The U.S. Should Ban Fur Farming
Few people would force an animal to live its entire life in a cramped, barren cage suspended over its own waste. As an example, most humane-minded people agree that puppy mills which keep dogs in precisely such conditions are abhorrent and should be shut down.
But what happens when the animals that are kept in such horrific conditions are not domestic dogs, but wild animals?
This is precisely the situation that exists for millions of animals raised on U.S. fur farms. Globally, the majority of fur used in fashion comes from animals raised on fur farms where they are forced to live in cramped confined conditions that fail to accommodate their natural behavior. Death provides their only release and is often precipitated by extreme fear, stress, illness, and pain.
The frivolity behind such treatment makes it particularly repugnant. Between 10 and 24 foxes and 36 to 65 mink are killed to make a single fur coat. While it may take fewer animals per coat to produce fur-trimmed garments, fur trim collectively may take more animal lives than do full-length fur coats due to its prevalence in today’s fashion.
The United States is the fifth largest mink producing country in the world. In terms of animal lives this amounts to approximately 3 million farm-raised mink killed annually for their pelts. Additionally, approximately 660,000 breeding female mink are held on U.S. fur farms. Reliable data on the total number of farmed fox, and farmed bobcat or lynx, raised or pelted in the U.S. are not available.
The fur industry and its apologists want us to believe that fur farming is a humane, environmentally friendly and highly regulated industry. Nothing could be farther from the truth. A common assertion made by the fur industry is that mink and fox raised for their fur are domesticated animals that have been selectively bred over generations to be adapted to fur farm conditions.
Fox and mink have been bred in captivity for possibly 90 years, which is less than 3 percent of the domestication time of cattle, pigs, horses, and dogs, which have been raised in captivity by humans for more than 5,000 years.
The issue of domestication in farmed fox, and perhaps to a lesser extent farmed mink, creates an interesting paradox for the fur industry. On the one hand, the industryguards itself against charges that it mistreats wildlife by claiming that farmed fox and mink are “domestic animals” in anattempt to akin itself to other animal-based agriculture. On the other hand, the industry must guard against comparisons of foxes and domestic dogs unless it is willing to defend the use of domestic dogs or cats for the fur trade — a practice that is so widely condemned that it has been banned in most long industrialized countries including the United States and Canada.
There are no U.S. laws regulating how animals on fur farms are to be housed or killed. Animals raised for fur are not covered under the federal Animal Welfare Act. The slaughter of furbearing animals is also not covered by the federal Humane Slaughter Act.
The techniques used to kill animals on fur farms vary. Small animals like mink are killed by neck snapping or “popping.” Larger animals like foxes are electrocuted anally by placing a metal clamp on the snout and forcing a rod into the anus, and then connecting the metal to a power source. Some animals are forced into bags or boxes and gassed with carbon monoxide or carbon dioxide. Animals may also be killed by injection, and while this is often considered a humane method, it is not possible to inject a wild, fearful animal skillfully.
It is clear that conditions and killing techniques on fur farms have been designed for the convenience of the fur farmer, not the welfare of the animals.
Fur farming also poses risks to the environment and native wildlife. Like any other factory farm, fur farms produce loads of animal waste (manure) that are too intensely concentrated to be neutralized by natural processes. Excessive nitrogen and phosphorus are the most common causes of water pollution in the United States.
Current research also suggests that farmed mink may be having a serious impact on North American wild mink through competition, hybridization, and disease introduction. Hybridization and associated genetic transformations may eventually result in the natural population being incapable of sustaining itself leading to species endangerment and extinction.
In the last 50 years, concern for animals has increased in many countries, resulting in an increase in animal welfare–related legislation and prohibition of acts considered to be unacceptably cruel. However, fur farming suffers a relatively low position on the U.S. political agenda. As a result, the United States lags far behind European countries such as the United Kingdom, Italy, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark, Austria, the Netherlands and Croatia which have banned some or all fur farming.
