Home
..Site
Updates 
History & Mission,
BOD
FAQ's
Accomplishments
Disclaimer, Copyright,
ContactPet Chin Rescue/ Re-Homing
..International
Chinchilla Rescue Network (ICRN)
Quotes For
CompassionRanch Chins
..Pet
Homes For Ranchies: News, Photos
Petfinder Page
In
Defense of Positive Activism (.doc)Make A Difference
..Change
by Choice
Show You
Care, Donate
ChinCare: Educating Chinparents
PART ONE
|
||||||||||||||
CbC, PART ONE (this page): *CbC: summary, 1 (pelter clubs), 2 (facts of pelting today), 3 (homing ranchies, vivisection) 4 (quality of life, fur farms) *LEARN THE FACTS! Pelting in the U.S. today is NOT profitable and ranchers agree, let's be FUR FREE! CbC, PART TWO: *Pet-Friendly Resources (organizations; forums and chat rooms; books, magazines, reference libraries, sites) *Correcting Misconceptions ("pelting neutral," sidetracking fallacies, past knowledge for today's pets) *The Chinchilla Fur Industry (news, market report: chinchilla industry council, news from croatia, hsus on fur farming) *Killing Methods (avma recommendation, electrocution, cervical dislocation) CbC, PART THREE: *Positive Activism In Action (fur-free sites: take action and research information, lobbying & letter writing) *Defining (animal rights, activism, stereotyping, extremism, passive resistance, fur-free, pro-pet, respect vs. tolerance) *Euthanasia: What It Is and What It Is Not *Laws Advancing a Fur-Free Future 
*Fur: Not "Natural" or "Eco-Friendly"
CHANGE BY CHOICE(summary, 1 (pelter clubs), 2 (facts of pelting today), 3 (homing ranchies, vivisection), 4 (quality of life, fur farms) SUMMARY: SHAPING THE FUTURE BY THE CHOICES WE MAKE (why cbc) The CbC pages are not the product of sensationalism, emotionalism or ignorance and CbC is NOT your stereotypical one-sided propaganda pitch from angry animal rights extremists, see: FAQ's and In Defense of Positive Activism (.doc). It bears repeating that MM is strictly a charity, not an animal rights organization and it's founders are positive AR activists, not extremists; we seek positive change by peaceful, legal and educational methods, only. We are NOT anti-rancher, anti-breeder or anti-pelter-club-members. We don't waste time and energy on hate because that's counterproductive to finding and implementing solutions that will save chinchilla lives from an untimely, unnecessary demise. What we ARE is pro-chinchilla, and that makes us fur-free or anti-pelting and pelting is useless (now that it's unprofitable) even to U.S. ranchers, whom we work with so they don't have to pelt. Ranchers who don't pelt aren't pelters and therefore aren't part of the problem, their cooperation and our intervention= lives saved. We don't support pelter clubs and we urge others not to join but we DON'T judge, hate or harass those who do because we respect their freedom to choose; we're not AR extremists who care more about bullying people than saving animals. Instead, we encourage pelter club members to become part of the solution and to make positive change happen from within those clubs. CBC strives to raise awareness of the problems faced by chinchillas in captivity today and advocates positive activism as the solution, as detailed in the four CbC principles in the large logo above. We believe that if everyone persisted in championing the principles of CbC, then positive change for chinchillas would eventually follow. Display the small logo above on your site and link to this page to show your support, thanks! Our background for the CbC pages derives from the many invaluable resources we've drawn on since first becoming chinparents in 1997: Intensive observation and interaction while working with hundreds of chinchillas through our rescue work (since 2000, includes interaction with chinchillas from all backgrounds: pet chinchilla or "hobby" breeder, pet store, rescue, re-homed and those with special needs or that have been neglected or abused, etc.), Pet Homes For Ranchies (saving ranch chinchillas since 2004, also see Accomplishments on Matilde's Mission) and our chinfamily (begun in 1997, over thirty since 2002); ongoing international communications with pet chinchilla owners, breeders, rescue workers and ranchers; extensive online research and data mining; the indispensible benefit of working closely with our exotics specialist vet; the study of our reference library which includes dozens of veterinary, scholarly and rancher-authored books, pamphlets and articles (.doc, and our purchase of rancher-authored books did not contribute to the continuation of pelting); communication with both ranchers and PETA (we are not members), etc. We have friends in both ECBC and MCBA who discuss their club involvement while respecting our views (and vice versa); we've educated ourselves on how ranches and pelting work, we've attended shows (in association with rescue work), visited pelting ranches and met with, bought chinchillas and supplies from and cooperated with ranchers to home their at-risk chinchillas with the pet chinchilla community per PHFR.
