Is using mohair fur okay?

Another downside to faux fur, unfortunately, is how it's made. It often uses petroleum products and other chemicals as raw materials. All of these chemicals require energy to produce - energy production and by-products of the refining processes produce greenhouse gases and other nasty chemicals that we have to find a way to store or dispose of 'safely'. When faux fur is no longer wanted or has become threadbare it goes in the garbage, quite often (some places may recycle it, but I know that Mountain Equipment Co-op in Canada is sadly no longer taking polar fleece for recycling, not sure why). Most faux fur does not biodegrade very easily or rapidly and it stays in the landfill for centuries if it's not incinerated, releasing more greenhouse gases and chemicals into the environment.

What I'm getting at is that the production and disposal of faux fur adds to environmental problems. Environmental problems add to habitat loss for animals (and humans).

I am an animal-lover and honestly, I think that if we must use fur-like things or trims, wild-caught fur, harvested using humane traps, is, in the end, a much better solution for animals than faux fur. It's sustainable if regulated properly, it's a renewable resource, I suspect that the pollution of a few trappers going out on their skidoos (even including the energy and pollution caused by the production of their skidoos and the refining of the oil to run them) is less than what all the mines, oil rigs, refineries, laboratories and factories required to make faux fur would produce, it's biodegradable and the very act of trapping wild animals necessitates the maintenance of wild animal habitats in order to keep the industry going, so the furbearers themselves benefit but also all the other species that live there.

 

ladyiolanthe - thank you, thank you! Finally, someone brought up this very valid point. I too love animals probably more than people, but please, enough with this hypocrisy about the fur! In my book, conscientiously harvested leather and fur is always more environmentally ethical than a product of a oil-refinery.

 

I always find this sort of discussion amusing because most of us are one big contradiction. Example, I don't use fur because it disturbs me and I don't eat veal because of veal cows. Yet I'll eat chicken in a restaurant and those animals suffer too before they are slaughtered.

People will go as low as to send death threats to a HUMAN BEING to protect animals. Something funny about threatening death for death? But at the same time some of those people might be wearing a diamond ring that they never bothered to ensure was not a conflict diamond. Or their house is filled with cheap luxury items made by poor exploited workers in foreign countries etc... I am often amazed at how deeply someone can care about an animal and have so little compassion for a human?

I used to feel physically ill (dizzy) at the thought of someone hurting an animal and often I still do. Animal rights really weighed heavily on my mind when I was younger. But I have calmed down a bit on this matter after I realized that in contrast I have never once picketed out side of the UN building for allowing the killing in Rwanda or marched outside the white house to protest Bush's attempt to "redefine" the Geneva convention etc...sometimes I feel like the worst hypocrite alive so I can't understand people who feel secure enough with their position in this world to violently and verbally attack another person over fur?

When I think of it all it makes my head spin. I guess the best we can do is pick our battles and make the greatest effort possible to not support merchandise that directly inflicts pain and suffering on another living being. Any living being! I don't know that an individual can perfect this to a point where they are completely without fault thus, sitting back and judging, calling people names like "Ignorant" or threatening them etc...is just ridiculous.

 

Funnily enough, veal was one of the reasons I stopped being vegetarian - knowledge of the, erm, wastage of calves in the dairy industry finally nagged loudly enough at me. So I did a bit more research into it, having vaguely heard of something called rose veal, and discovered that not all dairy calves are either reared in crates for veal, or shot at birth; but some are reared with either surrogate mothers or in barns - and fed (relatively) properly - until 6-8 months, when it is slaughtered. Veal, along with chicken, is one of the meats I will only eat if I can be sure of the provenance of it - which means I won't eat it in a restaurant, or in any form of pre-made/ready meal.

 

Well said!

As far as hunters maintaining wild animal habitats, a very good example of this is the work done by Ducks Unlimited. My husband works in wildlife conservation, and he works with this group extensively. Their goal is to preserve and return to nature habitat used by waterfowl, land that in many cases has been drained for farming, or is threatened by development. These changes to the land have caused massive drops in the populations of waterfowl and the other animals that use wet areas, like beaver, mink, etc.

Ducks Unlimited has preserved over 12 million acres of land in the US and Canada. Think of how many animals live there! This was done by duck hunters. But they aren't doing it to make sure they can kill as many animals as possible (Dick Cheney style), but to protect species that might go extinct because of other human actions. Why? Because most hunters (unlike the ones portrayed in film) actually care about wildlife.

Assuming that faux fur is better for wild animals only considers the specific animals spared. It doesn't consider the many habitats threatened by industrial pollution, dumping and other aspects of our throwaway society. Pollution and habitat encroachment have killed far more animals than hunting. That from my ecologist husband.

