recycle old fur.

Make an Accessory

An old fur coat could make a great fur collar, scarf, or hat. We've also been told of someone who had an old fur turned into glove liners. My hands are warm just thinking about it. Depending on the complexity of a job like this, you are likely looking at $100 and up.

A Coat Lining

Furs look great on the outside but they also feel really good when they are inside a coat. Creating a coat lining with an old fur coat can be a great way to keep warm without showing off the pelts. This works especially well in rainy places; creating a raincoat lining out of an old fur coat means you will be warm and dry. You might be able to get a lining created for a few hundred dollars, but it will most likely cost over $500 if you are planning to recut the shape and do fancy finishings. This could be a DIY project if you have a coat that you aren't too precious about. Simply cutting off the sleeves, removing the lining, and turning the coat inside out could get you a pretty decent raincoat lining if you don't need something fancy. (I am going to try this over the weekend. Wish me luck!)

A Cushion, Blanket, or Seat Covering

This is normally what people suggest as a worst-case scenario. If your coat's skins are too dry to be turned into another garment, then making them into a cushion or blanket is a great alternative. Fur seat covers in your car would pretty much be the definition of "driving in style", and if you've got a baby with expensive tastes, you could try to recycle old fur into a baby blanket or stroller lining. My son had an old piece of beaver as the lining of his car seat and he was quite pleased!

Trinkets

If your coat is too old to turn into a garment, and too small to turn into a cushion or blanket, then you could try making a trinket with it. A fur corsage, piece of jewelry, or a teddy bear is a great way to use an otherwise un-usable piece of fur. This is also a great option for any left over pieces, if you decide to shorten a fur coat, for example, why not make use of the pieces that were cut off?

A few things to consider before recycling a fur:

The age of the garment matters. It needs to have been well taken care of and stored properly in order for the fur to be in good enough shape to be remodelled. A lesson for us all - proper fur coat storage does prolong its life!

Some new pelts are over dried to make them lighter. These ones may also not be idea for remodelling.

Coats that have been let out can sometimes be too weak for remodelling, but nothing is stopping you turning them into a nice throw.

Mink, beaver, and fox are great fur types for recycling, whereas chinchilla, weasel and muskrat have thin leather and are more difficult to recycle into garments.

Remodelling isn't just about cutting a new garment or item from an old fur, you can also dye furs or shear them. There is a world of possibilities!

I received a phone call the other day from a very frightened fur retailer. Two young women had come into his store while he was serving a customer and begun lecturing him about the evils of selling fur. He had tried to stay cool and asked them to leave, several times, but they kept at him until, finally, he lost it and said things he wasn’t proud of. They had filmed him too; now his outburst was on an activist website and his Facebook page had been bombarded with comments accusing him of being a sexist thug.

“Am I finished?” he asked, shaken. “That’s not me, but they were so aggressive; honestly, I was frightened.” I told him to remove the threatening posts from his Facebook page – but to take screen-grabs first, for the record. I also advised him to make a police report about the women who had harassed him, and to ask the police to keep an eye on his store at night. (The windows of several fur stores in the same town were broken in the weeks that followed.)

Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. An outerwear store that sells fur-trimmed parkas in Vancouver has endured rowdy protests several times a week for more than a year. Activists now often follow fur-wearers down the street, haranguing them. DxE (“Direct Action Everywhere”) activists invade department stores, intimidating consumers and thumbing their noses at store security. At the opening of new Canada Goose stores in New York and Toronto, protesters carried “F*ck Canada Goose” posters. (So much for compassion and intelligent dialogue!) “Fur police” recently patrolled the streets of Hamburg, Germany, lecturing fur-wearers and giving them “tickets”.

READ ALSO: "Meat of the Matter: Peace-loving avengers," by Dan Murphy, for Dairy Herd Management.