WHY "CHANGE BY CHOICE?" New chinparents and people from other countries are often caught off-guard, shocked and bewildered, by the U.S. pet chinchilla community's involvement in pelter clubs (ECBC, MCBA) and their bullish defense of pelting and the fur industry. The reason for this seemingly contradictory behavior is that in the U.S., nearly all pet chinchilla breeders (pelter clubs are for breeders) are members of one or both pelter clubs, where they signed pro-pelting contracts to join and where they are subsequently indoctrinated in pro-pelting and ranch husbandry information through shows, literature and "live pelting demonstrations" (MCBA). We know that most U.S. pet chinchilla breeders belong to ECBC or MCBA because since 2002 we've hand-reviewed all English language pet chinchilla care sites (over 700 as of 2008) on the web for the educational purposes of our other site, and U.S. pet breeders announce their relationship with pelter clubs right on their own pet websites, where they also link to pelter club sites and resources. Our U.S. PET chinchilla forums are full of pelter club news and events, where pet breeders post with "proud member of ECBC/ MCBA" on their forum signatures, and their administrative contributions to pelter club forum and websites are routinely indicated in the online credits. So, while the liberal media may villify ranchers, at home (pet venues) where it counts and where U.S. pet chinchilla breeders monopolize the leadership positions (club owners, forum administrators, etc.), ranchers are revered, a pro-ranching bias is preached, and any pet owner or rescuer that voices a pro-pet objection is instantly lynched, censored and silenced. Although pelting in the U.S. today is not profitable and large-scale ranchers who have not yet retired are selling their animals live as pets (pet stores, direct sales) or breeding stock (to other ranchers or pet breeders), pelting still occurs when there are ranch chinchillas that for one reason or another aren't easily marketable live. When the U.S. chinchilla pelt business began its decline about a decade ago, ECBC and MCBA gradually opened their doors to pet chinchilla breeders, albeit entirely on their terms as reflected by their still pro-pelting mission statements and contracts. ECBC/ MCBA propaganda aimed at the pet chinchilla community promotes their image as benevolent mentors generously offering the benefit of their knowledge and experience when in fact they're simply training the next generation of ranchers who will serve the interests of the fur industry, or at least never oppose it. U.S. pet chinchilla breeders hold the majority vote in both ECBC and MCBA and they are very active in competing for awards and recognition in those clubs today. The fur industry and its associates employed foresight to ensure that the budding U.S. pet chinchilla community would stay out of their business and never confront them over pelting. Through pelter clubs, ranchers have taken pet chinchilla breeders under their wing so that the pet breeders have come to accept, even admire ranch husbandry and killing methods, and once they're shown the shiny breeding and pelting barns they completely forget that cleanliness doesn't excuse senseless (unprofitable, unnecessary) killing. We aren't saying that ranchers are one-dimensional and evil, that's an AR extremist lie, a distortion that has done more to discredit the case against saving ranch chinchillas than anything else because pelter club members make a point of finding a nice rancher on the pretext that everyone will believe that doing so proves that EVERYTHING the anti-pelting advocates have to say is false and misinformed. Which isn't true, but this is why MM sticks to facts, not sensationalism. We also aren't saying that all U.S. pet chinchilla breeders that belong to pelter clubs are "ALL bad," because many have helped in both our ranch and rescue outreach projects. What we ARE saying is that most U.S. pet chinchilla breeders belong to pelter clubs and as a result many of them regard chinchillas as livestock, not pets, and it is the bias of these people in influential pet community leadership positions that has led to a prejudice against saving ranchies or treating pet chinchillas with the respect and benefits they deserve as pets. What we are promoting with CbC is to raise awareness of issues related to becoming a PET-FOCUSED chinchilla community that prioritizes the health and happiness of chinchillas living in captivity today, PET chinchillas. We believe that it is necessary to make a peaceful separation from the fur industry and its associated clubs and agendas so that the U.S. pet chinchilla community can progress from the ranching approach (business rather than pet-focused, where chinchillas are regarded as livestock, a commercial commodity) to the pet approach which regards chinchillas as having intrinsic worth. A peaceful separation DOES NOT necessitate hating or villifying ranchers or those who belong to pelter clubs, or dismissing the information gained in the past by those associated with the fur industry (which has been paid for with chinchilla lives). That's extremism, it's wrong and despicably ignorant and we do not support that. Separation and progress can occur by simply advocating and making better choices, which we propose with Change by Choice. CbC is only absolutist in one sense: the welfare, the lives of the chinchillas MUST COME FIRST.
