In just one decade, a longtime fashion mainstay has been relegated to the sidelines of both haute couture runways and bargain clothing racks: fur.
In 2014, over 140 million minks, foxes, chinchillas, and raccoon dogs — a small, fox-like East Asian species — around the world were farmed and killed for their fur. By 2024, that number plummeted to 20.5 million, according to an analysis from the nonprofit Humane World for Animals using data from governments and industry. (Disclosure: I worked at Humane World for Animals, formerly known as the Humane Society of the United States, from 2012 to 2017, but I didn’t work on fur issues.)
The data encompasses the vast majority of animals raised on fur farms, though it doesn’t include the number of animals painfully ensnared in traps, which account for a small share of global fur production. It also doesn’t include fur from rabbits.
The rapid transformation represents a shift in the perception of fur from a luxury good that signals wealth and status to an ethical faux pas. It’s perhaps the biggest animal welfare campaign success story of the 21st century, achieved by pressuring major fashion brands to drop fur from product lines and persuading lawmakers across Europe and elsewhere to ban the production and even sale of fur.
Covid-19 hastened Europe’s move away from fur production, as mink — the species farmed for fur in the greatest numbers around the world — were found to be especially susceptible to the virus, and mink-associated strains spilled back over to infect humans. Economic headwinds and shifting political dynamics in Russia and China, two of the world’s biggest fur producers and consumers, helped change the course of the global industry, too.
The outlook for billions of animals used by humans every year, in industries from meat production to scientific research, is largely bleak. But the fall of fur shows progress is possible.
The brutality of fur farming, briefly explained
A lot of factors have contributed to the global decline in fur production, but there’s a key reason why it was possible to make progress against the industry. It produces an unnecessary luxury product that is, unlike meat, financially out of reach for most people. And that it’s so unnecessary makes its cruelty all the more horrific.
Animals farmed for fur are confined in tiny wire-bottom cages that are often stacked atop one another, causing feces and urine to fall through to the animals below them. Farms range in size from a few hundred, to a few thousand, to over 100,000 animals who are typically born in the spring and then slaughtered in the fall or winter. Mink are killed by carbon dioxide gassing, while foxes and raccoon dogs are anally electrocuted.
In Finland, some foxes — nicknamed “monster foxes” — have been selectively bred to have large folds of fat so they produce more fur, which causes a range of welfare issues.
The conditions and practices are terrible enough, but fur farming is especially cruel considering that these are wild, non-domesticated species. In the wild, their home ranges encompass several square miles, but on fur farms, they barely have any room to move around at all, much less express natural behaviors. Mink are semi-aquatic animals, yet have no access to water on fur farms. They also prefer to be solitary, yet they’re caged with other minks. Foxes, meanwhile, naturally burrow and create dens where they care for their young, but they can’t do so in captivity.
These bleak conditions cause the animals to engage in what are called “stereotypical” behaviors — repetitive motions that are a sign of stress. When caged, mink will pace or bob their heads — even perform somersaults — while foxes might constantly scratch at the corner of their cages in a fruitless attempt to dig and burrow.
“They’ve literally gone insane in these operations, because they’re not fulfilling their natural behaviors,” PJ Smith, director of fashion policy at Humane World For Animals, told me.
How animal advocates — and shifting political and economic conditions — put fur out of fashion
Today’s animal rights movement is largely focused on cruelty to animals raised for meat, milk, and eggs. But in the 1980s and ’90s, ending the fur industry was the cause du jour. PETA put the issue on the cultural map, stigmatizing fur by throwing fake blood on runways and recruiting A-list celebrities to wear next to nothing for its “I’d Rather Go Naked than Wear Fur” campaign.
The impact of that early advocacy, however, is hard to discern; Calvin Klein committed to going fur-free in 1994, while other brands resisted PETA’s campaign. US fur sales declined from the late 1980s to the early 1990s, though it’s unclear how much of that was attributable to animal rights campaigning.
By the late 1990s, animal advocates had largely moved on to other issues, while US fur sales began to recover. At the same time, China joined the World Trade Organization, which opened up its capacity to export fur, while the US’s growing prosperity led it to become a major fur consumer.
Fur production boomed, and fur trim became a popular lining for winter coat hoods. But some advocates maintained pressure against the industry, and in the 2000s, a few mid-level brands, like Ralph Lauren and J.Crew, went fur-free. Meanwhile, some European countries, including Croatia, Austria, and the United Kingdom, banned fur production. Terrifying undercover investigations into the fur trade — especially one video from a Chinese market in which a raccoon dog is skinned alive — reignited occasional momentum on the issue.
In the mid-2010s, Armani, NET-A-PORTER, and Hugo Boss committed to going fur-free. Before then, Smith told me, it was hard to get companies to take meetings with him. And then, everything changed when, in 2017, Gucci announced a fur-free policy. After Gucci, other major brands followed — like Versace, Burberry, Prada, Chanel, and Michael Kors, to name a few. In 2019, California banned fur sales.
Around this same time, more countries in Europe banned fur production, which had become a trend that accelerated after Covid broke out. Research found that mink are highly susceptible to the disease, and evidence emerged that mink-adapted viruses have spilled back over to humans. Economic downturns in Russia and China over the last decade, European sanctions against Russia over the war in Ukraine, and China’s crackdown on corruption (furs had been a common gift to government officials) likely affected fur sales and production in those countries, too.
And as major fashion brands moved away from animal fur, faux fur got a lot better.
Until the mid-2000s, “faux fur was this thing that was acrylic — it looked plastic. Not many people saw it as luxury,” Smith told me. But the political and corporate progress created a “gap in the marketplace,” he said, which helped startups get funding to create better-looking, higher-quality alternatives.
That progress appears likely to continue.
Switzerland just effectively banned fur imports, and the UK is considering doing the same. In 2023, European activists delivered over 1.5 million signatures in support of a ban on the production and sale of fur to the European Commission, which is currently weighing the measure.
Last week, in a major boost for the effort, the EU’s food safety agency issued a damning report on the welfare of fur-farmed animals. And earlier this month, the European Commission listed the American mink — which was brought to Europe for fur production — as an invasive species, which will restrict mink breeding and sales in the EU.
But there have also been recent setbacks. In 2019, New York City considered a ban on fur sales, but it didn’t pass. Politicians in some of Europe’s top fur-producing countries — Finland, Poland, and Greece — have resisted calls for fur bans, too. And there are some still big-name fashion holdouts, including Hermes and LVMH — the company behind Fendi, Dior, and Louis Vuitton.
In February, the New York Times reported on a vibe shift around the stigma on wearing fur, though it’s unclear whether that helped boost sales — the fashion world’s focus has largely revolved around reclaiming vintage and used pelts.
And despite the significant progress, 20.5 million animals in fur farms annually means there’s still a lot of work to be done. Smith hopes that doesn’t lead fellow animal advocates to become complacent and move on to other issues too soon, like what happened with fur in the late 1990s.
“The hardest part is going to be closing out an industry for good,” said Smith. “It’s going to be convincing those final fashion brands and retailers to move away from fur. And it’s going to be the case that we need to make to legislators and policymakers that we need to implement policy change,” he said, to “ensure the future is fur-free once and for all.”
