Legislating Fur

It’s difficult not to chuckle at Assemblywoman Fiona Ma’s, D-San Francisco, proposed bill requiring all garments sold in California made of animal fur to be identified as such on the label. However, at the heart of AB 1656 is not just consumer protection, but animal rights according to Ma.

Concerned that unidentified animals are being used in clothing manufacturing, Ma said in an interview yesterday, “People have a right to know if they are buying dog fur or a polyester blend. It shouldn´t be a mystery.”

I am aware of fur accessories using raccoons, dogs, cats, and rabbits; who knows what other furry creatures may adorn a jacket collar?

Of particular interest is that some manufacturers may actually dye the fur an unnatural shade of pink without identifying what type of animal pelt was used, according to Ma.

AB 1656 is surprisingly not the first fur labeling bill in the country: Wisconsin, Massashusetts, Delaware, New Jersey and New York already requiring fur labeling.

Meanwhile, the fiddling continues while Rome burns…

-Katy Grimes

No comments

Write a comment
No Comments Yet! You can start the discussion, add a comment to this post.

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Related Articles

Mish on CA pensions

Here is blogger Mish Shedlock on Arnold Schwarzenegger and public pensions (he allows CalWatchdog to reprint his posts): Schwarzenegger on

Assembly Crime and Punishment

Katy Grimes: It’s never surprising when the wrath of the Speaker of the Assembly comes down on a member for

Juvenile justice: The latest from San Diego Mayor Bob Filner

April 16, 2013 By Chris Reed Newly elected San Diego Mayor Bob Filner basically owes his political career to the