Dueling Pictures Of Fur Industry Emerge At Hearing On NYC Ban

NEW YORK — Dueling pictures of the fur industry emerged at a Wednesday City Council hearing on a proposed fur sales ban, which some worry will deal a signifcant blow to the trade.

To animal-rights advocates, fashion designers and some lawmakers, fur is a callous and unnecessary trade that kills animals for their pelts in grisly ways.

It's also on the decline, they argue. There were 450 fur retail storefronts in the city's Garment District in 1977, a number that had dwindled to 14 in 2018, "Project Runway" star Tim Gunn told lawmakers.

"Shoppers want cruelty-free products. The fur industry's profits hinge on the lies they tell and truths they hide," the fashion designer Joshua Katcher said at the hearing.

But figures within the industry said it is growing, thriving and doing its best for the animals on which it relies.

The fur trade is worth more than $33 billion, and major fashion houses such as Louis Vuitton and Fendi still use the material despite many brands stepping away, said Mark Oaten, the CEO of the International Fur Federation.

Oaten pushed the Council to make New York the first city to introduce FurMark, a certification program that the International Fur Federation is currently testing. The program sets animal-welfare and environmental standards for the industry, on top of government regulations, that will be enforced by inspections.

"A ban proposed this way would stop the freedom of those designers from being able to use fur and more importantly stop consumers here in New York from buying fur they want to buy," Oaten said.

The Council is considering legislation that would ban the sale of all new fur apparel and fine merchants who don't follow the rules. The bill, sponsored by Council Speaker Corey Johnson, includes exceptions for used fur garments and religious garb.

If the measure passes, New York would follow Los Angeles and San Francisco in imposing such bans. Mayor Bill de Blasio supports it but it's uncertain when the Council may vote on it.

Dueling groups of protesters rallied outside City Hall ahead of Wednesday's committee hearing. Supporters held signs that read "FUR FREE NYC" while some opponents had T-shirts bearing the phrase, "My Closet. My Choice."

Inside, Johnson played a video that showed animals being electrocuted and having their necks snapped. And Dan Mathews, a senior vice president at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, demonstrated a coyote trap in the chamber as he has for lawmakers and the press in recent weeks.

"Despite their claims to the contrary, there is no such thing in my estimation as ethical fur, or ecological fur, or excellent welfare fur," Johnson said. "That is marketing language aimed at hiding the brutality of this business."

Oaten tried to counter the graphic visuals and descriptions of fur farms, which supporters of the ban condemned as inhumane. He said all of the fur that comes from animal trapping stems from conservation efforts. And the FurMark program, which is currently in a pilot phase, sets standards for killing animals based on scientific evidence, he said.

But Johnson seemed incredulous toward the idea that one can humanely gas or electrocute an animal to death. At one point the speaker read from a Finnish code describing the best way to kill a fox.

"The rod electrode should be placed sufficiently deep in the rectum and firmly into the mouth," it said. "... The voltage and ampage should be sufficiently high for the current to overcome the body resistance of even the largest of foxes."

But Oaten tried to frame the debate as a matter of personal choice.

"If New Yorkers wanted fur banned, they would just stop buying it," he said.