Beavers in high demand. Castor gland $50/lb. (2:16-min. VIDEO)  

Is that a leg hold trap??? Horrible suffering and bleeding to death and starvation for the beavers?

I am all for the banning of this material.

I think this is a good reason to support the production of synthetics, as unpopular as I'm sure my opinion is here

Yes that makes sense. If that trapper makes his living this way, he needs to be properly equipped and trained in more humane & ethical ways of doing so.

Wait, is the castoreum animal torture?? WOW! I didn't know this. I hope it stops right now!!

WoW! Just watched the video...Disgusting, I didn't realise any of this, It's inhumane!

Jeez

I won't watch it. There was a beaver den in the marsh near our old apartment where we lived when we first moved to Virginia, and I remember how excited I was to catch a glimpse of one diving under the water. I used to walk by in the evenings, walking my dog, listening to the frog chorus, enjoying the wild honeysuckle and blackberries, and hoping to catch another quick glimpse of a beaver. I can't stand the idea of them being cruelly trapped and killed for their glands. I'm prefectly happy to live without castoreum in my fragrances (or beaver fur on my coats).

A total disgrace in the 21st century that this is still happening.

In fact as we are progressing we are becoming more disgraceful.

Well-said. This is 2010, for Heaven's sake!!

I was under the impression that much "castoreum" in perfumery is now synthetic.

Certainly there are synthetics to be used, and the industry should work in that direction.

Thank you, Quarry, for raising our awareness.

Ironically, some of the 100% natural perfumers (a movement which I understand is gaining popularity worldwide, but especially in USA) happily use real animal ingredients instead of synthetic equivalents. I don't know what to think about that. On one hand I am really attracted towards attempting 100% natural perfumes, as it's very, very demanding and requires great skill. But if I were to do so I'd have to go without musks and animalics because I wouldn't be happy about using animal ingredients for perfuming purposes no matter how they were harvested. :/

One woman I knew who made "natural" and cruelty-free handmade soaps actually used real lanolin. I was dismayed.

Where do they think they get the lanolin? It means, literally, "wool oil."

I thought lanolin was extracted when wool is washed for use in textiles. Do you also think the use of wool is cruel?

On the castoreum, I have been reading lots about it over the years and though it's true the trapping of beavers is not always done in the most humane way, I've understood that with or without castor glands, those beavers would still get get killed as pests or for their (still) more lucrative pelts. And it's because of the need to keep the pelts intact the beavers are trapped instead of shot. To me it's more respectful to the animal to use every possible part, than get the pelt and just throw the rest away.

Maybe I'm misinformed, but this video doesn't really have me convinced, but then I'm not a vegan. But I do want to stress I in no way condone the the torture of any animal and would never buy civet or deer musk for instance.

On the issue of lanolin and "extracting" wool, I suggest you Google "mulesing." Then look at a photo of a sheep who has undergone the procedure...

I was also under the impression that most "animalic" fragrance ingredients used today are synthetics. I guess I was wrong (??). Just out of curiosity: does anyone know which fragrances use castoreum?

Primrose: Yes, I new this about Australian merino sheep and for that reason don't buy merino. Are you saying this is standard practice in the whole wool industry? I've seen a lot of sheep kept for wool in Sweden and none of them were subject to this practise. But then it's not a big industry here.

Yes, I would also like to know which scents use real castoreum . Like Lilybelle- I won't watch the video . I hate animal cruelty . I would much rather perfumers use synthetic castoreum than do terrible things to animals .

I'm not a vegetarian or vegan, so I suppose I am a hypocrite, but my conscience bothers me from time to time. The wholesale cruelty toward & slaughter of animals seem so far removed from the way my father grew up on a farm. They ate animals, but they didn't torture them. But I seriously doubt I could go out and grab a chicken and wring its neck for my dinner. I can't even bring myself to put a worm on a fish hook, but that's just icky. Most of us are now so distanced from the original source of our foods and commodities that we don't even think about them. And we should, for many reasons.

mysticknot and lilybelle, I recall an article in which a synthetic castoreum was used. Is this true? (I am totally against the use of animal materials esp. when synthetics are around.) In the storms in the Southwest US, I usu. remove earthworms from the pavement and place them in dryer ground so they will not drown and then dry out or be killed. An index card is good for this as it will gently pick them up and allow them to be relocated.

http://www.mimifroufrou.com/scenteds...fragrance.html

And iez, as one cannot be sure of the origin of the wool, I just stay clear. I prefer sweaters in cotton and ramie, anyway. Ditto for diamonds, which are often from countries in which human suffering is found. Fortunately, the cost of diamonds make this easy to do!