While the cruelties and environmental threats of the fur industry have received little political attention, consumers and companies are increasingly turning their backs on fur. In a 2002 national poll of upscale U.S. consumers, conducted by Decision Research, 81% considered selling fur products to be socially irresponsible. At the same time many national and international retailers have ceased selling fur and have put their fur-free commitment in writing by signing onto the international Fur Free Retailer program (www.furfreeshopping.com). Likewise design competitions like “fffashion” www.bornfreeusa.org/fffashion, are encouraging forward-thinking designers to forgo fur in their designs.
The fur industry may attempt to market itself as an environmentally friendly industry that cares about animals, but conscientious consumers, companies and designers aren’t buying that message. They, like many European governments, have recognized there simply is no right way to do the wrong thing.
It is time for the United States to match public opinion and international progress on this important issue and ban fur farming.
Monica Engebretson is a senior program associate with Born Free USA (www.bornfreeusa.org).

There many reasons that fur could never be considered “responsible,” “sustainable” or “environmentally friendly.”
• In addition to loads of manure, fur farms also produce waste in the form of animal corpses – meat from animals raise for fur is typically not consumed, rather it is routinely piled up and allowed to rot, rendered, incinerated, or used as bait to lure wildlife into traps.
• Compared to a faux fur coat, it takes nearly 3 times more energy to produce a fur coat from trapped animals and 15 times more energy to produce a farmed-fur coat, according to a study by Gregory H. Smith a transportation research engineer at the University of Michigan.
• Environmentally harmful chemicals including chromium and formaldehyde are use in the processing and tanning of real fur garments to keep them from rotting. In 1991 six New Jersey fur processors/tanners were fined more than 2 million for releasing toxic waste into the environment . Tanneries more than any other business are on the Environmental Protection Agency’s Superfund list that identifies the priority environmental clean-ups.
• Traps set to catch wild furbearing animals are notoriously indiscriminate often catching “non-target” animals including threatened and endangered species and domestic dogs and cats. In 2008 a federal judge ruled that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources was in violation of the Endangered Species Act for allowing trappers to set traps and snares that catch, injure, and kill Canada lynx, a protected species. The case was filed on behalf of Born Free USA and the Center for Biological Diversity
Thank you for being so factful! It's people like you who are helping to make a difference. I also let the woman above have a piece of my mind.
Thank you!
Most people agree that natural fibers are superior to synthetic ( oil -based) clothing. In cold weather, natural fibers such as sheepskin, leather, wool and fine furs are fabulous to wear. They're biodegradable, recyclable and renewable.
For information on mink farming and fur in general, visit www.furcommission.com
You can also visit a mink farm online at www.furcommission.com and details on how this North American farming sector is regulated is detailed in Q3 at http://www.furcommission.com/FAQ.htm #Anchor-44867
Any questions? Email your U.S. mink farmers at furfarmers@aol.com We're always happy to hear from you!
I realize this comment was over a year old, but regardless off that fact you are blind and seriously mistaken about some of the statements made in your response.
No, most people do not prefer fur to synthetic material. Do you even consider checking the numbers. You only hope that people prefer it so you don't lose a job.
We are not barbarians anymore. In a time where technology was nonexistent, yes I'll admit using animals for warmth was completely acceptable, but there is no use for it now. We don't all live in antartica where temperatures are deathly cold! We have homes and electricity to keep is warm not to mention countless synthetic options. Anyone who can't afford these other methods for warmth would definitely not be able to afford fur, so your argument would be a ruthless attempt to even find a point.
Where do you even get the nerve to try and make fur farms seem environmentally friendly! Wake up! Fur farms are producing so much waste that companies like yours can't handle all of the mess your responsible to clean up. Your so called facts are completely off and I would love to direct you to the comment below where someone was kind enough to provide some evidence to their comment. As well as the article above that you must have been unable read.
You make it seem completely acceptable to see something that looks like it would be nice to wear and slaughter it. If I want to take skin from a person why wouldn't that be just as acceptable. I'm cold, so since we are in such a barbaric state right now then that should be fine, don't you agree? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds, pretty much like your argument.
I could go on and on, but I'll stop here. You should direct your attention to this video on YouTube.com titled "Very Sad Video (a must see)" and you tell me if you think this is acceptable to do to animals.
You sicken me. The world should have people like you in it, and you need to change. Switch over to the production of synthetic material goods, and you'll gain nationwide respect!