| About Di Digest | Back Issues | Mailing List | Email DI | On Line Features | 1
| 2
| 3 |
4
| 5
| LitScan |
2. |
Letting the Fur Fly |
| Things are getting a little hairy
in the international fur trade. Europe and major fur-producing countries like
Canada are scrapping over the use of leghold traps to capture fur-bearing
animals, pitting economic and social concerns over sustainable livelihoods
(see DID Issue 4, DI#2) against ethical concerns about animal suffering.
A proposed European Community regulation banning a broad range of leghold-linked
fur imports is looming, pending the results of on-going negotiations between the
EC, Canada, Russia and the USA. The EC is the world's major fur-buying market
and it wants exporters to reduce unnecessary cruelty toward animals. The
Canadians are particularly sensitive about the European move, which resonates
within its $1-billion-a-year, mostly-for-export fur industry and among native
people who practice trapping as a traditional way of life. The EC's Fur Trade
Regulation could affect numerous important - and unendangered - export species
from badgers and beavers to muskrats and raccoons. In an effort to quell the
European concerns, Canada has introduced regulations governing more humane
trapping in its territories. But British environment minister John Gummer still
wants the import ban until the leghold traps are removed once and for all.
Canadian Deputy PM Sheila Copps lashed back during the recent IUCN World
Conservation Congress in Montreal, saying a ban would hurt the traditional
livelihoods of First Nations people and have 'no basis in science or sustainable
development'. She suggested the EC position may have more to do with protecting
European fur farmers than furry animals of a four-legged variety. Whatever one's
position, the trade in pelts clearly touches on a number of deeply held values
and perfectly valid interests. We only hope traditional producers, cruelty-
conscious consumers and animal rights activists can come to an accommodation
before the ban delivers its own special sting.[of fur traders, leghold traps
and traditional livelihoods] | |
| Trauma scale n. an upcoming International
Organization for Standardization (ISO) rating system establishing criteria for
humaneness in trapping. Comfort scale n. an earlier misnomer for the ISO 'trauma scale' before it was concluded that traps hold little comfort. | |
| European Alliance with Indigenous Peoples. EAIP Newsletter: Information
Bulletin on European Policies towards Indigenous Peoples. Brussels, Belgium:
EAIP. | |
NOT HOT - |
Foot-in-Mouth Traders |
| Achieving agreement often sounds easier than it is. Round tables may be a
cinch to set up, but too often they miss the crucial elements required for
success. Take the case of Canada, which pioneered the idea but where few round
tables survive today. Why did some fail and others succeed? The answer lies in
two key factors. First, successful round tables require top-level buy-in from
those capable of making the final decisions. In Canada's provinces, then, the
participation of provincial premiers was crucial to creating the 'can do'
atmosphere necessary for progress. The other major factor contributing to a
dynamic outcome is the production of an identifiable output that the round table
'owns' and feels comfortable promoting, even if the political powers-that-be
aren't terribly supportive. Without at least one of these ingredients, the
result is likely to just be a wishy-washy soup of suggestions - and a shortened
lifespan for the round table. | |
Virtual Ideas |
The
fur trade from an animal rights perspective... And an industry perspective... Video coverage of Canada-EC wrangling over a European fur ban |
|
European Community countries are
considering banning a range of fur imports unless "there are adequate
administrative or legislative provisions in force to prohibit use of the leghold
trap; or the trapping methods used ... meet internationally agreed humane
trapping standards."
|