The use of traps in this day and age is unconscionable!

As for the beavers being pests, that is no excuse for cruelty. In the 19th century, fashionable men often participated in "rat baiting," a barbaric sport in which they bet on how many rats would be killed by a terrier in a specified period of time. Rats were either caught in the country or bred to be bait for the dogs.

As the rats were wildlife as well as pests, they were not covered by the Animal Cruelty Acts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat-baiting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruelty...imals_Act_1835

Well, everyone is a hypocrite about SOMETHING. You just have to be at ease with the lines you draw and if possible, learn more about what really goes on so you get to draw those lines a bit more accurately according to your personal morals.

I'm not veggie or vegan, but there is no way I would eat KFC battery-mutilated chickens for example. I rarely eat meat anyway and if I do, I prefer to get the meat from a local butcher organically farmed rather than from a supermarket. And so on and so forth...

My stance is that we should eat and clothe ourselves, sure, but do so as humanely and ethically as possible. I work with a lot of people who are 100% vegan and would not wear silk, wool or leather shoes.

What I specifically object to is the use of animals (often in cruel ways) to bolster our vanity or 'non-essential' items (yes; that means that I - gasp - consider perfume 'non-essential'! ).

Primrose, you entirely missed my point, namely to me it seems more humane to actually use every part of a killed animal instead of throwing it in the bin. It's hard for me to see beavers as a pest and I really wish we could keep more of their natural habitats, but tell that to a farmer who's without income for a year because beavers put the fields under water.

The point was also that not a single beaver will be spared their agony because people refuse to buy scents with castoreum, the profit is in their pelts and keeping them from putting vast areas under water.

To be quite frank, I must say I do find it hypocritical to eat conventionally produced beef, chicken or pork and then get upset about the use of castoreum. Pigs, chickens and beef cows suffer entire lives of agony, compared to the beaver living a free life only suffering at his death moment. I know what I'd choose if I were an animal.

And to me, perfume IS essential, eating meat is not.

Nukapai, I agree with you--we should be conscious about our choices.

And perfume is as important as food for survival. (Did I say that? LOL! I actually pack a small vial of perfume when we go camping...) LOL!


iez, this all sounds noble until you consider that being killed in a trap is not always humane nor instantaneous. (A trap is not a quick death from a well-aimed hunter's bow or a bullet from a rifle. Often hunters who use bows or rifles must track a dying animal and provide the death stroke with a hunter's knife.) Often a trapped animal can live for days slowly dying in agony of dehydration or starvation, or even become a meal for another animal. Some desperate trapped animals chew off their own legs in order to escape the traps, only to die in agony from infection or because they are too disabled to survive.

The notions that castoreum is a "by-product" of the fur industry, and that it's good that we use all of the animal, are appalling. Two wrongs do not make a right.

Using the most humane products is certainly the way to go.

Are there any good sources for information on synthetic animalic ingredients?

Primrose: Again you seem to actually want to misunderstand. Of course no animal should ever be killed with traps or other inhumane methods. BUT, the very reason they are trapped instead of shot are to keep the pelts intact and in North America there is also an insane macho trapper culture keeping the practice alive. And to me using all of the animal is not adding another wrong, it's avoiding adding the extra wrong of wasting the animal that is already killed.

I am not trying to sound noble, I am trying to avoid sounding so when I'm not. Noble would be to refrain from all fur, meat, down, milk, anything that supports industrial keeping or any killing of animals, and also refrain from killing mosquitoes, preferably sweep the path in jain manner to make sure you don't step on a bug. My vegan friends won't even eat honey because it enslaves bees, to me that's pushing it, but I'm not as empathic and self sacrificing as they are, so I won't pretend to be.

iez, this is certainly not true. Let's get real. You were inferring that trap hunting is quick and humane: "compared to the beaver living a free life only suffering at his death moment." "Moment" of death? Are we talking the same beaver traps here? How about "a beaver living free until its long, lingering death from starvation or infection puts him out of his misery, or the hunter finally comes along to cut his throat so he can be put into a bag?"

I see your point about wanting to use all of the animal. This is the attitude many aboriginal cultures had/have. The death of the beast is its gift from the gods, and the soul of the beast is to be thanked. Animals are not to be killed wantonly nor for vanity.
(I think the film "Avatar" touched on this...)

