x2

I hate to do this; defend NAFA, but the U.S. has it's own agreement. If NAFA wanted, which I don't believe they do, U.S. trappers to comply with anything, it would be our own bmps not Canada's agreement that they don't realllllly comply with.

It doesn't matter what agreement is referenced or if no agreement is referenced. The point here is that NAFA does not have the authority or jurisdiction to enforce compliance with or require declaration of anything with regard to our BMPs or our ethics or our harvesting methods or the equipment we use and so on. They have absolutely no standing when it comes to how we harvest fur -- NONE!

I will never participate in their attempts -- however innocuous they make it sound -- to have me acknowledge their authority over how I harvest my fur through any document signed or otherwise. It is literally none of their business, and I will make sure of that by never doing business with them so long as they continue down their Certification and Traceability road.

This has never been about crafting the right language for those of us in the United States to accept NAFA's "Ethical Sourcing Terms and Conditions." It's about who has the authority to demand whether I am in compliance with anything I do as a licensed trapper in the U.S.

NAFA does not have that authority in any way shape or form. And we need to make sure they never do.

NAFA sets their own terms with who does business with them. Nobody is forcing anybody to do business with them. I don't even believe NAFA wanted to do this certification B.S. Sometimes things are forced on you because your competition starts this crap. I bet they don't even want to deal with this since they got bigger problems these days. I could be wrong.

As does FHA, which respects the "wide range of state, provincial, territorial and federal rules" on harvesting fur by NOT setting up it's own trademarked certification protocols. Here is FHA's position on certification:



Here is NAFA's Certified™ Wild Fur requirement (aka "NAFA Certified™ Ethical Sourcing Terms & Conditions"):



Fur Harvesters Auction is NAFA's competition, and they don't require trappers to "declare their intentions" because intentions are irrelevant to the "wide range of state, provincial, territorial and federal rules" already in place.

I don't think we're in disagreement, Dirt.

FHA is not the competition I'm talking about. NAFA's (the fox and mink breeders of the U.S. and Canada) competition is the European farmers. They (European farmers) started this welfare certification stuff because their business activity is slowly being banned across western Europe. Now they are running to Poland. For some reason wild fur got drug into this mess.

The farmers created welfare STANDARDS. Are they enforced? You really can't certify wild fur. The certification is meaningless. The Auctions are just saying the word "Certified"

FYI

"Keeping mink in small barren cages has been banned in several European countries, including Britain, Germany, Czech Republic, Austria, The Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Spain, Croatia, Macedonia and Slovenia. The few remaining major producers of mink are Finland, Denmark, Poland, Greece and China. In Poland the government is discussing a new animal welfare law which would ban fur farming. Fox farming has been banned in Denmark and Sweden."

Gotcha...my misunderstanding.

If you want to sell your fur what's the big deal sign the freakin paper. Can't see where It's going to hurt you.

I agree with Beav, only the selling will hurt.

Yep! Sign the paper with FHA, and you won't have to declare your intentions to fulfill any requirements and your fur check won't bounce. Sounds like a win, win to me.

Good advice, Beav.

The point Is no one Is going to be checking your methods and what traps you use to make a catch. So It's just smoke and mirrors to satisfy some faction.

Muskrat will probably even be able to certify his illegally crossed the RR tracks fur.

Or.....I could maintain my self-respect and go with door #2 or #3. Markets with choices are a wonderful thing.

So what do you suppose the outcome would be if for instance... You didn't sign the agreement (certification) with NAFA, but you sent them a very large lot of red fox (or name your fur). What will NAFA do with that fur... Just seize it and sell it and keep all of the money, or return it to you and send you a bill for the shipping and handling costs, or demand the S & H costs in advance, and if you don't send the money they just keep it. I know this appears to be illegal for them to do this, but the way the liberal Canadian Government is, NAFA may be able to persuade the Government into passing regulations to make it legal to take this action, since it is an international action.

I guess I am at the age, and have been around enough to see everything most governments do, is to see how bad they can put the shaft to people.

Garry-.

They would sell it , take out shipping & handling and magazine cost and a few other fees then send you a hot check. Seems like it works for them so far.