By controlling the choices of their U.S. pet chinchilla breeder membership, pelter clubs (the fur industry) are exerting an undue, hostile control over the U.S. pet chinchilla community, where pet owners are being taught that small cages and no exercise is an option (among other things) and where they are encouraged not to worry about the plight of ranch chinchillas that are being needlessly killed. Current issues that have been seen and experienced firsthand and/ or brought to our attention by others in the pet community (detached observers as well as new and tenured pet chinchilla owners, breeders and rescuers) include:
If these points sound outrageous and awful then it bears mentioning that this is just the TIP of the iceberg and that's why we stand alone in exposing the truth. The U.S. pet chinchilla community is dominated by pelter club members who openly persecute anyone who questions or voices opposition to the fur industry that offers them recognition and awards. We believe that someone has to care enough to put the chins' lives ahead of politics and personal interest, and every person who cares enough to "get involved" does make a difference, by Change by Choice and by setting a positive pro-pet, fur-free example. When we originally displayed these pages on our other site we were new to the whole activism/ fur-free issue ourselves and we were totally unaware of everything extremists had done to undermine the reputation and credibility of activists, to the point where people regularly confuse the two to this very day. So our first fur-free appeal was more of an emotional one, an extension of our reaction to learning for the first time that chinchillas are pelted for their fur; we also naively presumed that anyone who'd been touched by these wonderful creatures would share our feelings and would likewise care about ending the sacrifice of chinchilla lives for "fashion." Alas, not so. Among other things, we were lynched on one pet forum by pelter club members, some of whom made very direct, personal threats both on and off the board and the leader of a pet chinchilla organization that we were members of immediately contacted (by their own admission) the leadership of a pelter club to inform and incite them against us. That backlash was for simply educating (and asking people to make compassionate choices) other pet chinchilla owners on the issue, we weren't extremists then just as we aren't now. An example of the petty, twisted intrigue that plagues the U.S. pet chinchilla community can be found in these statements that were made by a well-known pet chinchilla breeder/ pelter club member during correspondence with us on the pet vs. pelt issue: "Anyhow, I don't mind chins being pelted. I love my chins, but I would not hesitate to buy a chin fur coat if one came up I could afford and wanted. I know of several pet breeders right now who are purchasing furs. I know of one who is going to start pelting also." This callous, cavalier attitude is not uncommon among pet chinchilla breeders in ECBC and MCBA. We aren't suggesting that they shouldn't have their clubs and their fun, but it also shouldn't come at the cost of chinchilla lives. We can change the way things are, even from within those clubs. The U.S. pet chinchilla community and its clubs, forums, publications, etc., should be a safe place where those of us who genuinely care about the best interests of our pets can interact without suffering constant disrespect and adversity from those who excuse or indulge the killing and pelting of our pets, or who would have us treat them like livestock. Pet chinchilla venues should be able to advance the concept in the pet chinchilla community that our pets deserve to be treated as valued PETS. It's time that the fur industry and its associates respected the chinchilla's new status and the right of the pet chinchilla community to separate and build their own niche. Chinparents deserve separation for the sake of ourselves and our pets; it doesn't mean both sides can't still learn from and interact with each other but when it comes to pet venues there needs to be separation and mutual respect. EVERY person who commits to CbC makes a difference, every little bit counts! We believe the day will come when people will be amazed that there ever was a time in the U.S. when all chinchillas weren't valued and protected as PETS. 1) To support only pet-friendly chinchilla venues and resources (clubs, forums, publications, etc.,), eschewing pelter clubs (ECBC, MCBA) as long as their purpose, stated in their own mission/ contract statements, is to use their membership resources to support the continuation of pelting. (pelter club mission/ contract statements) It should be noted that CbC's ONLY objection to the U.S. pelter clubs (Empress Chinchilla Breeder's Cooperative, Mutation Chinchilla Breeder's Association) is their continued support of pelting, and for as long as their club mission statements and contracts encourage the killing of our pets, we espouse that the pet community should boycott those clubs. This isn't about hate or scapegoating, which are negative and counterproductive to positive change, it's about taking a stand for what's right, and the unnecessary killing of our pets is something that those who genuinely care for chinchillas should not support. It's fine to seek prestige and awards for breeding, but those should obviously never come at the cost of chinchilla lives. Both organizations have governing roles in the Chinchilla Industry Council which is vocally ANTI-PET: "The C.I.C. has gone on record as unanimously condemning the practice of selling chinchilla as pets. It was felt that this has drawn unfavorable attention to the pelting industry by the animal rightists and could possible in the future cause the outlawing of chinchilla pelting, as has already occurred in the U.K." (ref- chinchillaindustrycouncil.com) WE DO NOT SUPPORT "HATING" OR "BOYCOTTING" PELTER CLUB MEMBERS. Regardless of our choice not to support pelter clubs, we respect others' right to make their own choices and we encourage present members to take a stand and advocate change from within those clubs. PET chinchilla breeders (pelter clubs are for breeders) have the majority count and vote in both ECBC and MCBA, it is THEIR endorsement of pelter clubs that allows pelting in the U.S. to continue. Currently active members can actively seek change, they have the leverage, they can use it to revise club mission/ contract statements and practices ("live pelting demonstrations" at club meetings, pelt exhibitions at shows, etc.) so that they reflect the current status of chinchillas as valued pets. While there may be people who joined pelter clubs genuinely thinking that it would be a learning experience that would improve their pet breeding skills, that perspective is largely outdated and invalid. Compare the facts of ranching to the reality of pet breeding and ownership today, pelter clubs lack familiarity with subjects vital to the pet community and any perceivable gain from joining a pelter club can be had by participating in pet-friendly resources instead. For example, UK forums address the subject of breeding, their expertise is exemplary and they're fur-free. Dog and cat owners don't join clubs that kill their pets for fur, they even passed a law (PL106-476) to protect their pets from the fur industry, chinchillas deserve no less!
