The unethical and unnecessary fur trade
In our modern civilization the question of animal rights is becoming increasingly important: a true civilizational challenge.
In the media, discussions are frequently opened by intellectuals about the way we consider animals.
Veterinarians, ethologists, and neuroscientists remind us that animals are still treated as disposable products, no different from cars, furniture, or any other human-owned property, while they are sensitive creatures capable of feeling pain and distress.
Ecologists state that all farming activities have a negative impact on our environment. Statements made by high profile public figures encourage politicians to urgently reconsider the question of animal rights in Europe.
Laurence Parisot, former head of the French MEDEF (Mouvement des Entreprises de France), recently claimed that animal rights are a necessary evolution.
As Europe has always been a leading force towards a more humane society for animals, many NGOs find staggering that real fur is still widely available in Europe and that 6000 fur farms are still operating.
Let’s recall the obvious but forgotten truth: we don’t need to wear fur.
Even in a non-vegetarian world, wearing animal fur when alternatives are widely available is an ethical nonsense.
In fur farms, animals are caged during their entire lives. Studies show that fur-farmed mink suffer from captivity frustration even after 70 generations.
One study published by the zoology department of the University of Oxford clearly suggested that mink kept in cages were enduring immense distress and anxiety. Within the framework of a non invasive experiment, mink deprived of natural activities for 24 hours, like swimming in a pool had a 50% increase in the stress hormone.
Mink even after so many generations in captivity, still hear the call of the wild confirmed the biologist Georgia Mason (1)
Another fundamental study concluded that enriched environment has no effect on animal welfare.
enrichments were not sufficient to decrease or interrupt stereotypic behaviours (2)
There is evidence that they still need to perform natural activities as it was emphasised in a recent study:
farm mink still use water bassins for swimming volontarily, willingly and extensively although the animals are considered to be domesticated and this is often used as an argument that the behavior of wild mink can not be compared to the behavior of farmed mink (3)
Regarding the environmental aspect of the fur industry, a comprehensive study that was made public last year, showed that the environmental impact of natural mink fur coats and trims is higher than the impact of faux fur coats and trims (4)
Forget the fur.
We aknowledge that some might believe that the animal perspective is not easy to interpret.
That is why we must err on the side of caution.
The European Parliament needs to set a limit.
Wonderful green alternatives are now available and should be considered as the only industry to promote.
We are urging the European Parliament to take a stand toward a greener, more sustainable society, that is fairer to animals, and promote recycling and the use of organic and sustainable textiles, which do not imply the killing of millions of animals, and benefit the fur industry.
The Absurdity of fur:
French analysis and the most recent footage in Europe: