THE FUR, LEATHER AND HIDE TRADES 55 



Most people who protest against the use of furs on humanitarian 

 grounds, themselves regularly indulge in the use of meat and of shoes 

 and other leather goods, which are obtained only by killing animals, 

 either wild or domesticated, sometimes by methods as cruel as those 

 practiced by the most uncultured native trapper of the American wilder- 

 ness. In any case, the animal should be caught and put to death in the 

 most humane way that is practicable. In some places where large num- 

 bers of animals are slaughtered, more humane methods are now in 

 use than formerly, but in many slaughter houses and on farms the old- 

 fashioned way of hitting them on the head with a hammer or axe is 

 still the style, and we eat the meat without asking how the animal was 

 killed. So with furs, many trappers have adopted the least cruel method 

 of killing their catches that they know, because they believe that if the 

 animal is caught and handled with the minimum amount of struggle 

 and worry its pelt will be in better condition and bring a higher price. 

 Many of the dealers encourage the trappers in the use of better methods, 

 and urge more frequent visiting of the traps, in order to avoid losses 

 and get a larger percentage of prime pelts. 



Close seasons have been established by law as a conservation measure, 

 in order to protect females during the breeding season and when nurtur- 

 ing their young, and to prevent the taking of pelts that are not in prime 

 condition. Incidentally this has partly removed one cause of cruelty 

 by preventing the starvation of the young that would result from catch- 

 ing the mother while the young need maternal care. It is said that in 

 Alaska as many as 30,000 young fur seals starved in a single year be- 

 cause of the killing of their mothers, before the present regulations 

 were adopted. 5 



It should also be remembered that nature herself, though in so many 

 ways benign, is in many respects cruel. A large proportion of the 

 species of mammals whose furs are most valuable are themselves hunt- 

 ers, living upon various species of mammals, birds, fishes and other 

 living creatures that they succeed in killing. When the trapper catches 

 and puts to death a carnivorous or omnivorous mammal, for its pelt, 

 he may thereby commit one act of cruelty, but in so doing he prevents 

 the animal from killing many others. Furthermore, most of the fur- 

 bearers eventually meet violent death, even though not caught by the 

 trapper. This, of course, is not an argument in favor of any cruelty that 

 can well be avoided by the trapper, but merely an assertion that no 

 matter whether the fur-bearers be trapped by men or not, their end 



6 Laut, The fur trade of America, pp. 125-133, 1921. 



