Jump to content

Raccoon dog or Tanuki


Guest touchofsable
 Share

Recommended Posts

This I thought desreved a topic of its own as clearly the antis are trying to capitatlise on the utter stupidity and ignorance of the masses and claim the animals as dogs.

It is about as much a dog as a fox is.

 

It is a Siberian animal, which has been prized for its fur for centuries. From the Northern forests, you AGAIN have to question the validity of the accusation that its numbers have been decimated by the fur trade.

 

In fact, after the domestication of these animals and fox and sable, one could argue that actually their hunted numbers were less.

 

So what allows wikipedia to get away with this nonsense:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raccoon_Dog

 

where they claim their numbers in decline because of fur trade. Oh all of a sudden after thousands and thousands of years. Hmmm...funny how the fox and mink and sable aren't in decline isn't it?

 

I don't know what we can do about redressing some of this bullshit but it needs doing.

 

I emailed a friend form Siberia and the answer came back plain and simple.

 

Q "Why are Tanuki in decline?"

 

A "They are not in the forest where the people hunt them. Only near to the towns. Its distemper from the dogs introduced by poor communist oil workers from Russia who could not afford treat their dogs with veterinarians. When I was young they were scavenge in the town waste but many died of other disease too as a result."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raccoon_Dog

 

Anyway at least wikipedia acknowledge it's NOT a dog. Hopefully people can point that out when this gets mentioned in future press reports.

 

Of course our old friend HABITAT destruction has also had a massive effect on the animal, and futhemore if the animals survive this century it will be as a direct result OF the fur trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is all the fuss about? Just antis stirring up mischief out of non facts. There's a big difference between the taxonomic group "Family" (in this case Canidae) and the different geni that make up the family. (Genus canis, dogs and wolves, Vulpes Foxes (both of which are dogs. and Nyctereutes (Raccoon dog) which although in the same "Family" is not a true dog.

 

What is the problem with dogs for fur. I like dogs as domestic pets. but many people love horses (ToS for one!) and yet they are eaten in many parts of the worls. Many kids and adults too have a pet rat, which they consider a domesticated pet, and yet rats are persecurted as vermin. And lets not go into the relationship kids have with their pet rabbits, possibly one of the most abundant sources for meat and fur in the world.

 

You can develop close relationships with all these pets as with dogs. So what's the difference.

 

Apologies everyone.... I know I'm talking to the already converted here, but why dont the unconverted question this pathetic c##p churned out by the antis? Why dont people think for themselves for once

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well said Ravens.

Howver what I will say is this. There is a vast diference bewteen a compnion animal and one hunted or bred for the express purpose of food and hide.

Dog and cat fur are NOT suitable for fashion. They are neither animals that have fur for extreme conditions such as cold nor do they have the dense double furs of seni aquatic furbearers such as mink and beaver.

 

It is therefore not a quaestion just of ethics but also of quality.

 

Having said that of course, the Husky is used by indigenous peoples for fur; though only when needs call, or when the animal is injured. Otherwise, its use to man as companion is far higher.

 

Likewise with the horse. Horses are occassionally available for human consumption; but few breed them especially for such consumption. In Yakutia the horse is eaten and used for hide but only when necessary.

 

I would object to eating horse myself, but in Yakutia I would. Legislation against culling horses can also severely effect supply of food for big cats etc in zoos.....so all these things should be considered before gut reaction policies based on AR ideas.

However in modern times some of these fundamantal principles about our relationship with animals have been forgotten. We ae meant to care about animals in order that we protect and conserve them because we need them. We are also meant to love the company of companion animals...and they us...because we are all allies in the management of species; sharing the spoils by hunting together or mutual protection from other predators. When we forget this stuff, we are just also going to have problems for example with dog/horse misbehaviour because we fail to enforce their own social rules and expect them to observe our own morals...something they cannot do.

But to reiterate; a raccoon dog is not a dog.

As for a rat? yes it can be a fine pet. But again it can never be a companion animal since it cannot be trained to hunt with man.

 

The interesting exception to this idea is the ferret.

 

So what defines a companion animal is its ability to ally itself with man for mutual benefit. Horse, hound, cat, cheetah even, hawk/eagle certainly.

But there again the first domesticated companion animal was the Caribou....and nobody would deny the right of the herder to eat and trade the fur of the caribou. So nothing here is set in moral stone as it were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote ravens:

 

lets not go into the relationship kids have with their pet rabbits, possibly one of the most abundant sources for meat and fur in the world.

 

end quote.

 

An important point. Remeber the European rabbit is NOT native to the british Isles, and was introduced by the Normans (who hunted them with hawks) for sport and fur use; as is celarly shown in our new TIMELINE feature.

 

If animals are utilised for fur it seems their continuation is assured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got to agree with sabel here, the antis are really digging here. What doesn't help was a investigation in the US into some hooded jackets containing racoon fur finding out most were in fact racoon dog which is quite different from racoon .... However at the same time like sable says, racoon dogs are not dogs. Thge antis do seem to be making a lot of headway in convincing and brainwashing people this is dog fur and I think they are trying to get it banned in the US in the same way dog fur is banned.

 

From my perspective, the Chinese being the irresponsible scum there are (sorry if anyone is Chinese, I'm making a generaliseation here, because I myself am half Chinese any way) are making coats for companies like Sean John and labelling it as racoon fur when it's not. I also don't agree that a lot of Chinese fur production is not ethical like western fur farms and a number of cheap fur trimmed items are made from racoon dog where the fur is not obtained humanely. This is a real problem because it the anti's are capitalising on things like the Chinese supposedly skinning these animals alive and stating that the whole of the fur industry is like this when it's not.

 

This is what happens when people like our retared UK government ban fur farming, it just gets outsourced to somewhere like China, where both human and animal rights are virtually non existant. Fur farming in developed countries like in the UK, Europe and Northern America is/was highly regulated and the quality of fur is good and it is ethicly obtained.

 

The other worrying thing is if the antis get their way, it will be a gateway for saying that things like coyote fur should not be used, based on the fact the coyote is loosely related to the dog, as is the fox (though they relationship is pretty distant when compared to the domesticated animals we keep as pets).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I walked right into this one today at a clients office.

 

I took by a sketch they wanted and was talking with the guy [their Lawyer] about the design briefly.

 

A young woman Ad Designer was there discussing the Condo sales ads when they started talking about the dog fur campaign at the Macey's stores.

 

I was wearing one of my fur lined jackets [Gray sheared Beaver and pigskin]. The girl was aleady touching the pigskin since it too is quite soft while they're talking dog fur trash.

 

I say to her opening up my jacket "It's real too." and she's tentatively motioning to stroke it and the Lawyer guy says "It's OK to stroke the Architect." and she is all over the Beaver while I'm telling them about the fine points of dog fur and Takui/Racoon as Dog/Racoon.

 

Tactile feelings won the argument as "but those cute little pets" kind of faded from the disscussion. She was very excited over the very real fur.

 

 

 

 

 

 

OFF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well done OFF.

Its going to be like Johnny Appleseed getting our view across as the media don't want to hear it...they want the massive PETA advertising revenue.

 

So every time like this you can gently put people straight, then they go away rethinking the rubbish they have read in the media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...