PELTER CLUB MISSION/ CONTRACT STATEMENTS The following mission/ contract statements contain some misinformation that is stated as fact. To start with, killing a healthy, thriving animal is not, by very definition, "euthanasia." The primary killing methods aren't in compliance with AVMA recommendations, making electrocution and neck-breaking anything but "humane" and "easy, painless." MCBA and ECBC control their club membership's (of which pet breeders form the majority) choices and decision-making by prohibiting them from legally and peacefully opposing pelting. This is accomplished in a subtle and circuitous way, which makes the membership pledge less objectionable to those who are eager to ignore the otherwise obvious or who don't read before signing. MCBA in particular down-plays the club's agenda and puts on a pet-friendly face to attract membership from the pet chinchilla community. Firstly, the purpose of both clubs is clearly stated in their mission statements below, their function is to further pelting interests, etc. Members are then contractually obligated to support that purpose when they sign the clubs' contract which prohibits them from in any way opposing the club's purpose, e.g, "Do not support a system, program or policy in conflict with..." Thus ECBC/ MCBA club members support pelting because the club uses their resources for that purpose and prevents them from actively opposing pelting because they're contractually bound not to be in conflict with the club's agenda. But don't take our word for it, go to their sites, request copies of their mission statements/ contracts for yourself and see what these clubs really represent, their focus is not merely "educational": MCBA Mission Statement: "MCBA, Inc. is an international organization of chinchilla breeders with chapters and clubs spread throughout the world. Its function is to provide instruction on the humane care of chinchillas in their production and to help commercially market and promote all types of chinchilla pelts and products." Points contained in the MCBA Membership Contract: "Do not become a member of, employee of, volunteer for, investigator for, or paid by any animal rights organizations or other system, program or policy in conflict with MCBA, Inc." "Do support the use of humane euthanasia and the rights of others to ranch chinchilla for pelt production."
ECBC Mission Statement: "Empress is organized and shall be operated on a cooperative basis to educate ranchers, and to promote, encourage, foster and facilitate the economical, efficient, and orderly raising and breeding of chinchilla for the purpose of production and processing of chinchilla fur." Points contained in the ECBC Membership Contract, Code of Ethics: "Do not orally or in writing do anything to bring Empress Chinchilla or the fur industry into disrepute." "Do not support a system, program or policy in conflict with Empress." "Do accept the rights of others to ranch chinchilla for fur production. Humane methods must be used in all aspects of ranching." Points contained in the ECBC Membership Contract, Affidavit: "I certify that I am not a member of, employee of, investigator for, or paid by any animal rights organization." "I accept the rights of any member to ranch chinchilla for fur production." "I understand Empress is organized and shall be operated on a cooperative basis to educate ranchers, and to promote, encourage, foster and facilitate the economical, efficient, and orderly raising and breeding of chinchilla for the purpose of production and processing of chinchilla fur."
