Here is a form letter I saw on facebook, from the International Fur Federation, that can be sent to the mucky mucks at etsy in response to their fur ban. The post said we are free to use it or add or change as you want. Not sure it will do anything but if enough folks let them know how wrong headed it is who knows?

Dear Ms. Patel Goyal,

I am writing to express my deep concern and disappointment regarding Etsy’s reported intention to ban the sale of fur products on its platform from August, apparently based on a biodiversity policy.

This decision is, frankly, difficult to understand. Natural fur is one of the most environmentally aligned and biodiverse materials within the fashion system. It is a natural product that biodegrades at the end of its life, in stark contrast to synthetic “fake fur” alternatives, which are petroleum-based and contribute to long-term environmental pollution.

Furthermore, a significant proportion of fur originates from regulated conservation programs in North America. These programs play an important role in maintaining ecological balance and biodiversity. Indeed, government-supported initiatives in both the United States and Canada compensate licensed trappers for their role in wildlife population management and conservation.

Against this backdrop, Etsy’s position is extremely concerning. It suggests your company may have been influenced by one perspective—namely, animal rights advocacy—without engaging with or seeking input from the fur industry itself. This lack of balance is troubling, particularly given the global fur industry is valued at approximately $20 billion and remains an established and significant part of the wider fashion and sustainability landscape.

Had there been an opportunity for dialogue, we would have welcomed the chance to present evidence and perspectives demonstrating how natural fur can align with biodiversity and sustainability objectives.

In light of this, I would strongly urge Etsy to reconsider its position, or at the very least, to leave open the door for constructive engagement with industry representatives. There may be scope for a more balanced approach—for example, permitting the sale of fur derived from recognised conservation programs or certified sources that meet agreed environmental and ethical standards.

I am also concerned this decision may represent the beginning of a broader trend. Historically, bans on fur are often followed by increased pressure on other natural materials such as wool, leather, and even cotton. This raises important questions about consistency, sustainability and the long-term direction of marketplace policies.

I sincerely hope you will take these points into consideration and agree to a meeting with our CEO of the International Fur Federation, Mark Oaten, to explore this issue further and identify a constructive path forward. email address JZubricki@etsy.com

Etsy really needs to get letters from Native American organizations who's members sell handcrafted fur items. Wonder if anyone has thought of contacting these groups?
BTW, one thing fur advocay groups might want to do is get away from calling our trade the "fur industry", it is really an artisan conglomeration of individuals.

a few words about the value of fur and other wild animal derivatives in the history, art, traditions and daily life of different nations and cultures all around the world would be nice. Turning fur sales into something where you have to provide proof of your ancestry and use specialized outlets to purchase stinks of human zoo. It's not just some savages from the Discovery channel, it's millions of real people among us, and not all of them identify as soy Gretas. So much for their diversity and inclusion

Very eloquently stated, Tatiana.

Dear Ms. Patel Goyal,

I am writing to express my deep concern and disappointment regarding Etsy’s reported intention to ban the sale of fur products on its platform starting in August, reportedly under a biodiversity policy.

I raise this concern not only as someone involved in the fur sector, but also as an active Etsy seller who relies on the platform to support my small, rural, Canadian business. My Etsy shop sells wildlife-based products sourced through regulated, legal, and ethical means, and the income generated directly supports my local economy. Decisions such as this do not affect faceless corporations; they have real consequences for individual makers, trappers, artisans, and rural communities that depend on Etsy as a marketplace.

This decision is difficult to understand. Natural fur is one of the most environmentally aligned and biodiverse materials within the fashion and craft system. It is a renewable, natural product that biodegrades at the end of its life, unlike synthetic “fake fur” alternatives, which are petroleum-based and contribute to long-term environmental pollution and microplastic contamination.

In North America, a significant proportion of fur originates from tightly regulated wildlife management and conservation programs. Licensed trappers operate under provincial and state regulations, science-based harvest quotas, and humane trapping standards. These programs exist to manage wildlife populations, protect infrastructure, and preserve ecological balance. In both Canada and the United States, trappers are formally recognized as playing a role in conservation, and in some cases are compensated for damage control and wildlife management services.

Against this backdrop, Etsy’s position is extremely concerning. It suggests the company may have relied on a single narrative, largely driven by animal rights advocacy, without engaging directly with licensed trappers, conservation professionals, or industry representatives. This lack of balance is troubling, particularly given the global fur industry represents billions of dollars in economic activity and supports thousands of small, independent operators rather than large industrial producers.

As an Etsy seller, I value the platform precisely because it has historically supported small-scale, traditional, and locally rooted enterprises. This proposed ban undermines that foundation by removing an entire category of sustainable natural products without meaningful consultation. Had there been an opportunity for dialogue, many of us would have welcomed the chance to provide evidence and firsthand experience demonstrating how natural fur production aligns with conservation, biodiversity, and sustainability goals.

I strongly urge Etsy to reconsider this position or, at the very least, to pause implementation and engage in constructive consultation with industry and conservation representatives. There are viable, balanced alternatives, such as allowing fur products sourced from certified conservation programs, licensed trappers, or recognized ethical and sustainability standards.

I am also concerned this decision may signal a broader trajectory. Historically, bans targeting fur are often followed by pressure on other natural materials such as wool, leather, and even cotton. This raises serious questions about consistency, environmental reasoning, and the long-term direction of Etsy’s marketplace policies.

I sincerely hope you will take these points into consideration and agree to a dialogue with industry leadership, including the CEO of the International Fur Federation, Mark Oaten, to explore this issue further and identify a more balanced, evidence-based path forward.


Respectfully,
Matt Faulkner
Etsy Seller and Licensed Trapper
Hastings Wildlife
Ontario, Canada