It's not "flippant" to tell them to pound sand if, as it appeared before Monster Toms straightened out what they want, was the way it was headed. I won't chance allowing one company that may not be here ten years from now even suggesting law cahnges. It sure looked that way at first on this post.

I think it would be "flippant" to allow something like that to happen. We have our state agencies working with our trapping assn's keeping things on the up-and-up so we don't need what appeared to be an outside, no idea what we do company telling us. IMO of course.

(like i said a couple years ago when this first came up, all our laws and methods are easily found on line for them to either accept or deny our goods.)

Where would the fur trade be without CG today, and yes I mean the whole trade. Think about it a little bit and not only of the trapper but where would the buyers and brokers be without the margins generated by the coyote trade.

You really think I would come on here and post what I have just to stir the pot? Not hardly! Like I said i'm here to pass on what has been passed around at our meetings, and set some of the BS to rest, whether these thoughts come to fruition is yet to be seen. At very least I would say I'm probably the only person that has posted that talks regularly with CG reps. you want to find out whats up call them, ask for their product compliance and safety specialist. Hard to understand on the phone but helpful.

I'm proud to say that CG noticed how Colorado's auction works, and APPROACHED US first and foremost to help build this coyote market, We can only hope that it continues.

As far as these "tags" this is the first I've heard of them. The only incentive passed to me is that with compliance by the Auction they will be "CG certified" meaning that furs purchased at that auction will be welcome for CG garments.

If you have questions about what Canada Goose wants, I suggest talking to Canada Goose. All I know is what they told me when I spoke to them in MT. I have no questions at this time. I don't really have a clue what McAllister said in his report. I feel I ask enough questions that I agree with Monster Toms.
For those of you that don't know Marty B runs a route up through ND and MT buying for Petska. Maybe he has a clue too.
The bottom line is the buyer has the final say. He can make an offer or pass. He can raise his offer or tell you to pound sand. Keep that in mind. CG sells a lot of coats without fur. I would bet it would hurt us a lot more than them if they stop using coyotes for trim. It would be a lot easier to use ranch fox than fight with 10,000 trappers that don't know what is going on.
From what CG has told me I will sign.

It is flippant. Yes, they could be gone in ten years or they could just as easily double their market. Now ask youself how owuld they do that when they can not get enough coyotes already. They will have to come up with new product lines that either include another form a wild fur or go without. Right now I'm being told they want to use sustainable wild fur. Lets hope they don't start looking at something lkke blue fox.

I'm being told they have an idea of what they would like but are very open to suggestions and it's a work in progress. Make no bones about it, they aren't doing it to appease the anti's. Anti's don't believe in sustainable, humane harvests.

All I'm saying is I think we need to keep an open mind and be a part of the process or it may just be dictated to us.

Wallfur, I hear what you are saying. I'm leery of taking anyone on the line with me, even the neighbor. Not because I have anyting to hide but that is my nature.