Nevertheless, trap hunting is barbaric *any* way you look at it, using all of the animal notwithstanding. It should go the way of slavery, animal fighting for "sport" (rats, dogs, bears, chickens, any animals) and child labour.

I think Nukapai is right--we are all hypocrites in some ways, but being AWARE is a start. This is a step in the right direction.


BTW, there IS a synthetic castoreum note! Here is the link:

http://www.basenotes.net/threads/231...reum?p=1726067

You seem to assume all beavers are trapped, but at least in Sweden beavers are shot. Any trapping is highly illegal and no one seems to be willing to take that risk. I did read a lot on hunters forums to find out, and while boasting about illegal shooting of animals (really not ok with me), no one seems to do trapping here, it's considered barbaric.
Please read the first paragraph of my last post, you seem to have missed that part.

Oh, I see now... in *Sweden* beavers are *shot*--that is, the legal ones...

This thread began with trapping, hence the overall dismay over the gathering of castors from beavers. How we got into *shooting* beavers is beyond me...

I see I have been unclear in my previous posts on my basic assumption that trapping is not the normal way to hunt beavers, sorry for that. My assumption is based on the fact that it seems to not be done either legally or illegally here. I think the trapper culture is a local problem in north America.

The discussion here has not focused on stopping the use of traps, it has been on banning the use of castoreum.

Boycotting castoreum will not do anything to save one single beaver from inhumane treatment, it's only an excuse to feel self righteous if you don't go to the bottom of the problem i.e. the use of traps.

If you feel upset from this video, you should do something about the primitive local culture that condones trapping, boycotting fragrances using castoreum is just silly, unless you're a convinced vegetarian or vegan.

I will happily keep using castoreum in the future, castoreum I get from hunters who shoot beavers, here they are hunted for their meat (then trapping is useless) or animal control and the hunters happily give the castor glands away for free or almost free, since they don't find them at all valuable and usually just throw them away.

..and now a new revelation...the beavers are eaten, so the castors are by-products! I now suspect there is an agenda on this thread...are you also a farmer whose farm has been compromised by the activity of dam-building beavers, as well? Or are you actually a beaver hunter or a family member of hunters?

BTW, boycotting is one of the most effective political tools to create social change and raise awarenesss; it's a form of civil disobedience. In the U.S. the bus boycott of the 1960s gave rise to a major victory in the Civil Rights movement of racial equality (not often a visible issue in an ethnically/racially homogeneous country) and the boycott of vegetable produce in the State of California, led by labour leader Cesar Chavez, gave rise to better working conditions and higher wages for farm labourers. Lastly, gay people in the U.S. made a serious impact upon orange juice growers when their spokesperson, an anti-gay actress, made insulting remarks about their lifestyle--in the end, her professional career and marriage failed and she was declared bankrupt. Karma?

Being conscious of products we buy/use is laudable, but sometimes it is so very hard with some products to know of the ethical source: dolphin-safe tuna where divers carefully monitor fishing nets, non-blood diamonds where human rights are respected, etc. Sometimes one must simply avoid the products altogether.

You infer that you *buy* the castors, albeit for "almost free." However small, there is still the financial incentive to kill the beavers.

I will again quote Nukapai--it's all about awareness. Now that I know castoreum can by synthesised as an accord in perfumes, I will enquire about ingredients in perfumes, just as I eschew diamonds and furs. (And in Chinese herbal medicines as well, as some contain animal ingredients.)

In the end, everyone has his own karma.

This.

Primrose: Now you're totally lost, resorting to a personal attack that would be grave if it wasn't so utterly rediculous.
Why don't you inform yourself instead of sticking pigheadedly to a preconceived notion?

Yes, beavers are eaten, of course they are, and considered a delicacy with very tender, red meat and a distinct wild game flavour.

Boycotts work when they remove the incentive of an action, castoreum is not the incentive of beaver hunt.

Why don't you visit jaktsnack.se yourself and ask around for castor glands? I'm sure most of the hunters are not monolingual and you will get the same response as I did there, namely 1) What on earth do you want the glands for??? 2) Sure, if you want them just come and pick them up, yes for free.
(What I pay for them it's the small sum for postage and packing.)

And no, I know no hunter of beavers or other animals and certainly am not one myself so you can take back your utterly silly accusation and then... we will just have to agree to disagree in this matter.

Please limit discussion in the FFD to fragrances marketed to and worn by women.

It's time to close this thread.