Animal rights organizations
Green and fur products from mink and sable

In Russia, from time immemorial, they loved fur products, and this is fully justified, our climate is such that warm fur hats and fur coats will not only be an ornament, but also keep our warmth in the winter cold. This has always been the case, and not a single reasonable person has a desire to defend animal rights, to fight the owners and buyers of squirrel and sable coats.

Hunters obtained valuable fur with great difficulty and risk to life, then the fur was carefully dressed and sent to fur ateliers, where fur coats were sewn from it. All the way from the animal in the forest to the fur coat in the store, one had to put in a lot of hard work, and this work was always appreciated, fur coats were a very expensive pleasure.

Over time, people began to breed fur-bearing animals on farms, breed new varieties of animals and improve the quality of their fur. For example, American mink Black NAFA possesses delicious fur and is grown exclusively in nurseries. It seems that everything is correct - people from year to year invest their labor, and get valuable fur, which they can earn. But! There are some people who saw the violation of animal rights in fur products. These animal rights organizations really make life difficult for fur producers and ordinary women who love fur coats.

Let's try to figure out who is right - producers and consumers of fur, or animal rights organizations, greens and other animal rights activists?

Animal advocates argue that it is necessary to protect the planet, preserve rare species of animals for posterity, preserve forests and nature from pollution, so that animals have a natural habitat. A careful attitude towards nature, kindness towards all living beings, wonderful qualities, in this it is worth agreeing with them. Only defenders of animal rights forget that today the hunting of wild animals is carried out in scanty volumes, for example, by local residents of Siberia. Have you identified what sable fishing is like in the wild? The hunter leaves his family, goes to the forest for 3-4 months, where he travels from hut to hut and checks his traps. All these 3-4 months the hunter is fighting alone for survival in the snowy taiga. After the season, the hunter returns home, processes the skins and hands them over to the acceptance of the fur. Do you think the hunter becomes rich immediately? No and no again! First and foremost, the hunter hunts not so much sable per season - 100-150 skins, and secondly, they are quite inexpensive in Siberian purchases ($ 30-60) and the hunter has enough money for the meager maintenance of the family.

How many people want to live in such God-forgotten Siberian villages? There are few, and those who want to disappear in the taiga for months are even fewer, and therefore they cannot significantly affect the sable population in the wild.

And the rest, or rather the main skins, which we acquire in the form of fur coats and hats, are made from the fur of animals grown in nurseries. People raised them as pets and have the right to receive remuneration for their work. Why should people take this opportunity away? Why shouldn't animal rights activists get involved in protecting chickens, cows, pigs and all domestic animals in general? Is the life of a chicken or a cow less important than the life of a sable or a mink? Not at all, because fur-bearing animals raised in captivity are not endangered species. Therefore, animal rights organizations have no reason to protect fur animals, and make life difficult for producers and consumers of fur.

Why do they protect don't animal rights activists know that the mink in nurseries is not threatened with extinction? It's very simple - these people do not want to do something serious, work and produce something useful.It is much easier for them to organize protests, write angry publications in the press, paint women in fur coats with paint and get paid for this. Yes, yes, getting paid for destructive activities. And their activity is destructive, because they do not create anything, but only interfere with those who work and create a real product for society.

All these greens, environmentalists and the like, receive grants from various foundations, extort money from organizations that, in their opinion, violate animal rights or pollute the environment. However, they do little useful for real animals from the wild. Maybe they don't realize that natural fur and leather obtained from artificially grown animals are much better for the environment than artificial fur, leatherette and various synthetics?

Woman buying a fur coat, will treat her with care, and the fur coat will remain in her wardrobe for many years. Leather products also last much longer, which means they are less thrown away. Do you understand what it gives?

This approach to consumption gives a cleaner ecology! Because when buying products made of faux fur, artificial leather, people do not store them for a long time in their wardrobe, and very soon faux fur coats, leatherette bags are sent to the trash heap. In nature, this synthetics behaves quite differently from products made from natural materials.

Conclusions:
Animal rights organizations often don’t defend anyone’s rights other than their own. Animal rights advocates make life difficult for many people, depriving them of earnings and sometimes jobs. And the most important thing is that activities to protect the rights of artificially grown mink leads to an increase in the production of products from synthetic materials, which ultimately pollutes nature and complicates the life of real animals from the wild - rare species that live only in the wild and need to be preserved.

Based on these facts, one can say that animal rights defenders do much more harm to the nature of civilization and people than the sellers of fur products produced.