2) To purchase only faux fur or synthetic substitutes because pelting chinchillas should be left in the past, in the U.S. today it is entirely unnecessary, cruel, ecologically harmful and unprofitable killing. The Ethical Case Against Fur Farming (www or .pdf version) is a statement by an international group of academics, including ethicists, philosophers and theologians. PLEDGE TO BE FUR-FREE: HSUS, Fur-Free Alliance
PELTING IS COMPLETELY NON-ESSENTIAL, IT'S NOT NECESSARY FOR HUMAN WARMTH OR SURVIVAL Chinchilla fur is used to make costly LUXURY items that are affordable only by the very rich. While other animal rights (AR) topics (eating meat, hunting, fishing, wearing leather, etc.) may be defensible as necessary to modern man, fur is only about vanity, not survival. When the Chincha hunted chinchillas prior to the arrival of the Europeans, they used the whole animal (meat and fur) and did not kill what they didn't need, they certainly didn't kill for the sake of "luxury." With the arrival of the Spanish and other Europeans to the Andes mountains, chinchillas in the wild were ruthlessly hunted to near-extinction for the purpose of making luxury items from their fur (ref- .pdf, Extirpation and Current Status of Wild Chinchillas). Today they're killed in captivity (pelting is still profitable in other countries, not the U.S.) for the same reason, to produce luxury items, things we can live without and in fact most people do. There is a vast array of more appealing alternatives (synthetic and natural fiber, faux fur) that are superior to real chinchilla fur in their cost, quality, appearance and endurance. Fur coats can be a real pain to maintain, read details. The Humane Society confirms, "with the advent of synthetic fabrics that are both lighter and warmer than fur, there’s no need to kill animals for their fur." (ref- humaneteen.org, also see: The history of fake fur, Distinguishing between faux and real) "The campaign against fur ought to be a slam-dunk. Fur is demonstrably, absolutely unnecessary. There are a multitude of synthetic fibers that are warmer than fur, just as comfortable, and don’t rot in a rainstorm. Even better, they don’t smell up your house and attract bugs if you forget to put them in cold storage during the summer. And if a cab sprays you with dirty slush as it accelerates past your upraised hand, you’ll have one less thing to be upset about- the synthetics can withstand pretty much any glop that New York City traffic can baptize you with. There isn’t even a fashion benefit to fur. Faux fur can be virtually indistinguishable from sable, fox, mink, shearling, and other popular furs. In fact, dead animal fur has only one advantage over faux: it is a lot more expensive..." (ref -satyamag.com, "The One That (Almost) Got Away... Why the Fur Trade is Coming Back and What We Can Do About It" By Norm Phelps)
PELTING IS CRUEL AND NOT IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHINCHILLA "While most people assume that there are laws that mandate the humane treatment of animals on fur farms, there are no federal laws regulating the keeping or killing of cage-raised fur-bearing animals in the United States." (ref- hsus.org) To be born into the confines of a tiny cage (less than 2' square), to live without freedom, exercise, affection or herd companionship and to die by cervical dislocation or electrocution --VS-- the CHANCE to be loved and treasured for a lifetime as a beloved pet... HMM, doesn't take genius to decide which is better! THIS is pelting. Despite the investigation source, what's there is not just shocking, it's real. Chinchillas on a pelting ranch are not killed "humanely," they are not "euthanized" and they do suffer. Worse, they die unnecessarily, for no supportable reason whatsoever. There are no excuses for the indefensible facts of life and death on a fur farm, even in the instances where the facilities are clean and the death relatively quick, the deaths are still senseless, unnecessary. "Supporters portray fur "farms" or "ranches" as humane environments, but in fact, these facilities are little more than a series of small wire cages in an open shed. Animals suffer extreme confinement and poor housing conditions. Many of them exhibit behavioral disorders such as constant pacing, self-mutilation, and infanticide. Many suffer physical abnormalities as a result of inbreeding. They suffer as they die, too: neck breaking, gassing, and anal electrocution are the most common methods of killing animals raised for fur." (ref- hsus.org) "Ranches of Nightmares: Fur farmers like to call their operations "ranches," hoping to conjure in the public mind fantasies of happy animals roaming an open range. In reality, farmed fur-bearing animals live their entire lives crowded together in wire pens. No matter how many generations have been captive bred, their nature is to roam free over a wide territory. Unable to fulfill their innate needs, they literally go insane, spending their days and nights behaving neurotically, with constant head bobbing, endless, futile pacing, and self-mutilation—a nightmare that ends only with death." (ref- satyamag.com, "The One That (Almost) Got Away... Why the Fur Trade is Coming Back and What We Can Do About It" By Norm Phelps) MM regards neglect/ abuse from ANY source- ranchers, pet shops, pet owners, rescuers or breeders- as intolerable. But consider this: if a pet owner were to electrocute or break the neck of an animal, would that be ignored, excused... or prosecuted as abuse? If a veterinarian were to do the same, would we call it euthanasia... or would he have his license revoked? And yet electocution and neck-breaking is tolerated when pelters do it for the fur industry, as if the "who and why" changes anything for the chinchilla who is facing an unjustifiably cruel and totally unnecessary death. Matilde's Mission believes that it's entirely possible for ranchers and the pet community to work together, to cooperate as has already happened with PHFR, and when such cooperation takes place then pelting can be progressively, painlessly phased out. The fact that Britain has successfully made the adjustment from pelts to pets proves that it can be done!
