Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.

Donate

Ordinance would ban fur sales in Minneapolis

Photo by Charisse Kenion on Unsplash

Fur real. WCCO reports: “Minneapolis City Council members introduced an ordinance Friday which would prohibit the sale of new animal fur products in Minneapolis. The ban was proposed by Alondra Cano of Ward 9 and Cam Gordon of Ward 2. … The ban, proposed by Alondra Cano of Ward 9 and Cam Gordon of Ward 2, would not force any Minneapolis businesses to close. Instead, companies which currently sell animal fur will have a phase-in period, during which they can transition to selling fur-free products. There is also an explicit exemption in the ordinance which protects the rights of Native American tribes to sell fur for traditional and spiritual purposes. Secondhand stores too are exempt from the ban.”

Painful cuts. The Star Tribune’s John Ewoldt reports:Regis Corp. announced Thursday that it is eliminating 290 administrative and support positions throughout the U.S. and Canada. … ‘Although this phase of our transformation is certainly difficult, it is necessary to properly allocate capital and human resources to support investments in our rapidly growing franchise business,’ Chief Executive Hugh Sawyer said in a statement. … The company is turning away from owning its own salons to a franchise model.”

Return of the Vikings. The Star Tribune’s Kerri Westenberg writes: “Viking, the company that got its start plying European rivers, will splash into the Great Lakes in the summer of 2022. One of the routes on the Earth’s largest body of freshwater will shine a spotlight on Minnesota. Duluth will be among its ports of call.

Illegal weed(s). The New Ulm Journal’s Fritz Busch reports:The Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) confirmed five species of weeds on the state’s Noxious Weed Prohibited Eradicate List for the first time in eight counties in 2019. … Oriental bittersweet weeds were confirmed in Nicollet and Rice Counties. Cutleaf teasel was reported in Blue Earth County. … Other noxious weeds confirmed were black swallow-wort in Washington County, Palmer amaranth in Houston and Lincoln Counties and poison hemlock in Clay, Nobles and Rice Counties.”

In other news…

Adventure tale:Minnesotan in ‘Impossible Row’ recalls fear and fury near Antarctica” [Star Tribune]

Radio silence:Cities 97.1, KDWB hosts among those cut by iHeartMedia” [BringMeTheNews]

Confusingly, at the baseball museum in CHS Field:New museum exhibit kicks off celebration for 40th anniversary of Miracle on Ice” [Pioneer Press]

Normally we’re all for killing cliches but this is sad news:Minneapolis indie boutique Cliché has closed” [City Pages]

Not cool:Local bands Harper’s Jar and Gramma robbed of gear at gunpoint in north Minneapolis studio” [City Pages]

Feels like yesterday:Ten years ago today, Prince recorded his Minnesota Vikings anthem ‘Purple and Gold’” [The Current]

Comments (23)

  1. Submitted by David Therkelsen on 01/17/2020 - 06:50 pm.

    “No fur” adds to a very long list of things the Minneapolis City Council has prohibited business in the city from doing. I wonder if there is a single example of this Council doing anything that actually helps businesses succeed in the city.

    • Submitted by James Jarby on 01/18/2020 - 06:53 am.

      I’m glad that the proposed fur ban will help animals that are inhumanly farmed and produced for unnecessary and cruel human consumption. Does this type of killing actually equate to success?

      • Submitted by Robert Ahles on 01/18/2020 - 10:26 am.

        Do you feel the same way about chickens, pigs, beef cattle, etc.?

        • Submitted by James Jarby on 01/19/2020 - 07:48 am.

          Of course I do. It’s why my family has been vegetarian for many years. I believe that animal cruelty is the number one reason that people, like us, become vegetarian and vegan. Also, and it’s not easy, we try to avoid leather products whenever possible. Bringing wood products and vegetables into this discussion, as someone else has, is absurd.

          • Submitted by Dennis Wagner on 01/19/2020 - 12:01 pm.

            Some of us think bringing fur products in is absurd! Lets see, leather furniture, car seats, belts, shoes, hats, baseballs, footballs, basketballs, gloves, sandals, etc. etc. etc. Suppose the Eskimos and folks living on the tundras etc. should go fur free/meat free as well? Feel free to be a vegetarian, your choice is yours, furs and leathers have been around since more or less the beginning of time.What next ban on wool socks and sweaters? Crazy lefties are making the crazy righties look like rationale thinkers!

      • Submitted by lisa miller on 01/18/2020 - 12:15 pm.

        Except that it does not specifically say inhumanely hunted, so it does not include leather products. I don’t think many people even buy fur products anymore. I’m not sure why an ordinance is even needed. It does seem like yet another feel good ordinance. that does little.

    • Submitted by Eric Snyder on 01/18/2020 - 01:45 pm.

      It just so happens that there is an extensive economic history of businesses doing things that harm individuals, communities, consumers, the environment and wildlife.

      The idea that business should generally be left alone on the belief that this is maximally beneficial to society, is a belief that isn’t based on the bulk of evidence.

  2. Submitted by Arthur Swenson on 01/17/2020 - 09:34 pm.

    Well, a couple of years ago, they helped the “C” stores (think Holiday and SA) stand up to competition from the Dollar Store by saying that if you don’t sell full gallons of milk, then you can’t accept food stamps.

    Like so many of the ideas emanating from City Hall these days, I’m sure this “fur ban” will help someone who is well-connected downtown.

  3. Submitted by Mike Schumann on 01/18/2020 - 06:53 am.

    What’s next? Prohibit the sale of leather furniture?