Fur is still a favorite target but any animal-based business can find itself under attack. An infuriating new tactic of animal rights activists is to blitz commercial Facebook pages with negative ratings and comments, as a Vancouver chef recently discovered when he added seal meat to his “sustainable and cultural foods” menu. (Ironically, activists often claim that the seal hunt is immoral because only the fur is used!)

Here are 5 reasons why animal rights activists are becoming more aggressive ... and why it will likely get worse before it gets better.

1. Aggression Works

Activists have learned that many retail stores – even those of large corporations – have a low tolerance for confrontation. Things were different when most furs were sold by furriers running multi-generational family businesses; fur was what they knew, and they defended it with passion. With fur now popular for trim and fashion accessories, it is sold in a much wider range of stores.

This is putting fur on more people than ever before, but it also makes retailing more vulnerable: if fur represents only a small fraction of your sales but generates 99% of your security and PR problems, caving in to PETA is a tempting option. Unfortunately, the message to animal rights activists is that threats and intimidation work.

2. Pop Culture

If you have seen a music video recently -- or follow much of what passes for political debate these days -- you understand that the vulgar, arrogant and often aggressive tone of animal rights activists (“F*ck Fur!”) is very much in tune with certain elements of contemporary culture. And because there’s no sign of popular culture becoming much more polite any time soon, we can expect the arrogance and aggressiveness of these activists to intensify too.

3. Animal Rights Activists Are Getting Frustrated

Cleveland Amory, founder of the Fund for Animals, began campaigning against the fur trade in the late 1960s, almost 50 years ago. Protests intensified in the 1980s and then, again, with the emergence of media-savvy organizations like PETA. The traditional fur coat was also challenged by more casual lifestyles and the availability of less expensive winter clothing materials.

But just when it looked like Western consumers were abandoning their furs, the trade reinvented itself. Suddenly fur is everywhere, not only on 70% of designer runways, but in the streets – as trim on coats and parkas, on handbags, vests, scarves and boots. As trim and accessories, fur is more affordable and is being worn by more young people than ever.

Like old-time Stalinists frustrated with the “false consciousness” of workers who didn’t support The Revolution, many activists have concluded that, if moral persuasion isn’t working, it’s time for more vigorous methods. “As long as they do the right thing, we don’t really care why they’ve done it,” says PETA executive vice president Tracy Reiman when asked whether companies give up fur to avoid harassment, rather than because they share PETA’s views.

4. Social Media Encourage an Escalation of Emotion

Animal rights activists have always used disturbing images, but mainstream media rarely broadcast the most gruesome of them. In the Brave New World of social media, however, the gorier the better. As PETA's Tracy Reiman says, “… we put out a video of rabbits that are having their fur ripped out, and everybody watches it.”

It is not hard to understand why normally compassionate people would be horrified by some of the images circulating on the Internet. If I thought these images really represented the fur trade, I would be against it too. So don't be surprised that some idealistic young people decide it’s time to take stronger action to end such (apparent) atrocities.

The anonymity of social media also encourages more radical and polarized opinions, in all types of politics.

5. “Animal Rights” Is a Fundamentalist Ideology

The previous four points provide ample explanation for the more aggressive tone of animal rights activists. A more troubling question is whether the “animal-rights” philosophy itself may inevitably lead to more aggressive behaviour.

Despite all the media coverage of PETA’s antics, few people – journalists included – understand the profound chasm separating traditional “animal welfare” values from the radical and comparatively new “animal rights” doctrine. Animal welfare refers to our responsibility to minimize suffering for the animals we use. Hopefully everyone reading this post agrees with this. Animal rights, by contrast, says that humans have no right to kill or use animals at all, even for food or important medical research.

A more troubling question is whether the “animal-rights” philosophy itself may inevitably lead to more aggressive behaviour.

But if we truly believe that killing and eating an animal is the moral equivalent of murdering and eating another human being, then how far should we go to stop such “crimes”? Seen this way, activists who become more aggressive or even commit illegal acts are not “going too far”; rather, they are reading their animal-rights philosophers correctly.

