• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Proposed Fur Sales Ban in Massachusetts

F

FisherTech

Joined
Apr 25, 2018
Messages
2,731
Likes
4,712
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Animal Cruelty Fueling Push to Ban Fur Sales
Massachusetts would become the first state on the East Coast to outlaw the sale of fur products, under legislation introduced Wednesday. Rep. Jack Patrick Lewis (D-Framingham) and Sen. John Velis (D-Westfield) are sponsoring the bills (SD 1029 and HD 1592), which have the backing of the Humane Society of the United States. The bill's supporters cite cruel, unregulated animal killing methods in the fur industry. "Massachusetts is a world leader in animal welfare," Lewis said. "Given the overwhelming evidence of inhumane practices in the fur industry, the risks fur production has to our public health and the availability of so many different options for warm and fashionable fabrics, we will not continue to be complicit in unnecessary cruelty." The bill exempts leather, cowhide, and shearling, as well as previously owned fur products, and the ban would apply only to the sale of products including clothing and fashion accessories like handbags, shoes, slippers, hats or key chains, that contain fur. Said Velis: "The excruciating process these animals go through for their fur is utterly disturbing and must be ended. Due to the work of so many great advocacy organizations, more and more people have begun to learn of this cruel practice and what it entails. Public sentiment against the fur industry has been growing for years, and this bill is an important next step for Massachusetts." Laura Hagen, Massachusetts state director for the Humane Society, said "the fur industry's days are clearly numbered," mentioning places like Wellesley and Los Angeles that have banned fur sales, major brands dropping fur, and top fur-producing countries like Norway and the Netherlands outlawing fur farming. The MSPCA, Animal Legal Defense Fund and Fur Free Massachusetts are also supporting the bills, along with Reps. Natalie Higgins and Lindsay Sabadosa. - Michael P. Norton/SHNS
Click to expand...
 
Not one to sleep on this is classic anti death by 1000 cuts. They can't outright ban trapping so they'll make it harder and harder with no reward. I sent this letter to all the spineless politicians virtue signaling as well as some news papers etc.

"The cruelest thing we can do for wildlife is fail to manage it properly."

To Whom it may concern,

I am writing to voice strong opposition to the proposed legislation in bills hd 1592 /sd 1029. I am a hobby fur trapper as well as a professional animal damage control trapper. The proposed bills will do nothing to help wildlife, will facilitate wanton waste and go against the North American conservation model. Also synthetic faux fur, along with being an inferior textile, clogs landfills and breaks down to microplastics whereas real fur can be composted, upcycled etc.

Wildlife under the North American conservation model is a public trust. This means that wildlife is as much yours as it is mine until it is harvested and becomes someone's possession. The strict seasons and bag limits set by biologists determine what amount of harvest is permitted to maintain healthy ecological and social carrying capacities.

Cyclical fashion trends paired with knee-jerk propagandized anti-fur sentiments have created an industry for nuisance control trappers. This is to make up for the lack of recreational harvest from hobby trappers. When fur trappers trap they pay for licenses that fund conservation, habitat acquisition, pay biologists salaries etc. Sometimes to offset the costs of their hobby they sell some or all of the pelts they harvest to defray some of the costs. When nuisance trappers remove animals it is for a fee. This cost typically starts at several hundred dollars but can cost a lot more.

Animals need to be trapped and will be trapped/removed in perpetuity. By removing the market for fur you will simply inflate the costs nuisance trappers are able to charge because there is no competition from hobby trappers. Most nuisance trappers I know (myself included) try to line up the majority of their work during the recreational trapping season so animals removed can be utilized. Under this bill they will still be removed but the resource will be wasted. Wanton waste goes directly against the North American Conservation model. The same model that hunters, trappers and anglers, biologists, conservationists and passive and consumptive recreators used to bring North American Wildlife back from the brink of devastation. There are literally laws prohibiting wanton waste or our natural resources and by passing these proposed laws you and everyone in support of them are complicit in an astronomical increase in disuse of the resource.

The images of fur farms (which there are currently none operating in Massachusetts) are both inaccurate and disingenuous. European fur farms are held to some of the highest animal welfare standards in the world. What is also especially deceitful is the exclusion of lamb skin, wool and leather products. Animals that actually spend their lives in cages and who's harvest dwarfs the number of farmed and trapped animals. You're simply creating some unfounded hierarchy of animals who are ok to utilize.

As for textiles more and more research is coming to light as to superiority of natural animal product textiles. As I mentioned before fur is entirely compostable and even if carefully maintained fur will break down over time. Petroleum based faux fur products will likely outlast all of us before they begin to decompose. The vibrant sheen, softness as well as breathability of fur cannot be nor will it ever be replicated by synthetics. Humanity is no match for mother nature.

