FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Interview Requests: KEITH KAPLAN / Director of Communications
Fur Information Council of America
firstname.lastname@example.org or (323) 646-7791
Thursday April 4, 2018 Los Angeles, CA — In an era when the public is overwhelmingly aware of the environmental and social costs of mass- produced fast fashion the San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted yesterday on second reading to ban real fur, a natural and sustainable product, in favor of petroleum-based fake fur, a product that presents serious environmental threats.
Trends drive fashion purchases and with the “fur look” appearing in over 80% of the fall 2018 runway collections presented in New York, London, Milan and New York last month you can be sure that consumers will be shopping for this look throughout San Francisco. With a ban on real fur, retailers will have to expand their offering of fake fur to meet consumer demand. By inadvertently promoting fake fur this ban may directly contradict the many positive environmental moves the SF Board has taken to establish the city as a leader in addressing the environmental threats posed by plastics and Styrofoam.
Designers and consumers recognize the value of fur as a natural, sustainable and renewable resource. And they recognize that unlike mass-produced faux fur apparel, real fur garments are produced by hand, requiring the artistry and skilled handiwork of talented craftsmen. The amount of energy and fossil fuel required for fabrication is relatively low when compared to large, automated factories. And the fur trade supports land-based cultures and local indigenous populations contributing to environmental conservation. Fake fur, on the other hand, is not renewable, sustainable or biodegradable. It is mass produced in factories that emit dangerous carcinogens and when washed release thousands of tiny plastic lint fibers into waste water that are then released into oceans and rivers where they are ingested by fish, mammals and sea birds.
When sustainability and the environment are key concerns, shouldn’t the focus be on natural, renewal, recyclable products that can last generations such as real fur, rather than the plastic materials and other synthetics such as petrol based fake fur? For a better understanding of sustainability and the environmental threats posed by fake fur please click on the link below:
The world looks to San Francisco for their well-documented leadership in establishing environmentally responsible policies. With the environmental threats posed by the hidden costs of the fur ban ordinance is San Francisco now saying ‘NO” to sustainability?