In a meat-eatIng world, wearIng leather for shoes and clothes and even handbags, the dIscussIon of fur Is chIldIsh.’’ Karl lagerfeldThe daily Telegraph, january 2009

uK

‘‘

“Der er gået Bambi i alting”

Peter Sandøe, ProfeSSor i bioetik, i Politiken

Kopenhagen Fur

langagervej 60

dK-2600 glosTrup

Tel.: (+45) 43 26 10 00

faX.: (+45) 43 26 11 26

mail@Kopenhagenfur.com

www.Kopenhagenfur.com

Why is Fur comparable to steaKs or Wool?99.9 per cent of the population adhere to the basic prin-ciple that of course man is allowed to keep animals and use material derived from animals. be it for medicine, as pets, leather shoes, wool sweaters, milk or a fur collar. or steaks.

animals must be treated properly while alive – and they must be slaughtered in a proper manner. that goes for all animals.

in its 2003 report the animal ethical Committee under the danish Ministry of Justice wrote:

”if, in principle, fur is perceived as a product like any other product derived from animals, it is difficult to see why fur should be characterised as a luxury product. in our part of the world, we surround ourselves with prod-

ucts for which we have no basic need, and the definition of when a product is characterised as a luxury product is therefore somewhat arbitrary. for instance, it is dif-ficult to argue that fur is more luxurious than meat, as our part of the world abounds with substitute products in both cases. and if you choose to include environ-mental considerations in the debate, fur may seem less luxurious than meat eating, as you may argue in favour of the use of fur as a more environment-friendly product than synthetic materials and against the production of meat because of the high environmental impact and poor energy utilisation of the soil compared with plant production.”

Who campaigns against Fur?danish anti-fur campaigns are often headed by a small organisation anima which also wages campaigns targeted at school children against any use of animals.

fur is no different from steaks or wool. but some people are keen on depicting fur as a special niche in man’s traditional relationship to animals. the campaigns are often aimed at boutiques or fashion companies in an attempt to convince them that fur animals are subjected to great pain, and many people (= consumers) are “opposed” to fur. all of this is carefully calculated misinformation.

fur Is lIke steaks or wool

Quality Sorting of Mink SkinS at koPenhagen fur.

”Many of them, PETA included, advocate that animals should not be regarded as property (no pets), and should not be used for food (even milk, honey and fish are out), clothing or research. Those who take such a hardline view are a distinct minority.”

The economisT, ediTorial, january 2009

a fur breeder attendS the aniMalS at a Mink farMtyPiCal daniSh Mink farM.

“I also consider it an infringement to feed your child meat. A child is an innocent and pure creature who is defiled by carcass, and the child hasn’t even the right to choose!”the aniMal rightS organiSation aniMa’S diSCuSSion foruM

the organisation adheres to a vegan ideology – that man should fully refrain from using animals or materi-als derived from animals such as milk, wool, medicine, leather, meat, eggs, etc.

according to the organisation, fashion companies should use neither wool, leather, down nor fur. using the same ideology, a pharmacy or a supermarket would have to reduce its choice of goods quite radically. the idea of animal rights originates from the book Animal Liberation (1975) written by the australian ethics phi-losopher Peter Singer.

Engaging in a qualified dialogue with Anima on animal welfare is of course out of the question, as the organi-sation would argue that man should not keep or use animals in the first place.

anima was founded in 1999 as a danish sister organisa-tion of the uS-based animal rights organisations such

as Peta (People for the ethical treatment of animals) and hSuS (humane Society of the united States) with almost the same core values of ethical veganism – and often using very fanatical campaign methods.

Contrary to organisations involved with animal protec-tion, such as the danish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to animals, which accepts live stock farming provided it is undertaken with due regard for animal welfare, anima and other animal rights organisations are, as mentioned, opposed to live stock farming, fisher-ies, insect extermination, etc. of any kind.

in 2002, three of the founders of anima, Jan Mølskov Justesen, tone karina andreasen and Jan Petersen, were sentenced to terms of imprisonment of between five months and one year and nine months for arson and vandalism. anima’s current spokesman, Joh Vinding, has been active from the beginning.

on several occasions, anima has intimidated designers and shops, among them several of the iC Companys brands, into adopting a fur-free policy. the organisa-tion’s strategy is to contact retailers selling fur, and by using highly misleading “documentation” on the condi-tions of the fur industry, the organisation tries to talk the retailers into adopting a fur-free policy. if not successful, anima becomes increasingly aggressive posting a small group of very visible activists outside the retailer’s shop.

