Publications
Partners
Cape Town – Fury could sum up the sentiment of two opposing characters, who have been feuding over the ethics of the fur industry for the past few years.
On the one hand you have animal rights activist Dr Margaret Wilhelm and on the other hand you have her foe, fur retailer Robert Fischer of Erich Fischer Furriers.
Based in Johannesburg, Fischer prides himself on the prestige of having Africa's only fur specialist that abides by the Origin Assured (OA) label - meaning his fur produce is audited to the highest standards to ensure they have been sourced ethically.
Investec's tenant
Dr Margaret Wilhelm has been concerned with landlord Investec’s lack of engagement over the issue of its tenant (Fischer) in the Firs Shopping Centre in Rosebank, Johannesburg.
“Investec’s standard reply to this public plea has been that as long as its tenants are doing nothing illegal it will not take a moral stand against the sale of fur,” said Wilhelm.
“Investec, with its zebra logo, claims excellent business ethics and stresses its commitment to society, the environment and preservation of animals,” she explained. “It is, therefore, an anomaly that Investec profits from the fur business through its lease.”
She has held protests, launched petitions and attempted to get various stakeholders to engage on the issue. Her Causes webpage has over 6 000 pledges, while her Change website has a petition with over 3 000 signatures.
Fischer's response
"We are the only company to represent the African continent and we are audited on a regular basis," Fischer told Fin24.
"Margret Wilhelm has had a personal vendetta for a very long time against Erich Fischer Furriers together with her band of 15 marching supporters," he said in a written response. "We are a population of some 51 million South Africans and if she can only conjure up [those signatures] ... to her petition in three years, well then I rest my case."
Several bans or restrictions on fur farms have already been implemented, Wilhelm said. Retailers like David Jones said their company “no longer tolerates such inhumane treatment of animals”. Progressive companies have pledged to be fur free through the International Consumers for a Fur Free Society programme.
An organisation called South Africans against the sale of fur has held numerous protests against Erich Fisher Furriers. In 2012, Wilhelm issued two Promotion of Access to Information Applications to Fischer to disclose the source of his pelts. Fischer refused, she said, claiming it was sufficient that his furs had the OA label.
Investec: Fischer complies with regulations
Investec told Fin24 they were confident that Erich Fischer’s business fits within their code.
“We have taken cognisance of the views expressed by Dr Wilhelm and her supporters and have undertaken our own investigation into the activities conducted by Erich Fischer, a longstanding tenant who moved in long before we took ownership of the centre. We are satisfied that, to the best of our knowledge, this retailer complies with the stringent regulations governing all aspects of the fur trade.”
Many protests have occurred over the years against Fischer, one as recent as this Sunday. Social activism movement speak! (Society for People, Environment and Animal Kindness) joined forces with Fur Free SA to hold a silent demonstration outside the store.
About 20 demonstrators donned clothes spattered with “blood” and bearing slogans such as “Erich Fischer – a bloody business”.
- View the protest in action.
Wilhelm said furriers and fashion retailers sell fur items without knowing their source. This violated the consumer’s right to know the origin and constituents of products.
Wilhelm said OA label indicated that fur was humanely sourced.
“However, the myth of ethical fur has now been debunked in all Scandinavian countries. It does not matter if the item only has fur trimming or is a full size fur coat, the suffering for all animals on fur farms is the same. Even if the OA label is what it claims to be, there is no such thing as a humane fur farm.”
"Fur Free SA and Beauty Without Cruelty [both of which she is a member of] endorse all my anti-fur activity including this campaign," she said.
Fischer replies
"It seems that Erich Fischer Furriers is being targeted for info regarding our sources," he said. "I hope that all the stores in the land who depend, directly or indirectly, on animal products, be it seafood restaurants, steak houses, leather stores, hand bags and accessory stores, hunting and fishing supplies, jewellery stores, car dealerships - the list goes on and on - are also subject to this constant 'urban terrorism' endured by a hand full of extremists hiding behind the 'smoke screen' of non-profit organisations like Fur free SA.
"Others don’t have the luxury of living off donations, my staff and I have to work hard to make a living."
"The point is that for all the animals killed in the world for any type of industry, it is the fur industry that uses a minuscule percentage," he said. "And for all the Peta supporters and neutrals out there, please see this link."
Investec: Clients core to our business
Investec explained that it is a company that is strongly committed to being a responsible corporate. “Our clients are at the core of our business,” it said. “They span a number of industries, conducting a wide variety of activities."
- Read Investec's full policy.
“It is possible, as is naturally the case with other stakeholders and interest groups, that we have differing opinions at times. While we respect the legal and constitutional rights of all parties, activities conducted by clients do not necessarily reflect our views.
“Local and international regulation and monitoring authorities, as applicable, guide us in assessing responsible business practice. We satisfy ourselves further by conducting the necessary diligence as part of the lengths we go to in understanding our clients and their needs."
Violation of consumer act?
Wilhelm said the OA was in violation of the Consumer Protection Act, as follows:
Section 24(2)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 (The CPA) provides that a person must not knowingly apply to any goods a trade description that is likely to mislead the consumer as to any matter implied or expressed in that trade description.
Section 24(3)(a) of the CPA further provides that a retailer of goods must not offer to supply, display or supply any particular goods if the retailer knows, reasonably could determine or has reason to suspect that a trade description applied to those goods is likely to mislead the consumer as to any matter implied or expressed in that trade description.
However, even if this OA label is correct, said Wilhelm, many consumers were against the fur trade in general due to the cruel way animals are exploited for trivial fashion items. Departments, chain stores and major fashion designers/houses worldwide are pledging not to use fur. Since 2012, real fur is no longer sold in any Australian department store.
Barbaric conditions
Anti-fur lobbyists believed that the fur industry failed any test of morality, as there was no justification to subject animals to prolonged suffering for fashion items. “To ensure profits, it is impossible to farm fur humanely,” said Wilhelm. “Free-range farming is unfeasible, so intensive battery-farming methods are used.
“Wild fur bearing animals are crammed into tiny metal cages. When deprived of the conditions essential to their natural lives, wild animals go insane. To preserve pelts and lessen expenses, slaughter practices are merciless.
“Animals are anally electrocuted, gassed, poisoned, bludgeoned to death and even skinned alive. Only the pelt is used and a single garment comprises hundreds of animal skins. Environmental hazards arise from discarding thousands of carcasses and the use of toxic chemicals to treat raw hides. Excessive amounts of ammonia pollute air and water.”
Final word
"It would be nice if for a change all of my answers were printed and that my point of view ends your write up because we have never had the fair right to comment in full neither to end a write up," he wrote. "Because most write ups always end with the one-sided opinion of the Anti-Fur representative, which kind of gives them that last punch after the bell."
-Fin24
*What do you think of the fur retail industry that subscribes to the OA label? Write to us.
