MY LADY'S FURS.

Waikato Times, Volume 103, Issue 17384, 21 April 1928, Page 13 (Supplement)

MY LADY'S FURS.

CRUELTY OF TRAPPING.

(By “Cephas.”) “How is it our voices are not raised against a cruelty of immense proportions which has made such phenomenal growth within the past halfdozen years that fev»' have any idea of its present extent” asks Lucy Furman, in the Atlantic Monthly. “I refer to the use of steel traps for the taking of wild, fur bearing animals. Within the past four or five years the vogue for fur has so enormously increased that, at the most conservative estimate,

One Hundred Millions. of fur-bearing animals in America alone now suffer yearly in steel traps. All of us who are women know how, a few seasons ago. the craze for coats, fur trimmings, and summer furs came in like a tidal wave, carrying us all before it, until at the present day it is rare to see a woman on the streets who docs not wear fur. We also know that furs are very beautiful, and more becoming than anything we can wear —this being our sole excuse for the use of them in summer-time. If we have ever thought at all about how the furs were procured, probably we have had in mind a picture of a hunter, slipping Indian-like through the woods, stalking and then painlessly shooting his prey. This is all we know about it, unless we have lived much in remote and wild sections. The fur trade, making immense profits from the prevailing fashion, cannot be expected to enlighten us; we sec no mention of Ihe matter in papers and magazines: therefore we thrust any troublesome questionings back into that hinterland of our consciousness where other painful matters arc confined, and think no more upon them. What, then, is the truth about The Procuring of Furs. "The truth is that practically all fur-bearing animals, from the übiquitous muskrat to the more highly prized fox, skunk, beaver, and lynx, arc now taken, not by the quick flash of the merciful rifle, but by the prolonged agony of the steel trap. The professional trapper of the Northern woods and Western forests, with his long line of traps extending thirty, fifty and even a hundred miles, cannot if he would —it is a physical impossibility—visit his traps oftencr than twice a week, sometimes not oftencr than once a week into such regions humane officers never go; game wardens, if any, arc not in evidence; and the trapper is, as he has always been, a law unto himself. But what of the wild creature —ranging the deep woods for food, attracted by the bait, it paw suddenly seized and broken by the strong steel jaws, and held there in spite of all the frenzied struggles to escape".' Captivity is in itself torture to a free, wild thing; and when to this is added the cutting of the trap teeth into the living flesh, the relentless pressure of the steel upon keen and sensitive nerves (this prolonged pressure being the chief cause of suffering), is it any wonder that at last, after hours, maybe days and nights, of depression, the creature often gnaws off its own paw, pulls out the tendons and sinews of its leg, in order to escape the intolerable anguish? In countries so hitler cold that even a fur-bearing animal outside its den or hole must keep moving to avoid freezing, Ihe latter death may come within a few hours as a merciful relief; but the majority of creatures arc nol caught so far north, and prolonged agony precedes the death of most. Could this agony in some way be photographed upon the soft fur, or cry out from its glossy surface, 1 am sure there is not a woman in the United Stales, not even the Most Flippant Little Flapper who would buy a fur coat, or a furtrimmed coat, or even a fur scarf. The saddest part of this cruelty is that, of the hundred million lives so tormented and sacrificed, probably nine-tenths suffer needlessly. South of the Arctic Circle, furs, are strictly speaking, never necessary. The verytrappers and lumberjacks of the Canadian forests do not themselves wear f Urs —they wear warm woollens, with sometimes a sheepskin jacket. In the temperate climate of almost all of the United States, we well know that furs are not necessary, as is evidenced by the fact that our outdoor workmen of all kinds —men in the building and other trades, those engaged in street and track repair work, as well as truck drivers, mail carriers, traffic policemen, and others constantly exposed to the weather—never think of such a thing 4 as wearing furs. It is left for our protected and well-to-do women, living in furnace-heated houses, to wear fur coats when in winter-time they venture forth in heated cars to shop in heated stores. The less well-to-do ape their styles, and, if a fur coat cannot be afforded, have trimmings of fur. And all wear fur scarfs in hot weather. What is needed is not so much to abolish the use of furs, but to have them taken in such a way that the label 'Humanely Killed,' can truthfully be sewed upon them. Then we shall be able to buy and wear them with a clear conscience."