PELTING IS NOT PROFITABLE FOR U.S. RANCHERS, IT HASN'T BEEN FOR ABOUT A DECADE NOW (why pelt at all?) In the words of one large-scale rancher, "I don't know of anybody who is just a pelting ranch, not one rancher I know can exist just on pelts." (ref- chins-n-quills.com, a chinchilla forum) We are anti-pelt but since pelting is currently legal in the U.S we do respect the right of ranchers to pelt because we are law-abiding citizens. Respecting the law does not mean that we agree with it, we oppose pelting and that is why we conduct PHFR projects to save chinchillas FROM pelting. Unlike extremists who bully people and either make cowardly excuses not to get involved or who act out destructively (see .doc), positive activists use peaceful methods and work within the system to bring about change. Put in completely unbiased, factual, economic terms, while pelting may have been economically viable in the U.S. over a decade ago, for years now high production costs and a market demand for cheaper pelts for fur trim have made pelting unprofitable in the U.S. The unprofitability of pelting in the U.S. today is fact, based on statements made by the fur industry and on the testimony of ranchers themselves, many of whom have retired from the business altogether. According to the findings of A.A.C.CH (.doc): "To produce a skin in Argentina in 1998 cost approximately 10 USD per pelt, in 2000 it was 14 USD and by 2005 production costs there were down to 7 USD per pelt while in the U.S.A. production costs had risen to 24 USD and in Canada to 22 USD." In 2004 we found information online that verified the A.A.C.CH quote on the decline of U.S. pelting profitability, which has only continued to decline. Straight from the source, a pelter, in an online discussion regarding 2004 pelt prices in the U.S.: "TOP prices for: standard= $64, black velvet= $70, beige=$54. Good ranchers AVERAGE close to $30 a pelt." Processing costs ie., tanning, etc., are also paid for by the rancher and that devalues the profitability of pelting even further. We know of one ranch that was averaging less than $15 per pelt after processing costs in 2004. In January, 2007, the "United States Fur Exchange, A Division Of Palms & Company, Inc." (a major worldwide fur broker based in the U.S.) was selling finished (processed) pelts online for $16.(ref- alibaba.com) From an article written for 2006 by the Chinchilla Industry Council: "In the 1960's, 1970's and 1980's most chinchilla skins were used to manufacture full length garments, jackets and stoles. In 2006 most chinchilla skins are used in the trim and accessory trade. Jackets and stoles are a smaller percentage of the manufacturing industry with full length garments an even smaller percentage... When we started buying chinchilla our largest supply of skins came from USA and Canada. In 2005 our largest supply came from South America and Eastern Europe and a very small percent coming from USA and Canada. The best selling skins will be the skins Brent [Broker, Treasurer from Canada Canchilla, a fur brokerage organization] buys for lower than $30.00us. These skins are best suited for the trim and accessory trade. The higher priced skins will continue to sell well but just not as strong as the lower priced skins." High production costs and a market demand for cheaper pelts for fur trim are why chinchilla pelting is no longer economically viable in the U.S. Underdeveloped countries with lower production costs are still able to make a profit. From our investigative research it has become evident (ref: 1, 2) that as countries become more industrialized and developed economically, chinchilla ranching becomes increasingly unprofitable and expendable or is outlawed altogether on moral grounds. The remaining large U.S. chinchilla ranches are NOT dependent on pelting for their survival, that's false and outdated information, those ranchers make their money from selling chinchillas LIVE as pets (pet stores, direct sales) or breeding stock (to other ranchers or pet breeders) because LIVE animal sales are where the profit is at. Do the math, as ranchers already have: sell live animals for anything from $50- $500 (and higher) or lose time, money and effort by pelting.
