Community Chat

[KingstonsMom]

California will be the first state to ban the sale and manufacture of new fur products and the third to bar most animals from circus performances under a pair of bills signed Saturday by Governor Gavin Newsom.

The fur law bars residents from selling or making clothing, shoes or handbags with fur starting in 2023.

Animal rights groups cheered the measure as a stand against inhumane practices. The proposal was vigorously opposed by the billion-dollar U.S. fur industry, and the Fur Information Council of America has already threatened to sue.

It follows Newsom's signing of legislation that makes California the first state to outlaw fur trapping and follows bans on sales of fur in Los Angeles and San Francisco.

"California is a leader when it comes to animal welfare, and today that leadership includes banning the sale of fur," Newsom said in a statement. "But we are doing more than that. We are making a statement to the world that beautiful wild animals like bears and tigers have no place on trapeze wires or jumping through flames."

The fur ban doesn't apply to used products or those used for religious or tribal purposes. And it excludes the sale of leather, dog and cat fur, cowhides, deer, sheep and goat skin and anything preserved through taxidermy.

It could mark a significant blow to the fur industry that makes products from animals including mink, chinchillas, rabbits and other animals. The U.S. retail fur industry brought in $1.5 billion in sales in 2014, the most recent data available from the Fur Information Council.

Fashion designers including Versace, Gucci and Giorgio Armani have stopped or say they plan to stop using fur.

Under the California law, there is a fine of up to $1,000 for multiple violations.

Animal rights groups have said animals may be subject to gassing, electrocution and other inhumane actions to obtain their fur.

California joins New Jersey and Hawaii in banning most animals from circus performances.

The law exempts domesticated dogs, cats and horses and does not apply to rodeos.

[dex]

@KingstonsMom I am happy to read this news.We have many options for warm clothing this period in time.we don’t need to wear skins.

[bonnielu]

Does this mean no leather handbags, or did I  read it wrong?  While I am not even a fan of those who hunt and kill animals for any purpose (I don't eat meat) I keep thinking... WHAT IS NEXT FOR GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF MY LIFE.  I simply want to be left alone to make my own decisions. And then I don't live in California but my daughter is taking up temporary residence there. 

[KingstonsMom]

@dex 

I know it's baby steps, but better than no steps at all, IMO.

But I'm still trying to wrap my head around why the ban excludes dog and cat fur?

I fail to see the logic there.

[KingstonsMom]

@bonnielu 

The ban excludes leather and cat and dog fur.

[bonnielu]

Ok, sounds good.  Cat and dog fur?  Yep I wear dog fur all the time when my chihuahuas shed all over the place. Hubby and I have to brush our dark clothing constantly.  I guess if I miss a piece I will be safe visiting our daughter in California.  

[Porcelain]

Who wears fur in California anyway? It's not the Arctic.

[dex]

@KingstonsMom I think that the love of our domestic Pets is so strong that there would not be any market for such a vile product.I have never seen dog or cat hair goods made in the USA.I would hope that none would be imported.

[CelticCrafter]

With all the problems CA has this is a priority?  

[KingstonsMom]

---

@Porcelain wrote:

Who wears fur in California anyway? It's not the Arctic.

---

@Porcelain 

Many Hollywood celebrities wear fur, especially at red carpet events.

Jennifer Lopez and the Kardashians are accosted pretty often by anti-fur activists, for their love of wearing real fur.