• FireRetardant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Reasonable take. Seems better to switch now than continuing the centuries long tradition of exploiting Canada’s wildlife for their furs.

    • Mr_Blott@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      They still need to cull the bears though. Is it not better to use the fur for something?

    • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not that I’m a massive fan of killing bears or anything, nor am i a massive fan of the royals, or war — so I’m only saying this in the interests of discussion: but would making tiny black plastic fur even be better for the environment in the long term?

      • Draghetta@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        The best thing for the environment in the long term would be to cull about 60% of humanity, can’t separate trash enough to beat that. That can’t be the only argument for whether something is good.

        Personally I’d take a tiny amount of pollution in exchange for the cruelty.

        • RBG@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          “We could make hats out of them.” they selflessly proclaimed assuming they are in the other 40%

        • Seasm0ke@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Jesus Christ the lengths some would go to… redistribution of wealth and ending dependence on oil, monocultures, and factory farming is right there.

      • BlueLineBae@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I am on the fence about this subject. On one hand I would like to see a world someday where we don’t need to kill animals for food or fur. On the other hand, we haven’t yet found environmentally friendly material replacements for some of these applications. I hear on the news about things like pineapple leather and mango fur, but I have yet to see them used in something practical that would help reduce the use of animal products. Like sure, I can buy a purse, but when will there be an alternative for car seats or shoes that isn’t made of plastic. I really hope someone out there is working on a solution, but until then I’m really not sure which is worse. Fake fur hats will just add to the piles of plastic like everything else :/

        • QuinceDaPence@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          SCOBYs (Symbiotic Cultures of Bacteria and Yeast) could have some possible applications as fake leather but I don’t know if anyone is working on it or if it could actually be made strong enough.

          One example where we just do not have an equivalent is motorcycle gear. Yeah we have textile jackets, and I have one because where I am the risk of heat stroke in a leather jacket is more of a concern, but if you want abrasion resistance, leather is the best you can get. Can SCOBYs compete with that? I don’t know.

    • Vampire [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      liberals hearing about ‘faux fur’ obama

      liberals hearing about ‘microplastics’ pronounjak-rage

      They’re the same thing

  • li10@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Tradition is never an excuse for cruelty,” says Mr Fry, who is narrating a video which shows undercover film of how black bears are killed.

    A supporter of the animal welfare group made an undercover video which claims to show hunters putting down buckets of strongly-scented food as bait, and then shooting black bears with crossbow bolts when they approach.

    This doesn’t exactly seem like a revelation to me, and I don’t know why you’d need undercover footage… how do you think they hunted bears?

    Living their life in nature before being killed is about as good as it gets for animals. I thought they were gonna say they’re caged from birth or something.

    Besides a POV of “killing any animal is wrong”, I don’t really see an issue. It appears to be regulated and as long as they’re maintaining the bear population appropriately why is it any different than hunting deer or killing a cow for leather?

    I think it would be a good thing if they moved away from real bear fur for an alternative, but don’t see it as a real issue either way tbh.

    • glimse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      The problem is that wild animals are being killed so an unelected king in a democratic country can have his guards wear fancy hats

      • li10@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’d like the monarchy abolished as well tbh, but their hats are towards the bottom of the list of reasons why.

        That’s also not gonna be Stephen Fry’s point, as good as he can be about some issues he’s also a known monarchist.

      • mannycalavera
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        an unelected king

        Are kings ever elected? Like, what’s an example of an elected king? 😅

      • withabeard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Chances are (and I’m up for being corrected on this). The bears are being culled to maintain population levels.

        In all areas of the world, human interaction with nature means we’ve upset the usual ecosystem balance. We’ve moved predator/prey ecosystems, we’ve changed their sizes and we’ve decided there are big areas we just don’t want the predators. Culling/management is necessary to minimise our further impact.

        These bears are going to be shot with or without the furs being used. They’re not being killed so someone can have the fancy hats.

        • glimse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          Perhaps not the best source

          Freedom of information act requests have revealed that the UK government does not know the details of the supply chain for the fur it buys, as MP John Nicolson pointed out during the debate:

          “The evidence is that most bears in Canada are killed by trophy hunters who know there is a market for the skins. Canadian Government culls are infrequent and only authorised to kill the small number of bears straying too close to human habitation. The MoD has no idea about the provenance of the dead bears it buys. The evidence, again, is that they are often nursing mothers. When they are killed to make a hat, their cubs starve to death.”

          Canadian bear hunt policies are largely economically driven, despite many questioning the financial benefits over ecotourism investments. Black bear hunting trips cost thousands of dollars and, since the Government of Ontario has reintroduced the spring bear hunt, non-resident trophy hunters are paying to bait and kill bears for sport as they emerge from hibernation. Rather than being a by-product of wildlife management, bear pelts from Canada mostly come from recreational hunts.

    • essell@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      This doesn’t exactly seem like a revelation to me, and I don’t know why you’d need undercover footage… how do you think they hunted bears?

      Because most people don’t think about it. Video is a good way to get them started.

    • Malgas@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      how do you think they hunted bears?

      I’m a little surprised by the crossbows. My guess would have been rifles.

    • HelloThere@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Besides a POV of “killing any animal is wrong”, I don’t really see an issue. It appears to be regulated and as long as they’re maintaining the bear population appropriately why is it any different than hunting deer or killing a cow for leather?

      It may be because deer and cows are used for meat as well as their hide.

      I’m not sure what happens to the rest of the bear.

      • li10@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        True, if it’s wasteful then move away from it, but then again maybe there does need to be intervention to maintain bear population anyway.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    “Tradition is never an excuse for cruelty,” says Mr Fry, who is narrating a video which shows undercover film of how black bears are killed.

    Tall black bearskin hats are a familiar sight at ceremonial military events, such as the Changing of the Guard outside Buckingham Palace.

    A supporter of the animal welfare group made an undercover video which claims to show hunters putting down buckets of strongly-scented food as bait, and then shooting black bears with crossbow bolts when they approach.

    “By continuing to purchase caps made of black bear fur, the UK government drives demand for pelts and effectively incentivises hunters,” says Mr Fry.

    PETA says it will share the video footage with King Charles, as it asks him to support a switch from real to artificial fur.

    But a Ministry of Defence spokeswoman says that its bear pelts are sourced from authorised hunts and a regulated Canadian fur market: “To date and to the department’s knowledge, an alternative has yet to meet the standards required to provide an effective replacement for the bearskin ceremonial caps.”


    The original article contains 475 words, the summary contains 178 words. Saved 63%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • Vampire [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is a psychological and propaganda operation. The real agenda is to destroy Russia: they’re attacking it from its æsthetics and drip.

    No fur = No Russia (or at least, nothing worthy of being called Russia)