These bills need to be seen as what they are, an attack on science based wildlife management as well as the North American Conservation Model. The fur trade built this country and currently many species numbers that exceed that of the time of european contact. Emotions cannot override the science! The last time we meddled in wildlife management and gagged the scientists was in 1996 with question 1. What did that do? In a short spell our beaver population nearly tripled and conflicts increased astronomically. I have everything to gain from this bill passing. My business will likely increase. I'll be able to charge more money for the service I provide. I am against this because it is morally wrong! Wrong for people, wrong for animals, wrong for science. I hope this will open your eyes to the intricacies of this issue and you will withdraw your support of this asinine piece of legislator.

Regards,
Patrick Connelly
Owner of Connelly Wildlife Management
 
Attleboro city council members succumb to the activists agitators.

www.thesunchronicle.com

City council bans fur sales in Attleboro

ATTLEBORO — The city council this week banned the sale of fur products in Attleboro, but the ban can’t take effect any earlier than six months from now.
www.thesunchronicle.com www.thesunchronicle.com

ATTLEBORO — The city council this week banned the sale of fur products in Attleboro, but the ban can’t take effect any earlier than six months from now.
There are no fur stores currently in the city, so the ban is more of a deterrent. The council vote was taken Tuesday and was unanimous.
“I think (the ban) shows who we are and what we care about,” council Vice President Laura Dolan said. “It’s important.”

“This is near and dear to my heart,” Councilor Michael Angelo said.
According to the ordinance, “fur farms are reservoirs and transmission vectors for dangerous zoonotic diseases including SARS corona viruses.”
“The fur production process is energy intensive and has a significant environmental impact …and animals that are slaughtered for their fur endure tremendous suffering,” the ordinance states.
 
pupchow said:
Attleboro city council members succumb to the activists agitators.

www.thesunchronicle.com

City council bans fur sales in Attleboro

ATTLEBORO — The city council this week banned the sale of fur products in Attleboro, but the ban can’t take effect any earlier than six months from now.
www.thesunchronicle.com www.thesunchronicle.com

ATTLEBORO — The city council this week banned the sale of fur products in Attleboro, but the ban can’t take effect any earlier than six months from now.
There are no fur stores currently in the city, so the ban is more of a deterrent. The council vote was taken Tuesday and was unanimous.
“I think (the ban) shows who we are and what we care about,” council Vice President Laura Dolan said. “It’s important.”

“This is near and dear to my heart,” Councilor Michael Angelo said.
According to the ordinance, “fur farms are reservoirs and transmission vectors for dangerous zoonotic diseases including SARS corona viruses.”
“The fur production process is energy intensive and has a significant environmental impact …and animals that are slaughtered for their fur endure tremendous suffering,” the ordinance states.
Click to expand...
Addledboro.
 
PaddyHarmonic said:
Not one to sleep on this is classic anti death by 1000 cuts. They can't outright ban trapping so they'll make it harder and harder with no reward. I sent this letter to all the spineless politicians virtue signaling as well as some news papers etc.

"The cruelest thing we can do for wildlife is fail to manage it properly."

To Whom it may concern,

I am writing to voice strong opposition to the proposed legislation in bills hd 1592 /sd 1029. I am a hobby fur trapper as well as a professional animal damage control trapper. The proposed bills will do nothing to help wildlife, will facilitate wanton waste and go against the North American conservation model. Also synthetic faux fur, along with being an inferior textile, clogs landfills and breaks down to microplastics whereas real fur can be composted, upcycled etc.

Wildlife under the North American conservation model is a public trust. This means that wildlife is as much yours as it is mine until it is harvested and becomes someone's possession. The strict seasons and bag limits set by biologists determine what amount of harvest is permitted to maintain healthy ecological and social carrying capacities.

Cyclical fashion trends paired with knee-jerk propagandized anti-fur sentiments have created an industry for nuisance control trappers. This is to make up for the lack of recreational harvest from hobby trappers. When fur trappers trap they pay for licenses that fund conservation, habitat acquisition, pay biologists salaries etc. Sometimes to offset the costs of their hobby they sell some or all of the pelts they harvest to defray some of the costs. When nuisance trappers remove animals it is for a fee. This cost typically starts at several hundred dollars but can cost a lot more.