So Why Pelt At All? Ranching is business-focused and chinchillas are regarded by ranchers as livestock, a commercial commodity, that's an unbiased fact. Chinchillas that are deemed expendable or undesireable for live sale are killed and pelted to get some return on the rancher's investment. These, "at-risk" chinchillas are killed at a financial loss (compared to wholesale pet prices), some that are killed aren't even pelted, they're simply killed to eliminate the cost of maintaining those that take up space, consume supplies, require time and effort to care for but won't ultimately bring a (live sale) profit in the end. Sometimes they're killed for no better reason than that they cause trouble or the ranchers want to free up cage space. A chinchilla becomes at-risk for any of several reasons, the list below names some but is not all-inclusive. The primary indicative is that at-risk chinchillas are perceived as sub-standard or undesireable in the live animal market:  Considered
"too old" (pet market interest is primarily in just-weaned
kits) because they've retired from the breeding program or in
some cases are a few years old but were a problematic, slow or unproductive
breeder. Has
behavioral issues such as an anti-social
temperament Has
medical problems like malocclusion or an illness that would require
expensive veterinary care Has
physical flaw, deformity or handicap (fur-bitten, digits missing,
cauliflowered ear, blind, tripod, etc.) Not
the "right color" (pet market interest is primarily in
the mutations,
that is, colors other than the original gray) Not
the "right gender" if the pet broker wants an even number
of males and females (the polygamous breeding system, where one
male services many females, creates a surplus of males because more
females than males are retained for breeding)
3) To champion the homing of at-risk ranch chinchillas within the pet community and to exercise our right as citizens in the U.S. to work within the democratic system (through peaceful, legal and educational means only) to challenge and reform laws that allow chinchillas to be exploited needlessly, as with pelting or animal research; unless said research is strictly for the chinchilla's benefit (health, behavioral) and is in no way vivisectional. (vivisection, quotes, alternatives)  The
ChinCare webmasters initiated the first Pet Homes For Ranchies (2004
PHFR Midwest Project) project, a cooperation with ranchers
to home one hundred at-risk
ranch chinchillas with the pet community. That project paved the way
for Matilde's Mission: Pet Homes For Ranch Chinchillas,
which continues the good work (see FAQ's)
and advances the hope that someday chinchillas
will be protected by inclusion under PL106-476
or a similar law.We hope others will rally in this effort to phase-out pelting in the U.S., we encourage the pet community to inquire with ranches (we're always happy to make recommendations) about their at-risk chinchillas and to launch PHFR projects of their own. As the big ranches gradually become a thing of the past just as large-scale chinchilla pelt production in the U.S. already has, it's important that the chinchillas still being produced on the remaining ranches ALL find a forever home as pets, these living beings are worthwhile and they deserve to be cherished and VALUED! Besides the commercial exploitation of chinchillas for pelts, they also continue to be exploited for vivisectional purposes, vivisection is: "Operation on a living animal for experimental rather than healing purposes; more broadly, all experimentation on live animals." (ref- Britannica Concise Encyclopedia) By contrast, Petsavers of BSAVA is an example of true health research which is both non-vivisectional and conducted for the advancement of veterinary knowledge. Autopsies of deceased animals, lab analysis of fluids and tissue from live animals are among the ways that veterinarians and vet researchers can understand animal pathology without vivisection.
The victimization of chinchillas by the vivisectionist industry is outlined in these paragraphs: "The chinchilla is a good laboratory animal model because of its small size and long life span (12 to 20 years). These animals have been used as models for the study of hearing because they respond to pure tones and they have the same middle-ear anatomy and nervous system connections as humans. This makes chinchillas an excellent model for the common but painful problem of childhood middle-ear infections. The results of this research have begun to be applied in clinical studies in children. Chinchillas were also used in the 1940's and 1950's to develop a vaccine for cholera, a disease which once was epidemic. In addition, they have been useful to the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) on sleep research now applied to assisting astronauts in their missions." (ref- Partners in Research) From the ECBC website, "Chinchillas are ranch-raised for not only their fur but as breeding stock and use in medical and biological research." According to The Canadian Chinchilla Registry (ref), "Chinchillas are most commonly used for auditory studies. They are also used to study Chagas' disease, which causes heart failure in people." Lab Animal and ILAR list the one U.S. ranch that supplies chinchillas for lab experiments.