“Animal rights” -- like other fundamentalist doctrines -- does not allow for respect or tolerance of differing views. In this sense, the increasing aggression of animal rights activists is not an accident or an aberration. But if intolerance and aggression are the logical conclusions of “animal rights”, maybe it’s time we took a much more critical look at this radical new philosophy. This will be the subject of a future article.

Let's start our January news roundup with a story that has warmed our hearts: the story of a pair of fur farm vandals being jailed for their crimes. Nicole Kissane was sentenced to 21 months in prison and ordered to pay $423,477 in restitution, while her partner in crime is already serving a two-year sentence. Let this be a lesson to anyone planning on releasing mink and vandalizing fur farms!

In other good activist news, PETA is facing two lawsuits, anti-fur police impersonators are getting in trouble, and activists in the UK are going to be unmasked. If you are unsure about the difference between PETA and HSUS, this educational video (above) will be helpful, and if you need some help wading through the hundreds of lies these organizations use to further their agenda, here is our list of 5 Biggest Lies Animal Activists Tell About Fur.

At least the activists aren't preventing people buying or wearing fur: these second-generation and fourth-generation furriers are thriving. Meanwhile, if you are looking for a furry baby gift, check out these stuffed animals made of real fur. And celebrities have not stopped donning their pelts, including the Duchess of Cambridge (below) and Puff Daddy. Need some inspiration for your wardrobe? Here are 8 Musicians Who Rocked Some Serious Fur Coats in 2016.

If you are in the market for something a bit more discreet, then how about these mink-lined shoes? Or something a bit more affordable? Here are some fur-lined parkas that won't break the budget. If you've already got a fur collection but you need some tips of taking care of it, then check out our piece about protecting your furs from moths or this article about how to clean "fancy" fabrics.

Our trapper friends will most likely agree with these articles about how trappers aren't bad guys, the old-fashioned challenges are the lure, and how trapping is about being in the great outdoors. While we are on the topic of wild fur, we were thrilled to hear that Angry Inuk won the People's Choice Award at this film festival (above) and this Vancouver restaurant is re-opening the debate of the seal hunt, by offering seal meat on its menu.

Chili Dog Anyone?

Farmers have been busy, as usual, dealing with drones that scare their animals and trying to educate their non-farmer friends. And does run-off from mink farms damage marine life? The answer is no.

Let's end this month's roundup with a few questions to reflect on:

Is it ok for the general public to dispatch an animal in distress?

Could you survive a power outage in Antarctica?

Is a spicy dog vest the answer to fending off wolves? (above)

Do dolphins use a wing man to meet the ladies?

Can a pair of fox shorts save your life?

Eating seal meat is not something many of us have tried. It's not a regular feature on restaurant menus, nor is it abundant in grocery stores. Vancouver restaurant Edible Canada made headlines in January when it announced that its menu for the restaurant festival Dine Out Vancouver was going to feature seal meat.

The two dishes, a pasta dish featuring pappardelle with seal mince and a starter of seal loin served rare, caught the attention of media and culinary enthusiasts, but where there are seals, there are activists. Not only did protesters turn up outside the restaurant, they also went on a cyber attack, downgrading the restaurant’s reviews on Facebook by posting hundreds of one-star reviews (since reversed, to an extent, thanks to our loyal followers; see below).

We had a chat with Edible Canada's executive chef, Eric Pateman, described as “one of the leading ambassadors of Canadian cuisine”, about eating seal meat, protesters, and Canadian cuisine.

Truth About Fur: You knew there was going to be some backlash, so why did you decide to go ahead and put seal on the menu?

Eric Pateman: It was the right thing to do. Part of what we do as a business is define Canadian food culture and seal has such an important historical as well as present-day context to it. By not doing it, we would have been doing a disservice to part of what we do as a business, which is educating and informing people on what it is that makes Canada so unique.

TAF: Did you have any plans in place to deal with the activists, or did you just deal with it as it happened?

