Send all your eco-inquiries to Jennifer Grayson at eco.etiquette@gmail.com. Questions may be edited for length and clarity.
A lot of my friends are wearing faux fur, but I've heard that it's made from some not-so-eco materials. Is this true? And if that's the case, wouldn't it just be better to wear real fur, since it's a natural material?
-Zoey
I have a confession to make: I own a fur vest. But I feel OK about wearing it, because the fur was sustainably harvested from a lemming mass suicide and processed using GM-free cornstarch. No part of the lemming was wasted: The omega 3-packed wild meat was sold to a hunger relief organization at a fair price, and the bones were turned into a natural phosphate fertilizer. My purchase also supported native trappers who rely on this income for their livelihood.
The only thing is, when I wear the vest I get a lot of dirty looks, so I'm always sure to have this story well rehearsed in order to avoid further scrutiny. I don't deserve to get splashed with a can of red paint.
I jest, of course. (And those in the know can slap me on the wrist for perpetuating the lemming suicide myth.) But I spun this silly story to illustrate just how complicated navigating the fur marketplace has become.
There's faux fur. Vegan fur made from organic cotton. An "eco" fur made from the brushtail possums destroying New Zealand's forests. The latest craze is nutria, an invasive Louisiana rodent whose heralded-as-humane hide has graced the runways of J. Mendel and Oscar de la Renta.
Kind of makes you long for the days when the issue of wearing fur was as black and white as Cruella de Vil's coiffure, no?
If you're hoping to have Santa slip a sustainable sable under the tree for you this year, however, you may find the following disappointing:
First, nearly 85 percent of furs today come from farm-raised animals. That may sound like a laudable alternative to trapping animals (including endangered ones) in the wild. But these animals are often subject to the same harsh conditions (i.e., crowding and confinement) that exist in concentrated animal feeding operations, aka factory farms.
Second, while the animal waste from these fur farms can be a source of organic fertilizer, it can also pollute local groundwater if it's not carefully managed. So can the chemicals used to treat the skins, which include the highly carcinogenic formaldehyde, chromium, and naphthalene.
These chemicals prevent the fur from rotting. They also compromise its biodegradability. That pretty much kills the "natural" argument, doesn't it?
The obvious alternative, ostensibly, should be faux fur. It seems to be everywhere these days, inserting a bit of would-be green luxury into our scrimp-and-save times. Even PETA seems OK with it, pushing the pseudo-pelts on its website.
The truth, though, is that while fake fur may be animal-friendly, it is certainly not earth-friendly, since it's made from petroleum-based, non-biodegradable, energy-intensive materials like nylon and polyester. (I would argue, too, that it isn't even animal-friendly, since hurting the planet doesn't exactly encourage animal survival.)
Then there's the unfortunate situation, as witnessed in the film Skin Trade, that fur being labeled as faux may, in fact, be Fluffy and Fido.
So here's where I insert the stock greenie line that no fur is good fur, that even an ethical fur sends the wrong message, blah blah blah. Except I can't. I need to say something else first.
In my mind, wearing real fur is no greater an eco-sin than, say, eating a fast food cheeseburger. Which is to say that eating a fast food cheeseburger is, in fact, an eco-sin, but you certainly don't see people being splashed with red paint as they walk into a McDonald's (though maybe they should).
So my new rule is this: I'm not saying it's OK to wear fur, but don't give people the stink-eye for wearing fur if you're still eating factory-farmed meat. Or driving a car with leather seats. Or wearing Uggs.
I'll also add that if you are native American or live above 60 degrees north latitude, you can probably justify the full-length fox. If you're everyone else, but life won't be complete without that touch of mink, at least opt for vintage or a refurbished family heirloom. Just be prepared to do some explaining.
Follow Jennifer Grayson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jennigrayson
Bruce Friedrich: Catholic Bishops Should Include Fish in 'Meatless Fridays'
I've got to tell you, if you buy a fur from animals harvested from the wild in North America rather than farm-raised fur, the animals were harvested in as quick and humane a fashion as the trappers/hunters could manage, and in accordance with pretty strict game laws based on population ecology. Back in the bad old days, before trapping was regulated, it was different, but now it's quite well policed and limited. It's unfortunate that farmed fur is as prevalent as it is, because it's hard to be more sustainable than contemporary wild fur.
http://news.discovery.com/tech/indias-poor-risk-slow-death-recycling-e-waste.html
Its not worse but it doesn't justify it either.
http://www.peta2.com/takecharge/t_factsheet_wool.asp
And please don't call it "propaganda". When you have proof it is the facts. NOT propaganda.
