Definition: Malarkey

noun; meaningless talk, nonsense, insincere or foolish talk,

speech or writing designed to obscure, mislead, or impress. bunkum.

Sounds about right, Dirt !!

w

This might be the best auction ever!!!!!

Here's how the Antis are dealing with traceability at the retail level... Canadian retail level: https://nypost.com/2019/08/01/canada-goose-pulls-claims-about-its-treatment-of-animals-amid-probe/

You believe PETA?-idiot.

Well at least certification will prove once and for all that trapping is regulated. Peta won't be telling big whoppers about all our unregulated fur harvesting anymore.

Oh they will keep spewing their BS.Fortunately consumers now have solid info from the producers to refute the BS ie: C+T.

All traceability tells the consumer is the product comes from the U.S. or Canada. Are anti's telling the consumer our products come from somewhere else? The retailers and the manufacturers are the ones pedaling Chinese raccoon dog as raccoon and claiming they can't sell North American raccoon.

Yes-they say our garments contain live skinned Chinese raccoon dog.

My product is a pelt. Many products labelled by retailers and their Chinese suppliers as raccoon is actually illegally labeled Chinese raccoon dog. Both know they are lying to the consumer. This practice will continue as long as the U.S. does not enforce their labeling laws.

Boco, your hypothesis from the very beginning (for years now) argued that certification and traceability would curtail the lies and distortions from groups like PETA because we'll now have proof and evidence that our harvesting methods are humane because of the C+T label. Well, we now have a test case of your hypothesis, and PETA not only spewed out their usual lies and distortions *they used traceability* as the basis for their attack on Canada Goose.

Traceability provided them with the framework on which to pull their publicity stunt. It was key to everything they did here, and they brought the FTC into it once again!

And what did Canada Goose do? They ran with their tails between their legs, scrubbed their website of everything having to do with traceability, and made an announcement that the company is "currently in the process of diversifying its product offerings towards categories that do not use its signature coyote fur. Specifically, management called out knitwear, which primarily uses wool, as one category gaining momentum.”

It was a disaster.

Wrong. Certification is an unneeded and unwanted lefty idea, promoted to make producers think that their marketers(nafa) is doing such a great job for them.(the producer). Just another sales gimmick from nafa, and in collusion with a handful of end users. The fact of the matter is it won't make any difference, you can't get people that are brainwashed by the anti's to except fur, based on a wim and a prayer![/quote]

Maybe unneeded, maybe unwanted, maybe effective, maybe not. But it is a marketing tool, nothing more.

How does the company packing tuna in cans know for sure it is "dolphin free"?
How does the company packing an orgainic chicken know it didn't pick a bug off the fence that once walked across a leaf the was exposed to roundup?

Exactly what I wanted to say only you said it way better......

Wrong mainer-that is fake news spun by the peta crowd.CG stands by its product and backs its suppliers.In fact they proved thru C+T that the goose farm in question was not one used by CG.And their statement that the coyote harvest is surplus animals and sustainable.And that a population managed by harvesting the surplus mitigates nuisance and human conflict is spot on.They may not have worded it well but have come out to correct that.
They absolutely did not back off their commitment to sustainable harvest by their suppliers(trappers),on the contrary they re-affirmed their commitment.They did however clarify the poor wording.
Only the rabid antis did not accept that-are you an anti,you seem to be spewing/spreading their rhetoric about one of our most important supporters?Or is it because it is a Canadian company?

CG has been lying to their consumers for years. Apparently it works, but they get busted all the time and everybody pays the price. It was CG that started all this certification stuff concerning wild fur with their false claims that they only used coyotes caught by certified Canadian trappers. Reminds me of the old Burlington coat factory boondoggle.

Obviously you swallowed all the peta BS.
All fur trapped in Canada comes from trained and certified trappers.No lie.

Unfortunately some ( maybe most) of their coyotes came from uncertified U.S. sources. Peta made no claims, CG advertised this. What are you certified as in Canada? If you are all certified, what is NAFA and FHA certifying? Us?

I googled "certified Canadian trappers" google seems be unaware.

Certified under the aihts,and you under the bmp.

Traps are certified, not trappers. And Canadian coyote trappers use snares (not certified) and certified trap use is only mandatory in Ontario, Quebec, and New Brunswick. Not exactly where western heavies come from.

"Note 1: The exclusive use of these certified traps is currently mandatory only in Ontario, Québec, New Brunswick"

Snares are totally acceptable under the aihts derogation.
And the footnote refers only to encapsulating traps for coon,lol.

No the footnote refers to all Phase 2 restraining traps which cover all the certified restraining traps for coyotes and other species. Snares are not certified killing or restraining traps. Since the subject was certification can we stick the subject. If you believe your own misinformation you type on here, it does not surprise me you believe CG or NAFA or FHA.

Certified traps