Animals need to be trapped and will be trapped/removed in perpetuity. By removing the market for fur you will simply inflate the costs nuisance trappers are able to charge because there is no competition from hobby trappers. Most nuisance trappers I know (myself included) try to line up the majority of their work during the recreational trapping season so animals removed can be utilized. Under this bill they will still be removed but the resource will be wasted. Wanton waste goes directly against the North American Conservation model. The same model that hunters, trappers and anglers, biologists, conservationists and passive and consumptive recreators used to bring North American Wildlife back from the brink of devastation. There are literally laws prohibiting wanton waste or our natural resources and by passing these proposed laws you and everyone in support of them are complicit in an astronomical increase in disuse of the resource.

The images of fur farms (which there are currently none operating in Massachusetts) are both inaccurate and disingenuous. European fur farms are held to some of the highest animal welfare standards in the world. What is also especially deceitful is the exclusion of lamb skin, wool and leather products. Animals that actually spend their lives in cages and who's harvest dwarfs the number of farmed and trapped animals. You're simply creating some unfounded hierarchy of animals who are ok to utilize.

As for textiles more and more research is coming to light as to superiority of natural animal product textiles. As I mentioned before fur is entirely compostable and even if carefully maintained fur will break down over time. Petroleum based faux fur products will likely outlast all of us before they begin to decompose. The vibrant sheen, softness as well as breathability of fur cannot be nor will it ever be replicated by synthetics. Humanity is no match for mother nature.

These bills need to be seen as what they are, an attack on science based wildlife management as well as the North American Conservation Model. The fur trade built this country and currently many species numbers that exceed that of the time of european contact. Emotions cannot override the science! The last time we meddled in wildlife management and gagged the scientists was in 1996 with question 1. What did that do? In a short spell our beaver population nearly tripled and conflicts increased astronomically. I have everything to gain from this bill passing. My business will likely increase. I'll be able to charge more money for the service I provide. I am against this because it is morally wrong! Wrong for people, wrong for animals, wrong for science. I hope this will open your eyes to the intricacies of this issue and you will withdraw your support of this asinine piece of legislator.

Regards,
Patrick Connelly
Owner of Connelly Wildlife Management
Click to expand...
When the NES members lottery pool win the powerball , I vote for you to be our publicist/spokesperson
That was very well written, impressive!
 
For those just reading this for the first time: The bill the OP posted about was in 2021. The update about Attleboro is 2024
 
pupchow said:
Attleboro city council members succumb to the activists agitators.

www.thesunchronicle.com

City council bans fur sales in Attleboro

ATTLEBORO — The city council this week banned the sale of fur products in Attleboro, but the ban can’t take effect any earlier than six months from now.
www.thesunchronicle.com www.thesunchronicle.com

ATTLEBORO — The city council this week banned the sale of fur products in Attleboro, but the ban can’t take effect any earlier than six months from now.
There are no fur stores currently in the city, so the ban is more of a deterrent. The council vote was taken Tuesday and was unanimous.
“I think (the ban) shows who we are and what we care about,” council Vice President Laura Dolan said. “It’s important.”

“This is near and dear to my heart,” Councilor Michael Angelo said.
According to the ordinance, “fur farms are reservoirs and transmission vectors for dangerous zoonotic diseases including SARS corona viruses.”
“The fur production process is energy intensive and has a significant environmental impact …and animals that are slaughtered for their fur endure tremendous suffering,” the ordinance states.
Click to expand...
Who TF lives in Attleboro ? Get out and hold signs asking who elected the feckless people to run their town ? Seriously , make signs and stand outside town hall ?
 
yeah. pure virtue signaling.. Attleboro's not the type of town to have a "furrier" so there's practically no chance that this type of retail establishment would ever set up shop in the town.

Attleboro went full retard long ago..
 
Only a complete economic boycott of all sporting goods/licenses/hunting/fishing/etc in Massachusetts will change things. Until then you are pissing into the wind. Take your business and cash to a state that has a freaking brain in its head wrt wildlife management. Writing/calling/talking to your MA representative is nothing more than mental masturbation.
 
FisherTech said:
What some folks don't understand is how far that this ban can be enforced. I know what I am about to say sounds radical but that is what you are dealing with. Think "Fly Tying Products" Mepps Spinners with Squirrel tail.
Click to expand...
Never thought of that. My son buys buck tails, squirrel and rabbit fur for tying flies.
 

Similar threads

2024 Trout Stocking Massachusetts
Replies
18
Views
506
Mountain
Mountain
Massachusetts predator hunters?
Replies
16
Views
512
Patriot
Patriot
NWTF Cranberry Country Longbeards Spring Banquet April 7th
Replies
0
Views
70
cdawgs65
C
Any Good Meat Processors in MA?
2
Replies
37
Views
895
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Modern gun season opens today in Kentucky.
Replies
10
Views
533
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Back
Top Bottom