9.29.2008

Eco Fur?

From a link in the Seattle Times, Eco-Luxury Fur: a company claiming that wearing expensive furs is beneficial to the environment.


The hype-text on the website reads:



"[W]ithout any of the negatives often associated with fine furs." Huh? I can think of a few.

And this passage from the Independent:

"Fur is sustainable, recyclable, biodegradable," says Hutchings, who then goes on to argue that possum fur is a special case. "These animals would be killed anyhow, and the way the government does it is inhumane." Currently, the New Zealand government sprays pellets of poisonous sodium monofluoroacetate (1080) over large areas. "The animal is left out in the wild to rot, which can be a source of secondary poisoning, and there can be collateral poisoning if other animals eat the pellets," says Hutchings. Her possums are killed within 10 seconds using cyanide, or are trapped. The fur is processed without the use of artificial colours or preservatives, and made into cushions or throws that cost $200 (£112) for a cushion and $3,400 (£1,900) for a bedspread. "That the fur is ecologically compelling is icing on the cake. It feels luxurious and looks incredible," continues Hutchings, who thinks her throws can help climate change. Possum fur is the third warmest in the world, so snuggling under one of these bedspreads allows you to turn the thermostat down.


When I first heard of EcoTimber back in 1994, I got a bit worried that "eco" was being too widely affixed to things that weren't, but this "wear fur, help the environment" claim is just too much. Exterminating/managing an overly abundant invasive population is one thing; wearing the bodies of the creatures in order to participate in the historical luxuries of fur is another.

1 comment:

  1. Woah. I can't believe how watered down leftist/liberal/activist terms can get. Eco-fur?

    Thanks for sharing this.

    ReplyDelete