Should I buy the real skin, what was once attached to real, living creature to avoid what is often a n environmentally harmful synthetic....or should I go for the synthetic to avoid wearing the skin of the creature? And that conundrum is a little biased, if we have the eco-faux, then I'm grateful, but any faux skins I've been able to stick to are the more environmentally risky quality, mainly because it's most affordable.
But I will always do my best to choose the synthetic. I guess sometimes the catch-22s are too difficult to avoid. I do have some leather and wool garments, though, but they were gifts and contain sentimental value. I think what matters most is the effort.
http://healthychild.org/blog/comments/think_eco-fashion_means_birkenstocks_think_again/
That kind of pesticide use isn't exactly helping the animals. Let's face it: Most of us are not wearing only organic cotton.
This is disappointing to me:
'I'll also add that if you are native American or live above 60 degrees north latitude,'
I agree that people in cold climates have an excellent argument for wearing fur. It's a phenomenal insulator.
Is there some reason that 'native American' people should get a pass WRT fur, but hunters, tanners, and trappers of other races shouldn't?
I don't understand the argument.
If you are living a subsistence lifestyle -- be it trapper, hunter/gatherer, etc. -- I, personally, am not ethically opposed to using fur if it is a physical necessity. Others here, I'm sure, will disagree.
This opens up another can of worms, though. What do you do with the skins and other non-food parts of an animal killed in a hunt (eg brains, which can be used in tanning)?
Fur cuffs and collars on coats is an entirely unnecessary endeavor today, especially when current methods for harvesting hides allows for barbaric and inhumane traps and methods of killing the animal — like smashing its head with a pipe or standing on its throat or chest.
As a young boy growing up in the hills of Missouri, I ran a trap line for income. At that time, the pelt from a large raccoon would fetch around forty dollars. We also ran "coons" with hounds. As you might imagine, ten or twenty pelts a week was pretty good income for a poor farm boy back then. About the same time that I left home, the Europeans banned import of our fur owing to the trapping issue. It wasn't long before large numbers of racoons were encountered in atypical conditions, diseased and starving in many instances, owing to population explosions that facilitated remarkable spread of disease amongst their populations, notably distemper and rabies. None of the animals we hunted or trapped ever suffered the horribly slow and lingering death these animals did.
Merry Christmas!
Ralph...how cute are you? Is your life less worthwhile because you may not be "cute" 'anymore? If a person is not attractive does that mean it's OK to take their life or their life is less worthwhile?
It's not your call. All animals are our co-inhabitants. ALL of them.
For me I realize that it is essentially impossible to be 100% vegan but I say that I am a vegan with conviction to make a statement about what my priorities are in this life and they do not include using animals as slaves to make my life better.
I see nothing wrong ethically with eating and wearing roadkill but I would not want to be sending that message to anyone that I may be possibly okay with fur so I respectfully decline to use eco-fur as I think everyone should as long as an industry exists to profit from animals as slaves.
Gene Bauer had a fantastic idea of having mandatory video surveillance on all farm animals. I urge you to sign it and help put an end to animals suffering in isolation.
http://animals.change.org/blog/view/time_for_video_cameras_in_slaughterhouses
http://www.all-creatures.org/articles/ar-whatswrongwool.html
http://www.all-creatures.org/articles/ar-whatswrongwool.html
http://www.freewebs.com/cruelty-free/apps/videos/videos/show/1756470-what-s-wrong-with-wool-
My reason for supporting an loving fur is that is it biodegradable, local, sustainable, and long-lasting. You might choose to keep yourself warm in a fleece, but fleece is made from petrochemicals and synthetics that are extremely harmful to the environment and not sustainable or biodegradable. How many animals did the Gulf of Mexico oil spill kill? Just something to consider.
So you support and love fur even though those animals are horrifically abused specifically for that purpose...very odd statement considering this is what happens for these animals on a daily basis. http://skintradethemovie.com/
Personally I don't know what you saw on that fur farm, but I would not allow my dogs to be treated that way, I am an animal behaviorist and you can say you have been to one farm, but their are so many others that are horrific conditions for these animals that are caged and lonely without medical care chewing each others legs off and having their skins ripped off alive. The psychological implications are too much. But I'm sure since you seem to know so much you already knew this.
We can stop using fur to make a statement, it's pretty much all we can do for now and write letters and tell others. But unless you live in a cave you pretty much have to accept that everything we do these days is having impact but that is no excuse for tolerating animal slavery done on purpose or for profit. I recommend those surveillance cameras be installed in every business that uses animals for free labor. It's the least that can be done.