If you want an example of how C+T helps an industry just look at farming. It killed the little guys.
yes but in trapping the little guys are doing it for fun and using outside money too support a "hobby".
Traceability is already in place and has been for many years, self-certification is in place when we sign our permits saying that we will follow all laws and regulations.
The problems with raccoon-dog and false advertising were nothing to do with trappers or hunters, it was retailers and marketing people blatantly lying, I guess all the opposition to fur in the USA can be laid on the marketing people maybe. And now those marketing types want to set trappers up as either whipping boys or scapegoats for any future bad press that comes from false advertising at the retail level.
It was mentioned above and passed over, does CG actually even buy coyotes? It was said that they actually buy ruffs already made up by some invisible to the consumer ruff supplier, who may or may not be the dresser/tanner; but breaks any tie between the trapper and the garment maker.
I have already self-certified with my permit and provided traceability at the buyers level and beyond the buyer, whether it be a country buyer or through an auction, after the initial sale I have no more to do with the fur nor any control over it.
Certification of the brokers and tanners and dressers and furriers and marketing liars is beyond my control, but if there is a problem with the public perception, it arises in those areas. Always it has been the retailers that have created the public perception, the retailers need to look at their own house first.
Open mind, Ok. Voluntary whipping boy for corporate advertising, I don't think so. But others have volunteered and more will in time.
This entire discussion is moot, the folks that are affected first and most have already made the contract. The precedent is in place. Boco is correct in that it is too late to prevent all this.