« Back to the Ads page

Eco-Fashion

November 6, 2008
Submitted by hsiaolan.hung

2.5 AVERAGE RATING

Eco-Fashion

Tags:

hsiaolan.hung’s of Canada gave this ad a 5

According to International Labour Organization, chemicals commonly used to process fur include acids, hydrogen peroxide, chromium, formaldehyde, bleaching agents, and various types of dyes. In 1992 the Dutch Advertising Standards Authority ruled that fur apparel advertised as “ecological” was improperly and misleadingly labeled. In 1991 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) fined 6 fur processing firms $2.2 million for the pollution they caused. The EPA stated that the waste from fur processing plants "may cause respiratory problems, and are listed as possible carcinogens." What the fur industry also fails to mention is the high number of non-target catches. Traps cannot distinguish endangered species from non-endangered ones. Trapping fur-bearing animals by the millions out of our eco-system for "fashion" can NEVER be green! Check out www.CrueltyIsNotGreen.com

Other Ratings:

scott gave this ad a 1
February 20, 2009
Comments:
The Bible state man shall have dominion over the land and animals. Trapping or harvesting animals has been a way of live and survival for hundreds of years.Now we have people that feel they need to change the world.Fur is a natural product and the close minded people of California and elsewhere do not have a clue about rural America and the way of life.It is easy to have an opinion about things you do not know anything about. Harvesting animals is proven to be efficient and humane with todays techniques and have evolved into more that what some perceive as steel traps chopping legs off,etc. Many animals are released unharmed with rubber padding traps and live traps and if not kept in tact,disease will take over from over population. Do some research and look at all the animals with mange that are bald without any hair. They distroy trees,kill livestock,dig large holes in the ground,etc.
muddyriverdogz of USA Illinios gave this ad a 2.2
February 20, 2009
Comments:
Both Polyester and Nylon(Nylon from fuel grade oil) are made from oil.That is what 99% of clothing is made from today.I would like to ask what you will be making clothing out of when the oil runs out?I guess then fur will be okay again..
anthonyauto of WV gave this ad a 1
February 20, 2009
Comments:
I find the ad is accurate and fully descriptive of what they offer. Fur is a clean, green renewable resource. As in any industry, there are good trappers and bad, and sadly, extremists and activists try to apply the bad ones as a bare generalization. Not only is trapping scientifically proven humane, it is also been proven a valuable and effective method of biological diversification and management.
d of wi gave this ad a 1
February 20, 2009
Comments:
Fur is natural, plain and simple!
dinok gave this ad a 1
February 17, 2009
Comments:
Whether people like it or not, Fur is natural. Fur bearing animals lives in nature, made in nature and is 100% renewable, recyclable and naturally biodegradable. If that is not environmentally friendly, what is? In addition, sustainable harvesting of nature's wildlife, (which is done in developed Countries), is necessary for a healthy and balanced ecosystem. Think about the consequences on the environment without proper wildlife management? It just makes ecological sense!!
Caampbell of canada gave this ad a 1
February 17, 2009
Comments:
I'm very pleased to see fur producers finally speak up about how fur is renewable, reusable and sustainable! As long as the International Humane Trapping Standards are followed (which Canada, and other countries are committed to) I will always be a big fan of beautiful and sustainable fur products.
Della of Purple Hill Ontario gave this ad a 1
February 17, 2009
Comments:
Fur has been around forever, keeping people who live in cold climates, warm, and able to work outdoors. The modern fur trade is very aware of sustainable harvest, and takes only the surplus populations of fur bearers. Animals do not die of old age in the wild, but from disease, starvation or predation. Man as a predator is more "humane" than another animal.Fur is biodegradeable, sustainable,renewable, and very long lasting. This to me, is Green.
Wand of canada gave this ad a 1
February 17, 2009
Comments:
Anyone who actually looks beyond the surface at animal cruelty issues pertaining to trapping knows that Canada is THE world leader in humane trapping standards. To confuse cruelty issues - which is a human behavioural problem, NOT a problem with a specific type of work - with sustainability issues, dilutes and confuses an already challenging dialogue about how to live responsibly and respectfully on this planet. To pinpoint chemicals used in tanning and parade around in all of those synthetic "eco-fabrics" is hypocrisy at it's height. Fur lasts. It is renewable. It supports traditional ways of life that should be shining example to anyone who cares about sustainable living. You want to visit a community that has no need for a landfill? Find yourself a group Canadian of wild fur trappers.
Chillie of Warsaw, Ontario gave this ad a 1.2
February 17, 2009
Comments:
No fashion technology is 100% green, but the fur trade is an excellent example of sustainability. Does anyone know how many trees a beaver will destroy in its lifetime?
Joe Hale of Oregon gave this ad a 1.2
February 17, 2009
Comments:
I'd give Patagonia and others a 5 for the way they greenwash--how can they make petrochemicals clothes that will never biodegrade and claim it is eco? I have a suede coat from high school I still where (25 years old). Can't say the same for any of the fake petro fleece. Fur is just leather with the hair left on. Fur and leather last so much longer (better value) than the fake throw-away products. This is a very well regulated field and I think the animal rights activists blur the lines between eco and animal rights. I look at animal welfare + eco + environmental.
mickymarie of USA gave this ad a 4
December 31, 2008
CompassionIsTheNewGreen of California gave this ad a 4.4
December 26, 2008
Comments:
Overstates and exaggerates & leaves out important information - the double whammy that make this ad greenwashed to "strongly agree" bogus claims. To say that nature "produced" a fur coat with cancer producing chemicals or that it is a fashion choice that is "responsible" in any way is pure "foxwash" - not to mention utterly UNcompassionate. To be green is to treat the earth and all its inhabitants with respect – not as “resources” for us to ABuse. The only kind of "sustainable resource management" that should take place in our beautiful forests is called "Nature" - and she does a fine job of regulating our flora or fauna without the help of trappers, indigenous or otherwise. How about showing the fur industry that compassion is the new green! Enter the fashion design competition that is truly green; “fffashion” at www.bornfreeusa.org/fffashion
bethanne616 of New York, NY gave this ad a 5
December 7, 2008
Milieunet of Utrecht gave this ad a 5
November 24, 2008
Comments:
No fur !!!!!!!!!!! Nothing green in this ad. Complete nonsens
aleximondrus of Barcelona gave this ad a 1.4
November 22, 2008
audej of Brazil gave this ad a 4.4
November 14, 2008
Green-Rising-Marketing of Salt Lake City gave this ad a 4.7
November 10, 2008
Comments:
This is unbelievable. Concern for the environment is not just limited to what's being put in the air, but also respect for the eco-systems and species that make it up...as well as humane treatment. Holly-www.greenrisingmarketing.com
ryoder of Omaha, NE gave this ad a 2.6
November 7, 2008
Comments:
I think the original post may be confusing the horrors of trapping as a threat to the environment. Sustainable resource management, whether of flora or fauna, allows for harvest. The original post cites a web site which objects to harvesting by trapping, but doesn't object to the claim that it can (or even should) be done in a way which keeps the population stable for indigenous and future generations. I agree that no mention of the tanning process was mentioned in the ad - and this is where the ad veers towards greenwashing. It does not mention the process, and this is the part of the industry that has historically provided the largest environmental insult.