 

Thank you for bringing this up. I have a number of friends who do precisely this, and I see this sort of... I don't know if I would call it hypocrisy as much as I would call it a form of blindness, or at least a case of not seeing the forest for the trees.

It seems the more passionate someone is about a subject, the more everyone else has to be screamed down; listening appears to stop, it has to be the way they think it is and only the way they think it is and nothing else will penetrate no matter how real it may be. When someone thinks the only truth is their truth, it's a good sign that sight of the bigger picture is long gone.

 

Hey there Surreality.

Yes, I find this a very complicated topic for me to put into words, but the truth is that I think a lot of people (including myself at times) can be self righteous hypocrites. This thread is filled with confessions about buying responsibly etc... I promise I try to do the same but you know I am failing in some areas of my life because it is so difficult to understand where all of the stuff is coming from. I mean ALL of our stuff. From the pencil on our desks, to the milk we are putting in your coffee, to the cup that holds it and so on...

I am not saying that we give up but I do think that going to extremes (death threats) over fur seems totally over the top. I doubt that many of those fervent people go to the same lengths for unprivileged humans living in poverty in their own country. I have known many passionate animal right activists and I was amazed at how few of them protested over the crisis in Rwanda when it was happening. I guess that hacking people up with machetes is something to sympathize with but not protest worthy because it doesn't conjure childhood memories of fluffy the kitten ? I deeply respected their dedication to raising animal rights awareness but I blushed at their self righteous condescension toward the "uneducated masses" as it seemed a bit

The "big picture" is almost impossible to fully comprehend. There is a lot of suffering in this world and it would be beneficial to all to try to gain some understanding before we scream down anyone. People love animals but it would help if they could also focus some energy on loving people (NOT JUST CHILDREN). Living in perfect balance and harmony in this world is extremely difficult and so few of us are actually succeeding sooooo...let's all be careful about aggressively pointing fingers.

/end my love the people rant

 

Yes -- and honestly the name calling and more extremist behavior runs the risk of driving people away rather than changing their minds. When it comes to educating people, behaving in a calm rational manner will be received better than having someone yell and scream at you. Though where I stand on various animal issues does at times overlap with the animal rights folks, I often have issues with their tactics and lack of...I don't know, perspective? Being realistic? You get people who mean well, but seem to know little about the animals they want to protect or how to deal with the public. I know not everyone is like that, but there's definitely some very vocal folks that do more harm than good.

I agree wholeheartedly that it's impossible to be perfect -- especially in the world we live in where it can be difficult to ascertain where and how our consumer goods are made. All anybody can do is the best they can, and doing even small things helps. Animal welfare issues are important and worthy of support, I just wish some people would stop and take the time to educate themselves before attempting to 'educate' the public.

 

This is where I am on it, too. (Especially wincing in agreement on the age issue; it's sometimes as though people stop being relevant to any given cause when they turn 18.)

To ramble more generally on the issue, I used to be very much 'no fur ever ever ever ever'. Then my grandmother gave me one for my 16th birthday, because it was a tradition in her family. (We will not discuss how stupid it looked and still looks on me. Truly. Floufy white fuzzy stole on an overly busty short Italian chick with too much hair? Oh it was such a bad idea on every possible level.) I was presented with exactly that quandary, when it comes right down to it: argue against the gift and support my principles over an animal that I could not now be of any help to and wound someone dear to me emotionally, or start to consider the fact that it might be something not so black and white to handle. Ultimately, I thanked her for the gift and her thoughts but did let her know that if there would be future presents for certain commemorations, to avoid fur, and why.

While I don't exactly have opportunity to wear it very often, I don't anyway, and not just for the 'this looks patently ridiculous on me' part. Even that choice is one I have to consider, because the item already exists. I can't change that. I wonder if it sitting there in a box in a closet is wasteful and I should wear it, or if wearing it would instead inspire other people to get more of them and thus I shouldn't wear it.

A friend of mine made faux fur coats for people, years ago, that were close enough in appearance to real fur that two of her customers got paint-bombed for wearing them. That didn't get her to stop making the fakes, though; what did? When someone complimented her on one of hers, not knowing it was faux fur, and said she'd scoured the city to find one just like it and finally found one -- except that one was real. So the actual 'promotion of use' issue there can arise with the real or the fake fur, ironically.

I have so many vintage scraps that I've not needed to buy new fur, but I don't really have an enormous issue using it. If I had to for something, I likely would. I have a few friends who hunt, and they've offered to provide pelts if I ever want them, which I haven't as yet. I have used leather for some of my work, though, and would continue to for those purposes.

 

I also used to be "no fur!"

However, after growing up with friends who lived on farms and hunters, I am a bit more lenient. I love leather. Pleather just feels fake and stiff. Fake fur feels like polar fleece, which makes my skin crawl.

