DATE: Monday, September 15, 1997            TAG: 9709140004

SECTION: DAILY BREAK             PAGE: E1   EDITION: FINAL 

TYPE: Column 

SOURCE: Larry Maddry 

                                            LENGTH:   92 lines

PETA OFFERS ON OPPOSING VIEW OF FURRY FASHIONS FOR THE FALL

AS WE SAY down South, it isn't ``a fur piece'' from our newspaper building to the national headquarters of PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals).

But when a story appeared in last Wednesday's edition of The Daily Break titled ``Fur Infusion'' - giving the clear impression that the public was no longer avoiding fur because the fur industry is supporting the humane treatment of animals - no one bothered to phone PETA.

Or walk a few blocks up the street to get the view one of the country's largest animal welfare organizations.

No one asked PETA whether there was ``an easing of anti-fur sentiment as a result of industry reforms,'' as the article stated.

Or whether the fur industry ``is supporting animal welfare and the humane treatment of animals,'' as the Fur Information Council of America claimed in the story.

As Lisa Lange, PETA's director of public affairs, correctly observed when she phoned to complain: ``You gave only one side of the story.''

And the side we gave is untrue, she said. (The story did say that there are plenty of fur-like trims and coats that give the illusion of fur ``without the guilt or expense.'')

``Fur industry reforms do not exist,'' Lange contended when I dropped by her office last week.

She handed me a copy of a PETA ad published in Women's Wear Daily shortly after Princess Diana's death. It was captioned: ``An Appeal Regarding Princess Diana to

Designers Still Using Fur.''

The ad contained a statement by PETA president Ingrid E. Newkirk. It began:

``Please honor Princess Diana's memory by refusing to use fur. Cruelty was never a fashion statement for this century's kindest and best-dressed woman - someone who made it known that she would never wear fur. . . .

``Why not show your respect by helping close down fashion's cruelist industry, the fur trade?'' Newkirk asked.

Lange says 90 percent of the country's fur farming is done with minks. ``The standard method of killing the minks is by breaking their necks,'' she said.

Our story said, ``People have become more tolerant of fur in part because the American Veterinary Medical Association has established strict guidelines for the fur farms to follow.'' (The AVMA says it has not established any guidelines for the fur farms to follow, strict or otherwise. A spokesperson said it lacks the capacity to do that and has no regulatory authority.)

Lange says fur farms do not follow the method of killing recommended by the AVMA - lethal injection. Instead, she said, they break the minks' necks.

``Not all of the minks die immediately after their necks are broken,'' she said. ``Most suffer horribly for up to 30 seconds, and some suffer terribly for much longer because their necks weren't completely snapped.''

The practice is condemned by the AVMA, but they continue to do it.''

Foxes are killed by anal electrocution, she said. She showed me a video of a fox being electrocuted in that way at a fur farm. ``Basically they burn the foxes insides,'' she said. ``It's barbaric.''

The cruelty to animals at fur farms is not in the method of killing alone, she emphasized. Lange said the animals' short lives are filled with fear, stress, disease and psychological hardships. And filthy cages are the norm rather than the exception, she said.

Lange wanted to know what justification there was for the story's statement that there is an ``easing of anti-fur sentiment as a result of industry reforms.''

She handed me a handful of excerpts from stories printed around the United States.

Here are a pair of them from an industry trade publication - Fur Age - printed in April:

``The highly anticipated 1996/1997 U.S. retail sales season did not meet expectations.''

``Macy's West, one of the few remaining West Coast department store chains still selling furs, is discontinuing its six remaining fur salons.''

Another clipping was from a story last month in the The Washington Post about a Chinese fur market: ``It's hard to imagine the Chaowai Street market existing in the United States, where fur coats have fallen out of fashion in the face of protests by animal rights groups.''

And, of course, the glitterati continue to avoid fur garments. Celebrities from Kim Basinger to Ellen DeGeneres have joined the anti-fur crusade.

``People in our community love and respect animals as people tend to do everywhere,'' Lange said. ``The article did not reflect public sentiment.''

After speaking with Lange, I phoned the Fur Information Council of America. A spokeswoman there said she could not speak about industry reforms because the council represents manufacturers. She referred me to the Fur Commission USA, which represents fur farmers.

There, fur commission staff member Robert Buckler said there had been few if any reforms in the past decade - because they were unnecessary!

``We are a leader in the animal industry in our requiring veterinary inspection and certification of humane care practices,'' he said.

Oh, my. Well, you believe whatever you want. But I believe that fur story was unfair and misleading and that it should never have been printed. KEYWORDS: PETA

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu