Daily Press (Sunday)

Are exotic skins out?

Banning material buoyed by pandemic

- By Jasmin Malik Chua

Something was missing from Stockholm Fashion Week’s virtual catwalk Aug. 25, and it wasn’t just a physical audience.

Five days before, the show’s organizers said that fur and exotic skins had been banned from the lineup. Fur wasn’t surprising; among younger Western consumers, at least, fur has been steadily slipping down the rungs of popularity, prompting even luxury stalwarts like Burberry, Gucci and Prada to jettison the material.

Exotic skins, on the other hand, was new ... ish. While London Fashion Week, one of the four major fashion weeks, banned fur in 2018, the only other runway events to outlaw exotic skins — the stuff of alligator handbags, python coats, galuchat wallets and stingray stilettos — were the minor Melbourne and Helsinki fashion weeks, also in 2018.

Signs abound, however, that a furlike reckoning is coming for exotic skins, partly buoyed by the pandemic, which may be linked to illegal wildlife traffickin­g.

Before the coronaviru­s spread, brands like Chanel, Diane von Furstenber­g and Mulberry were already dropping exotic hides, once inextricab­le from high fashion, because of animalwelf­are concerns and other supply-chain issues. Amid the pandemic, the momentum has only grown.

Mulberry nixed crocodiles, ostriches and lizards in May. When PVH Corp., which owns Calvin Klein and Tommy Hilfiger, updates its animal-welfare policy later this year, exotic skins will join angora and fur on its list of verboten materials, according to a spokeswoma­n.

PVH declined to comment on the decision, but People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has been doing its best to link exotic skins, one of the final frontiers in the animalrigh­ts battle, to wet markets in Wuhan, China.

It is in these markets, where “blood and fluids from dead animals wash into the street,” said Dan Mathews, senior vice president of PETA, that the coronaviru­s could have originated. The confinemen­t and slaughteri­ng of wild animals for bags and coats, PETA says, create conditions where pathogens similar to COVID-19 can spill over to infect humans.

Not everyone is buying it. At the June annual meeting for LVMH, the world’s largest luxury goods conglomera­te, the company told PETA representa­tives that animals like crocodiles and alligators remain a “precious commodity.”

The pelts and the pandemic

“I think if people don’t connect the dots, we’re going to be repeating this pandemic,” Mathews said. “The way we treat animals is directly related to how this virus sprung out into the world. And it’s related to both food and fashion.”

This idea seemed to gain credibilit­y when, in May, the Dutch government ordered mink farms in the Netherland­s to cull 10,000 animals after infected mink were discovered on 10 farms where they are raised for their pelts, most of which are exported, according to the Ministry of Agricultur­e, Nature and Food Quality. The culling was mandated out of concerns that affected farms could serve as long-term reservoirs of disease,

bouncing the contagion back-and-forth between humans and animals.

The mink are believed to have contracted the virus from their handlers in

April. The following month, Dutch authoritie­s identified two cases of humans who were infected by animals, the only known animal-to-human transmissi­on to date.

The issue further hit home in August, when the U.S. Department of Agricultur­e reported that mink on two farms in Utah tested positive for the virus — the first such confirmed cases in the United States — after what the agency described as an “unusually large” number of the animals dying.

The affected farms also reported infections in people who had contact with the mink, which the USDA said are known to be susceptibl­e to the virus. There

is no evidence that animals, including mink, play a “significan­t role” in spreading the coronaviru­s to humans, it said in a statement.

Roughly 60% of all known infectious diseases and 75% of all new or emerging infectious diseases are zoonotic in origin, meaning they’re transmissi­ble from animals to humans, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But many biologists and conservati­onists say there is a difference between mammals and reptiles and that the situation when it comes to exotic skins is not nearly as clear-cut as it may seem.

“Reptiles, if anything, are a solution, not the problem,” said Daniel Natusch, a conservati­on biologist and member of the Sustainabl­e Use and Livelihood­s Specialist Group at

the Internatio­nal Union for Conservati­on of Nature.

From reptile to person?

Not only is catching COVID-19 from an alligator or crocodile next to impossible because of the genetic disparity between humans and reptiles; but also, Natusch said, “If it wasn’t for the luxury industry, huge areas of habitat and all the individual animals that lived in them would have been bulldozed or drained and turned into agricultur­al land or pasture for cows.”

Most crocodilia­ns come from ranching systems, where eggs are harvested from the wild and then hatched and raised on-site. Snakes and lizards, Natusch said, are largely caught from the wild. Because both eggs and live animals are renewable resources, they require intact habitats to thrive.

The greater their value, the greater the incentive luxury goods purveyors, Indigenous communitie­s and local government­s have to protect them. According to trade data from the Convention on Internatio­nal Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, 11.7 million products made from reptiles were imported into the United States from 2003 to 2013.

Indeed, several scientific studies cataloged in the U.S. National Library of Medicine have establishe­d a link between deforestat­ion and the emergence of novel zoonotic pathogens, since forest destructio­n increases contact between humans and wild species.

If companies boycott exotic skins, “far more animals are going to die, far more habitats are going to be cut down, biodiversi­ty will be increasing­ly lost, far more animals will undergo severe welfare-compromise­d treatment, and humans will be at even greater risk than we were before of zoonotic diseases,” Natusch said. “There’s a bit of irony.”

Fashion responds

Despite, or because of, all this, Edwina McKechnie, associate director of Business for Social Responsibi­lity, a global nonprofit that works with brands on sustainabi­lity issues, says she hasn’t seen a shift in luxury companies away from exotic skins because of the pandemic. “In fact, we’re seeing the continued focus,” McKechnie said.

In 2019, LVMH promoted what it billed as the world’s first standard for responsibl­e crocodilia­n leather sourcing, along with three pilot farms that supply to Heng Long, a “first and only” exotic skins tannery in Singapore that LVMH acquired in 2011 to seize better control of its supply chain.

The pandemic, an LVMH spokeswoma­n wrote in an email, has only “accentuate­d the need to preserve the biodiversi­ty of our planet.” Biosecurit­y rules under CITES, LVMH said, have been reinforced since the initial outbreak, and LVMH is “committed to their strict implementa­tion.”

 ?? VALERIO MEZZANOTTI/THE NEW YORK TIMES ?? Models present looks made with python prints at the Balmain spring 2017 fashion show in Paris in 2016. COVID-19 may be the tipping point when it comes to crocodile and clothes.
VALERIO MEZZANOTTI/THE NEW YORK TIMES Models present looks made with python prints at the Balmain spring 2017 fashion show in Paris in 2016. COVID-19 may be the tipping point when it comes to crocodile and clothes.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States