Moreover, anima tries to play down its radical view-points in the general public at large. in, for instance,

“The fur industry is very good at communicating how they treat the animals. Compared with how animals are treated in general, it seems morally ambivalent that people are opposed to fur but still wear leather shoes and eat eggs”

kiM grenaa, Style CounSel, in MilJødanMark PubliShed by the daniSh MiniStry of the enVironMent

“We are all part of the food chain. We all live and we all die, we cannot put ourselves on a pedestal, but should always as human beings ask ourselves how the animals lived and how they were killed”

Suzanne brøgger, author and koPenhagen fur’S faCe in 2005, in danSk

PelSdyraVl, MeMber Magazine of the daniSh fur breederS’ aSSoCiation.

applications for football pools and lotto funds, the organisation describes itself as an animal welfare or-ganisation, and naturally no specific reference is made to the organisation’s “less marketable” messages, i.e. that the production of milk and eggs should be stopped.

Why have they chosen Fur as their campaign theme? as underlined above, an organisation like anima does in fact consider fur in the same way as yoghurt, wool or bacon. No use of animals is acceptable from their point of view.

When anima picks fur as its campaign theme, it is of course because of the fairly limited prevalence of fur products. Milk drinkers and people wearing leather watch straps outnumber people wearing fur by far. it is, therefore, difficult to “sell” the message that milk or leather should be prohibited.

if only a small percentage of the population owns a fur product, the issue is much easier to “pursue” – it may even stir up a little envy in us all.

but make no mistake. for fashion businesses, wool and leather will be next on the list. and in special campaigns targeted at school children, the vegans have already launched a witch-hunt against the food industry.

Slaughtered Mink are Cooled for uP to 24 hourS before they are Skinned.

robotiCS iS uSed in the Pelting ProCeSS.

“Animal welfare is a question of biological needs – not philosophy”

leif lau JePPeSen, aSSoCiate ProfeSSor, uniVerSity of CoPenhagen,

andelSbladet, Joint PubliCation for daniSh CooPeratiVeS

“Everything has gone Bambi”

Peter Sandøe, ProfeSSor of bio ethiCS,

in the daniSh daily neWSPaPer Politiken

“I think the killing of the mink was definitely the most humane and soundless and bloodless death i’ve ever seen. it was from cage to death in matter of seconds.”

“Clearly this is not what the protesters believe and having heard all their horror stories, it’s not what i had expected. if this really is standard practice, then why the outrage?”

MerrileeS Parker, a britiSh tV PreSenter,

after haVing exPerienCed killing of Mink at a daniSh fur farM ShoWn in a tV doCuMentary broadCaSted in the uk in 2008.

claim: fur animals are skinned alive.

truth: no, they are not. before being skinned, fur animals should actually cool naturally after the killing, a process that follows stringent procedures just like the slaughter of all other animals. if so-called video tapings show half-dead animals being skinned, they represent extreme cruelty to animals staged by the activists to obtain “ef-fective” footage. it is both 1) more trouble, 2) dangerous and 3) damaging for the fur quality to skin animals alive.

claim: there is no knowing where the furs come from.

truth: as a consumer or retailer, you can always ask about the origin of furs. the fur trade uses an international label of origin, origin assured (oa). the label covers certain fur types and is used in several countries which regulate fur trade by means of legislation and inspection. furs carrying the label can be traced down through the chain of suppliers, workrooms, tanneries, buyers and auction houses to the country of origin. Please also note that dog and cat furs as well as fur from seal pups are banned for import into europe and there-fore completely irrelevant to discuss.

claim: fur is cruelty to animals.

truth: Massive volumes of publicised university research documentation clearly indicates that fur animals are living under even better conditions than many other farm animals.in denmark, fur animal farming is governed by danish and eu legislation - and the veterinary doctors of the danish Veterinary and food administration systemati-cally inspect all farms.

claim: Many are opposed to furs.

truth: on the contrary. fur has never experienced higher de-mand from consumers than today. in the period 1999 to 2007 alone, the global retail sale of furs almost doubled from uSd 8.2bn to uSd 15bn. at the same time, the glo-bal production of furs reached an all-time high in 2008.

claim: Many fashion brands and designers have fur-free policies.

truth: anti-fur activists are extremely pleased that some shops and fashion brands have declared fur-free policies. but since the mid-80s many, many more fashion brands and designers have fallen in love with fur as an authen-tic - and very natural - material. anyone can see that fur abounds all over the fashion stage. Most recently, karl lagerfeld has joined many other designers in stating that fur is just like any other material.

claim: fur animals are different, because their meat is not used.

truth: fur animal bodies are, for instance, used in the bio-diesel production at daka’s plant at hedensted in denmark. in this way, the entire animal is used. fur animal feed also contains by-products from human food production - material that would otherwise have been destroyed. this means that fur farms even consume more meat than they produce - and nothing is wasted.

addiTional informaTion is available from info@Kopenhagenfur.com or Tel. + 45 43 26 10 60

true and false about fur