The U.S. Fur Trade Act of 1989 was passed by Congress to regulate fur sales, and its effect on the fur industry has been widely misunderstood.
The law was meant to protect consumers, but its main goal is to protect fur farmers from unfair competition.
The Act has not done enough to protect animals and their fur from abuse and exploitation.
In fact, a number of Fur Farmers, including American Fur Association president John Mathers, argue that the Act has been responsible for many of the conditions that cause fur to lose its protective properties and deteriorate in quality.
In a recent article for the journal Animal Behavior, the authors argue that while the fur trade has made some gains in terms of protecting animals from exploitation and cruelty, the fur market is not a sustainable way to grow the industry.
In this article, we’ll explore how the fur supply chain, and the economic realities of fur farming, are changing in an attempt to better understand the economics of fur and its sustainability.
First, some background on the industry The fur industry is a multi-billion dollar industry, employing over 30,000 workers.
In 2017, the U.K. reported that the industry employed nearly 2 million people, or 4.7% of the U