Also, a viewpoint on "conservation". We all know the "deer overpopulation" stories and whatnot, but this one is a little bit more on a personal scale.

My friend lives on a hobby farm. One night, we went out to feed the horse and goat and realized that there was a possum in the barn.

Possum urine is very poisonous to horses. If it were to relieve itself on the hay, we'd have a dead horse. Also, possums eat kittens. Without the barn cats, there would be a mouse override on the barn, who would then eat the oats and leave their happy little droppings all in it. Also not good for horses.

So, they did what they had to do.

They killed the possum.

Now, I know people are like, "but the possum deserves to live!" But, think about it. Possums are stubborn little things. They tried to chase it out of the barn, but, instead, it went into a stall. It won't leave the place that will give them lots of delicious food. They can be very territorial.

But, if we did let the possum live, it would have poisoned our horse, killed the barn cats, which would then let the mice overtake the barn. It would have completely thrown the entire little eco-culture of the barn into a tailspin. To conserve the barn's integrity, we had to get rid of the possum.

 

I think a lot of this has to do with how close we are to nature. At this time in history we are farther removed from our food than ever. And we have technology that seems to obviate much of the killing that happened in the past.

I grew up in New York City, about as far removed from the wild as is possible. I had a very typical city dweller's view of what nature was. Local creatures were English sparrows (an imported pest), dandelions (another imported pest), Norway rats, etc. In other words, about as artificial an environment as possible.

But my views on nature and our relationship to animals changed profoundly once I met my grandmother (in another country) who owned a sheep farm, and after I met my husband, who has rejected hunting himself, but comes from generations of hunters. I learned the killing of animals sometimes isn't as simple as it seems on its surface.

It's easy to form an opinion based on surface facts. Who could be pro killing fluffy, sweet bunnies, for instance? There's a visceral reaction to cruelty, that is right and good. But the reality is that as humans encroach on nature we change it and have a responsibility to manage it. Anyone who eats-- vegan, vegetarian or ominivore is responsible for some animals' death-- directly under the plow, trampled underfoot, or indirectly through displacement, loss of habitat and starvation/sickness. This issue is not as simple as black/white, good/bad, ignorant/informed. It's more about doing the most good and the least harm. And good judgment, ultimately. And judgment means that opinions--informed opinions-- can and will vary. After examining the facts, some will choose to eat meat and use fur, and some will choose not to. Both choices should be respected.

 

What you've said is very true! Unfortunately, the majority of fur does not come from small-scale hunters and trappers (the International Fur Trade Commission indicates that 85% of fur is farmed), and the farms and tanneries that produce most of the fur and leather in today's market create immense amounts of pollution. The waste from closely-confined fur animals contains high amounts of nitrogen and phosphorous, which cause significant damage in our lakes and rivers. Even worse is the tanning and dyeing process, which uses carcinogenic heavy metals such as chromium and cadmium. I have no idea what kinds of industrial pollutants are created by the fake fur industry (I wish I did!) and I doubt it's pretty, but I also don't think it's accurate to paint animal fur as a "green" alternative.

I also want to mention that I've really enjoyed hearing everyone's viewpoint on this topic and am impressed with the level of civility that's been shown regarding such a sensitive topic! From a more personal perspective, I think it's awesome that so many people are thinking so hard about where different products come from, and how we can balance our need for consumer goods with environmental and social concerns.

(I also want to apologize if I sound at all preachy--it's certainly not my intent. I conducted a great deal of research on the fur/leather tanning industry while I was working for a human rights organization, so it's a topic I enjoy discussing.)

 

Yup, that is why I specified wild-caught fur. Certain people in the community I live in still tan moosehides the old-fashioned way, using the animal's brains, water, smoke, and a lot of hard work, but this is a dying art. I agree that fur farming and commercial tanning are both horrible for the environment and for animals.

 

When it comes to domesticated animals I've never had an issue with skinning and such. It's seems only natural. A wig is an easy choice if it's what you want.

 

How do you feel about using a mohair wig on your doll?
Personally, I love the mohair. I like the texture better and the way it holds its form. It's also slightly cheaper depending on the site.

Does it go against what you believe?
I'm all for animal rights (not quite as crazy as peta but I'm close) but I believe that if every part of the animal is being used or if the animal is being kept alive then it is fine. Now, if I were to learn that these animals were being killed just for their hide, I'd probably swear of mohair forever.

Does anyone else feel this way?
I can totally see where you're coming from and I do sympathize with you, but I know I'm not to that point of internal conflict myself. I hope you find a resolution that makes you happy.

 

When I think of fur I think of fake fuzzy fur in crazy colours. I don't eat meat but it's because I don't like it and I don't class myself as vegetarian because of that. I wouldn't want to buy real fur because I like fake stuff in crazy colours.

