There use to be 4 fairly large furriers In the Madison WI area. There are none at this time. And I don't see there ever being any again.

I hope groney sells 1000s of coats.

glv sees what I am trying to say. I would love to see a fur boom, but I just don't see a cheap copy of a coat that was king kicking it off. There were copy coats being made in China before CG bailed for less then what CG was selling them for. They sure didn't hold the market up. Some even had a patch similar to CG's. He may sell enough to use up his coyotes and dig himself out of the hole, but one person buying fur does not push the price much.

All of the dressing and sewing will be overseas is my bet so much for made in America, At least Canada Goose was Canadian made.

Didn't Joe Willy Namath wear a full length coyote fur coat
to the Super Bowl back in the day a few decades back ?

w

Yes, was on the front page of the Dailey News.

Yep ! Joe Namath should be the answer among the 80 year old market. Maybe he can hawk coyote depends?

Or dangling hearing aids from the ruff!

Chat GPT argument for wild fur over synthetic coats. In my opinion we have a generational chance to position fur as the environmentally sound choice in certain segments of the clothing industry. Even if you do not believe in climate change, micro plastics or water shortages, this is the number one argument that I pull out when discussing the use of fur. The amount of money being put into climate initiatives alone makes it worth while for the fur industry to try and get in as a environmentally friendly industry.

Arguing for the environmental benefits of wearing wild fur over mass-produced synthetic clothing involves several key points supported by relevant statistics. Here’s a structured argument:

1. Resource Efficiency
Wild Fur: Wild fur is often a byproduct of wildlife management and conservation efforts. According to the International Fur Federation (IFF), wild fur is frequently sourced from regulated trapping programs aimed at maintaining ecological balance. This process uses animals that are culled to prevent overpopulation, which can otherwise lead to ecological imbalances. Therefore, the fur from these animals helps in managing and conserving wildlife populations.

Synthetic Clothing: The production of synthetic fibers like polyester is resource-intensive. The European Commission reports that producing 1 kilogram of polyester requires about 5.5 kg of CO2 emissions, and the entire industry contributes approximately 1.35 billion tons of CO2 annually. This high resource consumption and carbon footprint are significantly higher than the resource needs for wild fur.

2. Durability and Longevity
Wild Fur: Wild fur, like other high-quality fur, is highly durable and can last for several decades. The IFF highlights that wild fur garments can have a lifespan of 30 to 50 years with proper care. This durability reduces the frequency of replacement and minimizes waste.

Synthetic Clothing: Mass-produced synthetic clothing, typically made from polyester and other artificial fibers, has a shorter lifespan. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) indicates that synthetic textiles often wear out and are discarded within a few years, leading to higher turnover and increased waste.

3. Waste Management and Biodegradability
Wild Fur: Wild fur is biodegradable and can be repurposed or recycled. The IFF notes that natural fur can decompose and return to the ecosystem without leaving long-term waste. Additionally, many wild fur garments are reused or upcycled, extending their lifecycle and reducing waste.

Synthetic Clothing: Synthetic fibers are non-biodegradable and can persist in landfills for hundreds of years. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation reports that microplastics from synthetic clothing are released into the environment with each wash, contributing to significant pollution.

4. Carbon Footprint
Wild Fur: The carbon footprint of wild fur is relatively low. According to the IFF, wild fur’s carbon footprint is around 1.7 kg CO2 equivalent per kilogram of fur, which is lower compared to the emissions associated with synthetic fibers.

Synthetic Clothing: The production of synthetic fibers like polyester has a much higher carbon footprint. The Climate Council states that synthetic fibers contribute approximately 35% of the fashion industry's total greenhouse gas emissions, making their environmental impact substantial compared to wild fur.

5. Water Usage
Wild Fur: The production of wild fur generally requires less water compared to synthetic textiles. The IFF indicates that the water usage for wild fur is minimal compared to the water needed for manufacturing synthetic fibers.

Synthetic Clothing: The production of synthetic fibers is water-intensive. The World Resources Institute reports that producing one kilogram of polyester requires about 80 liters of water, excluding additional water used in dyeing and finishing processes.

6. Pollution and Chemicals
Wild Fur: Wild fur’s environmental impact is lower in terms of chemical use. Modern practices in fur handling often involve fewer chemicals compared to the extensive use of dyes and finishes in synthetic clothing production.

Synthetic Clothing: The production of synthetic fibers involves various toxic chemicals. The EPA estimates that the textile industry releases large amounts of pollutants during the production and dyeing of synthetic fabrics, contributing to environmental contamination.

Conclusion
While ethical considerations regarding the use of wild fur must be addressed, data suggests that wild fur can be more environmentally conscious than mass-produced synthetic clothing. The lower carbon footprint, reduced water usage, and biodegradability of wild fur present significant environmental advantages over the resource-intensive, high-emission, and pollution-heavy synthetic fiber industry. By supporting sustainable wildlife management and conservation programs, wild fur offers a more eco-friendly alternative in the context of fashion.

Although a good argument for sure, but green energy isn't about oil or carbon footprint, it's about control. Until people wake up, we're all just spinning our wheels.

We know that, but many of the people that "preach" it don't. We need to use what they think they know against them.

Amen k

Good post saskfly. I would emphasize the extreme harm microfibers are causing in our oceans' ecosystems. Microfiber contamination is a huge environmental concern with some sources estimating up to 500,000 metric tonnes annually reaching our oceans and persisting for up to 500 years!

Microplastics are even being found in human blood and mother's milk. The apparel industry is a major source of microplastics.

I've made fur hats for years now, not a lot, I make to order every year there are more orders, people will wear fur when others around them do ! If you have a presentable item well made and cost effective to move !

The cost has to be affordable as well, one cannot charge for a out of country 300 dollar hat here, they won't sale, unless it's a binge or dare deal for others, I know seen it happen enough to know its a thing.

Our country is not a fur wearing country any longer for full fur apparel, if it's fur hat's, collared coats or gloves for the winter, you can do pretty good if your work is presentable, it has to look and feel professional, not thrown together for a few buck's, any one doing fur work to sell them selves will tell you the same thing.

I buy fur in small amounts every year for my use, have it tanned professionally so it looks and feels expensive, not any home tanned stuff that is semi soft, or has hard spots, this is imperative for selling ! I also trap and hunt my own fur, every year I increase my inventory and now retired will invest in pre-made hats of several styles due to customers now sending referenced people to me, an inventory I never wanted to do, however there are now other reasons to do so !!

People want fur to sale, everyone have to do their part, trappers need to wear it to all outdoor stuff in the winter, even if it's just in a camp around, during a hunt or family affair they need their family and friends to wear it as well, everyone needs to do their part, not wait until a large buyer tries it on their own , just so others feel they can then again flood the market with fur.

Which this in its self is another debate that needs some real attention for controlling supply and the market, not to just hit fur hard because the price is up some. which the majority of trappers do instantly the next year, few trappers are real stewards of supply and control of their product. It's a dollar deal for other things in life they want to advertise they bought it with their fur catch !