    • Submitted by Dennis Wagner on 01/18/2020 - 06:13 pm.

      Yep, that’s it for Bomber hats, certain gloves,boots, mittens, you can’t make this stuff up! These folks are over the edge! What next ban wood products? Real meat? Should we be eating those poor vegetables?

  4. Submitted by RB Holbrook on 01/18/2020 - 12:27 pm.

    The anti-fur ban comments are as amusing as they are predictable.

    “You’re telling me I can’t do something I never wanted to do? That’s so unfair! Minneapolis liberals stink!”

    • Submitted by Robert Ahles on 01/18/2020 - 11:32 pm.

      If you can’t post my comments you can forget about any more of my donations to MINNPOST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  5. Submitted by Al Andresen on 01/19/2020 - 10:12 am.

    Control freaks rule the day again in Minneapolis. All those people really want are little robots who follow every order from their playbook.

    As the left is so fond of saying with respect to abortion — “If you don’t believe in abortion – don’t have one”.

    Yet, that logic is instantly destroyed by them when it comes to much of the Bill of Rights and others choosing how they live their lives.

  6. Submitted by Russell Booth on 01/19/2020 - 10:27 am.

    Possums are a serious pest animal in New Zealand and pose a threat to the island nation’s forests and native wildlife. The possum invaders are changing the habitat there to the extent that some native species may soon go extinct. Species extinction is considered to be very, very bad by many animal lovers, I hear.

    Possum fur is the third warmest fur (after seal and polar bear). New Zealand is now completely overrun by invasive possums.

    If it were no longer economical for New Zealanders to trap possums for sale of pelts, it would harm efforts to eradicate the island of this invasive pest species. Other species will pay the price.

    Oh, well. I guess if we can save just one animal from a cruel trapping death, other species of animals don’t matter that much.

    But if motivated by something other than a knee-jerk, feel-good reaction – and being educated about this issue – someone might think that buying new possum fur that originated in New Zealand is ecologically sound and good.

    • Submitted by Russell Booth on 01/19/2020 - 11:35 pm.

      I forgot to mention: Faux fur is plastic.

      We might need a city ordinance to require us to use a petroleum product for ruffs on our parka hoods (that is a poor substitute for fur when it comes to keeping warm and dry in our northern climate), rather than a sustainable, biodegradable natural product.

      That way our waste will include tiny microfibers of plastic that will find their way to the BWCA, the Great Lakes, the glaciers of Greenland, the very tops of the alps and the remote wooded areas of New Zealand where native people don’t trap possums anymore because enlightened consumers prefer to soil their nest called Earth with plastic.

      Another idea: ban plastic bags because plastic is bad.

      Mixed messages much?

  7. Submitted by Andy Briebart on 01/19/2020 - 07:22 pm.

    I mink coat bought in Minneapolis, hhmm, great idea.

    Valentine’s day isn’t far away.

    Every time my wife gets a compliment, she can say she got it in Minneapolis!

  8. Submitted by Pat Terry on 01/19/2020 - 11:03 pm.

    Methinks that the exemption for Native Americans and traditional/spiritual use is going to be legally problematic. San Francisco recently enacted a fur ban and is now facing a lawsuit.

    I don’t wear fur, but I have leather shoes and a leather briefcase. I also got my dinner at Arby’s tonight, and we all know what they have.

    • Submitted by Frank Phelan on 01/22/2020 - 05:58 am.

      Yup, industrial feedlot raised beef that is bad for the environment & family farmers.

      • Submitted by Pat Terry on 01/22/2020 - 09:45 am.

        I was gonna say “the meats” but that’s probably true too.

        I guess the point, though, is where do you draw the line. Fur is bad but leather is ok? Is vegetarian good enough or do you have to be vegan?

        And if these things are bad, why shouldn’t these rules not apply to Native Americans? Why is that different from conservative Christian groups claiming exemptions from civil rights laws?

  9. Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 01/20/2020 - 08:58 am.

    This is why I hate business reporting. We we wish everyone well and sympathize with those who lose their jobs but none of us are invested these people’s careers. What DOES effect and interest us might be the reasons and logic behind corporate restructuring decisions. Are they going a “different” direction, and if so why? Is this purely ratings driven? Is the Twin Cities “market” changing somehow? These are issues that potentially affect everyone who wants to listen to radio in the Twin Cities, not just a handful of programmer and on-air personalities. Yet all we ever get when these stories are covered are these details about details that are of little interest. Anyone who wants to know what these guys are posting on FB or Twitter has already seen on FB or Twitter.

  10. Submitted by Sylvia de Freitas on 01/20/2020 - 03:25 pm.

    I have a mink coat handed down to me from my aunt. I’ll hand it down to my daughter or granddaughter, who will probably hand it down to her daughter. Seems to me a lot more ecologically sound than a lot of other things people do.

  11. Submitted by Alina Trukhina on 01/22/2020 - 08:09 am.

    There really are barely any stores selling fur in Minneapolis. The only one that comes to mind is Ribnick furs, so Alondra Cano may just have it in for them. I live in her district, which has plenty of issues that could be addressed rather than focusing on a non-issue.

  12. Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 01/22/2020 - 10:57 am.

    In general fur sales have been plummeting for decades now, the ordinance doesn’t make a lot of sense to me, but let’s not pretend this is some kind government assault on our freedoms. Anyone who want’s to buy fur will have not difficulty find it if MPLS goes ahead with this.

Leave a Reply