EP: We definitely had had some conversations about what some of the potential backlashes could be, but we never anticipated the impact on social media that we saw. We expected some protesters, etc. ... The online impact was far more significant than we expected, but the in-person protests were less than we anticipated.

TAF: Well it is January, people don’t want to go outside, and it is much easier to criticize people anonymously from your computer.

EP: And most of the online attacks were international.

TAF: You posted on Facebook that the response to the seal meat was quite good. Can you talk about the feedback from customers?

EP: We had no idea how this was going to go, we thought it would be a great educational piece for the consumer. Obviously our customer base really likes the innovative and the obscure, and to try things that are truly reflective of our culture. When I looked at our numbers over the weekend, after the first three days [of the Dine Out Vancouver event] the seal dishes were the number one selling dish, by two to one over the next most popular dish, and the next was lamb heart. So we definitely attract a clientele who is interested in trying different proteins and dishes from across Canada.

[Editor’s note: lamb heart comes from a very cute, baby animal, but strangely there were no protests about that.]

We never anticipated that the pasta and the seal loin would do as well as they did. We didn’t make the call to add the seal loin to the menu until three days before Dine Out Vancouver. People were saying, “We really want to come in and try it, and we really want to taste it in its own right.” And almost every single table in the restaurant was ordering it. At the end of the day, the general perception has been incredibly positive. Ninety-five percent of the people who have tried it said “it wasn’t at all what I was expecting” to “it was better than what I was expecting.”

TAF: I expected it to be more liver-y. I didn't expect it to taste like steak.

EP: The big thing with seal is if you don’t cook it right, it does taste like liver and it does taste bad. It is very temperamental. I will be interested, when I am traveling across the Arctic circle to Newfoundland and going to the Festival of the Seal in the Magdalen Islands in March, to try other people’s interpretations of it. From what I have been reading online, the much more historical preparations are to cook it to death, and it comes across as a much more intense flavour, versus what we have done with the loin itself, keeping it rare. It mutes a lot of the flavours that come out with excessive cooking.

TAF: Do you think this is something you want to feature regularly?

EP: We are getting asked every single day whether we will keep it on our menu, and based on the response so far, absolutely. How we will keep it on the menu is yet to be determined. We are having guests ask for the loin in a larger portion - more than two ounces, more of a steak style. We might keep the pasta. We will sit down and evaluate that with the culinary team after Dine Out Vancouver and see what we want to do. Once the hunt is done and there is fresh seal meat, I can see us running a seal festival or an event around that.

TAF: I’ve frequently tried to find seal meat in restaurants across Canada and I have struggled to find it on menus. Have you had any feedback from other chefs, and do you think this might encourage them to put it on their menus?

EP: Absolutely. In the last week I have probably been contacted by five or six chefs, ranging from White Horse to Yellowknife to Calgary, and a few in Vancouver, all looking to get in contact with our providers. I can definitely see this starting to kick off. Someone had to be the one to jump in first, but I think we will start seeing other people adding it to the menus. We even had a fishmonger approach us if he could start carrying seal at his seafood store.

TAF: Throughout the dramas with the protesters, have you noticed how animal rights groups use the seal hunt as a money maker? Seals are abundant so there is no question about sustainability, and baby seals haven't been harvested since the '80s. What do you think of campaigners still using images of cute baby seals to raise funds?

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

EP: In all honesty, I don't know enough about that side of the industry. This was totally new to me, in terms of understanding a lot of the political ramifications and ties around it. Part of the reason I’m going to this seal festival, part of the reason I want to go out on the seal hunt this year, is to get a deeper understanding for myself personally. I had a couple of really good discussions both with the Humane Society and even PETA when they were protesting outside our restaurant the other day, we had a good chat and getting their take on things.

My job is to promote what Canada is, and I think one of the things that makes Canada so unique and special is that we are free to have a voice around things that are important to us, free speech, the ability to protest. I am not opposed to people doing what they are doing, though the cyber attacks were a little off mark, but I didn't have any issues with PETA showing up in front of our restaurant doing what they did. They have the right to do that. I hope to be far more educated by the summer with the hunt itself, really understanding it and all of the ramifications around it.