Many years ago though I took a fur coat loving friend to the theatre and as the trip was quite a long drive away she threw her fur coat onto the back seat of my car for the journey. My car had plush dark blue seats and there was * so * much fur left over my back seat - took ages to get rid of it - it sort of wove itself into the fabric!

 

I'm totally fine with using fur for anything, so long as the rest of the animal is going to be used as well. My issue with fur stands not with animal rights (I'm an animal welfare [1] girl), but with wastefulness.

(I'm probably going on someone's hate list for this ) As long as the meat of the animal goes for something like dog/cat food, fertilizer, or another product versus straight into the trash, I don't have an issue with it. I would not be okay with fur if they shaved the carcass and threw the rest away. That's just disgustingly wasteful.

By the way, I'm seeing a lot of confusion about "animal rights" and "animal welfare". If you go by the AVMA, they are VERY different stances. Here are the terms based upon what I've been taught as a pre-vet student aimed at getting into an AVMA sponsored vet. school:

-Animal rights: Animals are equal or greater than humans. Animals should not be eaten or used for products such as eggs, fur, leather and milk, nor used in anyway that is unacceptable to humans. May include rights only afforded to humans such as right to vote and own property. (PETA, HSUS (who is NOT affiliated with your local humane society), ALF - (The people who firebomb laboratories and have killed people who work in them. Obviously, they are the FAR extreme end of animal rights and are not supported by all animal rights activists.).)
-[1]Animal Welfare: "Animal welfare refers to the state of the animal. Assessment of welfare includes consideration of the animal's health, behavior, and biological function. Protecting an animal's welfare means providing for its physical and mental needs. Ensuring animal welfare is a human responsibility that includes consideration for all aspects of animal well-being, including proper housing, management, nutrition, disease prevention and treatment, responsible care, humane handling, and, when necessary, humane euthanasia." (American Veterinary Medical Association, Veterinarians, your local human society, ASPCA)
-Human Supremacy: Animals are for whatever their owners feel like. It is acceptable to do whatever they want to the animal because it is nothing more than a piece of property. (I don't support this, for the record.)

Also for the record: I eat meat, eggs and wear leather. I don't wear fur simply because I don't like the price tag. I always spill stuff on it anyways. >___<

 

How do you feel about using a mohair wig on your doll?
While I like fiber wigs, one of my dolls who's character wears wigs will have several mohair wigs to choose from. So obviously, I'm ok with this.
Does it go against what you believe?
Oh honey. I was born in Texas. And I'm moving to the UK, land full of sheep and cows and farms. I have family on my mum's side that are farmers, and my dad's side is Cajun. I love meat. I love fur. Particularly off of food-animals, as they'll die anyway. Humans are meant to be omnivores. It is more respectful to an animal to use all of it than part of it.
I think it's obvious: it's not against any of my beliefs.

Also: never eat my brownies. They have suspect ingredients and are never vegan.

 

It's 3 a.m and I have class tomorrow but I felt the need to share my 2 cents.
I honestly have no problem using fur, leather, eating meat...it's all an act of live. Native Americans did it and used the entire animal. More times than not when you're buying leather, the meat from the cow is being consumed, being sold, or being flushed down the porcelain throne.
What I do have a problem with is the people who pull the "holier than thou" by stating "I refuse to eat/use/associate myself with an animal that was murdered," implying that the people who eat the animals are murderers and are less of a human being because we'd rather get genuine protein from the source instead of some pill. (Please note that this is how I interpret those messages, I'm not pointing fingers at anyone nor do I wish to be associated with doing so.)
And I perfectly understand animal control in environments; sometimes, natural selection just doesn't work quick enough or efficiently enough and thus, all game for us human beings. You can't help but kill Bambi and Thumper, especially if they're messing with the ecosystem and you can't domesticate them and you can't just capture them and let them die naturally. It just doesn't work like that.
Onto the mohair wig point: I guess just use whatever wig is suits best to your style. If it bothers you so much that an animal is in the wig, then don't buy and and get something else. Animals are killed--it's a fact of life that no one can change.

My friend's Jewish and I once asked her why she wouldn't accept a transplant if she needed it. (This is relative, I promise)
She explained to me that in her practice, Jews don't accept transplants nor give blood because they believe that when their time to go is their time and there's no use in prolonging it. I apply that with the animal control issue--their time is their time and there's no use prolonging or delaying it.

...this coming from someone with no religion but alas. There's my 2 cents. Off to bed.

 

In those situations I ask "Was the animal killed for its fur or is the fur a byproduct of the animal being eaten?" When we cookmeat, we make stock (broth) from everything we can't eat. It seems wasteful not to use the skin if the skin has a use too. It seems silly to put all of the stigma on one part of the animal.