Login / Register
You must Login or Register to rate this ad
Description:
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
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



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.