The Dine Out Vancouver event ends February 5th but keep en eye out for future seal meat specials at Edible Canada. And thank you to all the Truth About Fur followers who helped us get its rating back up on Facebook. Notorious seal-hunt opponent Paul Watson issued a call to his supporters to post poor (“1-star”) reviews, and 550 did just that, dropping Edible Canada’s average rating from 4.5 to 2.1 overnight. Truth About Fur and other responsible-use groups responded and within a week 5-star ratings caught up and pulled ahead. On the day of publishing this post, Edible Canada's average rating stands at 3.3. Check it out and post your review.

Clothes moths don't kill or bite, and aren't poisonous, but they are the little jerks of the insect world and have very expensive taste. They love furs, cashmere, wool, and any other expensive animal fibers you have in your closet. When it comes to fashion, they are bug enemy number one, but there are ways to keep the little buggers away from your furs, and I'm here to tell you how.

Prevention Is Best

Here are my favourite tricks to turn your closet into a no-go zone for clothes moths.

Cedarwood oil: Spray cedarwood oil (diluted with distilled water) around your closet, but away from the clothes, or place cedarwood oil-soaked cotton balls in corners of closets and drawers.

Lavender oil: Fresh lavender oil (used in the same way as above) is another nice-smelling clothes moth deterrent.

Give them space: Don't over-stuff your closets and give your coats a good shake every now and then. That makes it difficult for clothes moths to get comfortable in there.

Natural repellents: There are quite a few good natural moth repellants on the market, including ones you can hang in between your coats or stuff into the coat pockets. I avoid mothballs, though. They smell bad and are terrible for the environment.

Freezing: Note this is of no use on furs as it will destroy the leather, but I will share my trick for keeping wool and cashmere safe from clothes moths: freeze them for 48 hours in September or October. This kills the eggs, and it is actually the larvae that hatch from the eggs that are responsible for the holes in your clothing, not the clothes moths themselves.

Professional storage: Your best bet for keeping furs safe out of season or when they aren't being worn is professional fur storage. If you are looking for storage near you, ask your local furrier. If they don't offer storage, they will be able to recommend someone who can.

How to Tell If You Have Clothes Moths

A sign of clothes moths is if the fur is shedding. The hairs come loose from the leather, and fall out. But don’t confuse shedding with breakage. Delicate furs, like rabbit and chinchilla, are prone to breakage with heavy wear so it is normal that they break and shed a little bit. But if the hair is coming out in clumps, then you probably have moths.

... And If You Have

Isolate the infested garment. The bad news is, the moths are probably in your other clothes as well so it's time for a full closet clear out. Fumigation is one solution, but you can also clean and/or kill the moths on your clothes by washing and/or freezing everything, and then cleaning the entire closet like a crazy person followed by an overdose of cedarwood or lavender, to keep them away. Warning, this is not a fun way to spend your weekend.

Fur, unlike wool and cashmere, cannot be frozen to kill the eggs as this will ruin the leather. The only way to remove clothes moths is to get a professional fur cleaning. If it is a jacket you bought for $50 from a vintage store, you may want to consider getting rid of it, as it may not be cost-effective to clean, but that is of course your choice.

The easiest way for animal activists to further their agenda is to lie, and when it comes to the fur trade, that means portraying us as a cruel industry that mistreats animals. We don't like giving animal activists credit, but there's no denying how successful they've been at spreading their lies. They appear so frequently in traditional media, blogs and comment sections, that members of the general public can hardly be blamed for believing that at least some of this horrible stuff must be true.

Well, it isn’t, and we are here to set the record straight about the Five Biggest Lies Animal Activists Tell About Fur.

Activist Lie #1: Animals on fur farms are skinned alive. Take a moment to consider this and you'll realize it makes no sense. Not only is skinning an animal alive illegal and utterly immoral, it would also be dangerous for the operator, would increase the risk of damaging the pelt, and would presumably take longer than skinning an animal that was euthanized. (Is it easier to cut your dog’s nails while he is excited or when he’s been sleeping?) Farming is a business, and businesses need to be profitable – so why would anyone adopt a practice that is dangerous for their staff, damages the product, and takes much longer than doing it properly? The simple answer is that they wouldn’t, which is why animals are never skinned alive for the fur trade.

In fact the horrible activist video that started this vicious myth has now been exposed as a complete fraud – the cruel acts it shows were staged for the camera!

SEE ALSO: 5 REASONS WHY IT'S RIDICULOUS TO CLAIM ANIMALS ARE SKINNED ALIVE

Activist Lie #2: Most furs come from China where animal welfare laws don't exist. Therefore, most animals used in the fur trade are mistreated. The clever part of this lie is that, if true, it would render irrelevant the high standards of animal welfare on North American and European fur farms. If most fur comes from China, who cares how well farmers care for their mink in Wisconsin or Denmark?

There are two problems with this argument. First, it doesn’t matter where a farm is (it could be on the moon!), if farmed animals do not receive excellent nutrition and care, they will not produce high-quality fur. In fact, China does have animal welfare laws and is in the process of introducing Western standards to fur farming, but even without them Chinese fur farmers have a strong economic incentive to keep their animals healthy.

Second, and more to the point, while it is true that many fur garments are now cut and sewn in China where labour costs are lower, the fur pelts used to make most garments sold in the West originally came from European or North American farms. In fact, more than 90% of European and North American farmed mink and fox – and North American wild furs too – are sent to China to be transformed into apparel and accessories.

Activist Lie #3: Animals chew off their paws to escape steel-jawed leg-hold traps. This lie refers to very old trapping methods that are no longer permitted or used. Decades ago, some animals (especially muskrats) would sometimes have bones broken in old-fashioned leg-hold traps, allowing them to pull free. This does not happen with the new padded and off-set foot-hold traps. In fact, these new live-holding traps cause so little damage, they are used by biologists to catch and release (unharmed) wolves, lynx, otters and other animals for radio collaring or relocation. Meanwhile, the great majority of fur-bearers (including muskrats) caught for their fur are now taken in highly effective quick-killing traps, eliminating the possibility of a trapped animal being left alive.

Activist Lie #4: Fur farms are "not subject to federal regulation". This is a sneaky deception by animal activists that suggests that fur farming is "unregulated" and therefore without standards to protect the well-being of the animals. What is intentionally not explained is that federal regulations generally concern only food safety issues related to livestock produced for human consumption. Fur farms, however – like all farms – are indeed regulated by municipal and state or provincial laws. Furthermore, farmers who mistreat or do not provide proper care for their animals can be prosecuted under federal (and state/provincial) animal-cruelty laws.

SEE ALSO: CALLING PETA: U.S. FUR FARMING IS STRICTLY REGULATED

Activist Lie #5: They kill "baby seals" in Canada. If we had a dime for every time we've heard this lie, we could buy a dozen beautiful seal-skin coats! In fact, the hunting of nursing harp seal pups has been banned in Canada since 1987. For the last 30 years, harp seals can only be hunted after they have moulted their first fluffy “whitecoat” fur. By the time the hunt legally opens, the seal pups have been weaned and are on their own, preparing to migrate to their Arctic summer feeding grounds. (Their mothers have left, to breed again, before also heading north for the summer.) But these easily verifiable facts do not stop animal activists from continuing to illustrate their fund-raising campaigns with photos of fluffy “whitecoats”. Why let facts spoil a great story that has raked so many millions into their coffers from well-meaning supporters?

What you can do. The next time you hear someone spreading these 5 Biggest Lies Animal Activists Tell About Fur, set them straight! We all know that if people hear lies often enough, they start to believe them. Well it works both ways. People need to hear the truth more often to believe it ... so let's be sure that they do!

***

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