EXPOSING VIVISECTION As the scientific and medical communities have repeatedly testified, vivisection is nothing but fraud, a sham that victimizes BOTH animals and people so that an unscrupulous, greedy few can reap profits: grant-seeking "researchers," pharmaceutical companies that manipulate the results to legitimize their product claims and reduce liabilities, "class B dealers" who get animals from shelters and sometimes even steal pets to sell to labs, and the supply companies that actually breed (Lab Animal, ILAR, etc.) animals to be purposely crippled, burned, poisoned and killed. (ref- medical community exposes vivisection in pages of quotes) Contrary to what many have been led to think, products and "cures" ARE released into the public directly after animal testing, because anything tried out on a human test population after animal testing is just that. It is a simple matter of a greedy few getting rich by manipulating the ignorance of many, who run scared and agree to whatever the "authorities" tell them is "necessary" to save themselves. The "us or them" (humans or animals) mentality is vivisectionist propaganda, and it works on the masses who gullibly trust authority figures. For example, cancer "research," and the vivisection used in it, is a trillion dollar racket that practically guarantees those who profit from it won't be declaring a cure anytime soon: "The Cancer Business" is one of many internet expose's. Convinced that vivisection has contributed to life-saving vaccines? That's what they want the public to believe: allforanimals.com, buav.org, navs.org, animalinks.net, animalaid.org... and many more across the web. Relevant, kill-free alternatives do exist but it's going to take some initiative on the public's part to get educated and insist that these primitive animal sacrifices and outrageous public health fraud are permanently ended: AIDS and Animal Rights Index, also IDA on AIDS and animal testing Americans for Medical Advancement: 50 Deadly Consequences of Lab Animal Experiments Animal Aid article: "...The ultimate effect of such imprecise animal-based research is reflected in tens of thousands of unnecessary human deaths before the responsible drugs are finally withdrawn. Examples include: the use of steroids in human head and spinal cord injury; drugs such as rtPA in stroke treatment; hormone replacement therapy (HRT); Vioxx; TGN1412 at Northwick Park hospital; amrinone for heart failure; an Alzheimer's vaccine in 2001; and 80 HIV/Aids vaccines which have failed in over 100 clinical trials, despite testing in non-human primates on a massive scale..." Animal Liberation NSW: Interview With An Ex-Vivisectionist & "Thoroughly Tested" Drugs That Injured or Killed British Anti-Vivisection Association (BAVA): Articles British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV): FAQ's Coalition to Abolish Animal Testing (CAAT): Extensive list of links Diaries of Despair: The Secret History of Pig-To-Primate Organ Transplants Doctors and Lawyers for Responsible Medicine (DLRM): Dangers to Human Health In Defense of Animals article on Hans Reusch: "For more than three decades, Ruesch dared to challenge the vivisection establishment with charges of “scientific fraud,” and his pioneering work in the 1970s inspired many activists (including IDA founder Dr. Elliot M. Katz) to fight for animals suffering in laboratories... A lifelong animal lover, Ruesch was shocked into awareness when an acquaintance showed him a badly-scarred kitten rescued from a vivisection lab. From that moment forth, he devoted the rest of his life to ending animal experimentation. Ruesch is widely credited as the first person to systematically attack vivisection not only for being cruel to animals but also a danger to human health. He’d experienced this firsthand as a young boy, when his baby brother Konrad died after being given a pharmaceutical that was declared “safe” for humans after being tested on animals. At age 60, Ruesch bravely faced down the drug companies and animal experimenters who profited by killing animals and people. In 1974, Ruesch founded the Center for Scientific Information on Vivisection, and switched from writing fiction to penning powerful exposés of the vivisection industry. When Slaughter of the Innocent was first published in the U.S. in 1978, its impact on the formation of the worldwide animal rights movement was enormous..." InterNICHE: Criticisms of Harmful Use International Advocates for Health Freedom: Medical Research Expose's International Association Against Painful Experiments on Animals: 101 Misleading Results Medical Research Modernization Committe (MRMC): A Critical Look at Animal Experimentation New Zealand Anti-Vivisection SocietY: Can You Tell the Difference Between Rodents and Humans? Physician's Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM): When Animal Tests Fail The Absurdity of Vivisection: Fifty Disasters of Animal Testing The National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS): FAQ's The Truth About Vivisection: FAQ's Uncaged: Drug trial disaster demands urgent animal testing review Vaccine Website: The Human Cost of Animal Experiments Xenotransplantation: Animal to Human Organ Transplants, The Danger to Humans (scroll to view)
THE TRUTH, QUOTES FROM THE MEDICAL COMMUNITY PAGES: Doctors Against Vivisection, CAAT: Doctors Speak Out, Quotes For Compassion "It is the outrageous lie of the supporters of vivisection, a lie serious in its consequences, that animal experiments take place for the good of mankind. The opposite is the case: animal experiments have only an alibi function for the purpose of obtaining money, power and titles. Not one single animal experiment has ever succeeded in prolonging or improving, let alone saving, the life of even one single person." ~ from a paper published by Dr. Heide Evers, D-7800 Freiburg, 1982 "All our current knowledge of medicine and surgery derives from observations of man following especially the anatomical-clinical method introduced by Virchow: symptoms of the patient while alive and the alterations found in the dead body. These observations have led us to discover the connection between smoking and cancer, between diet and arteriosclerosis, between alcohol and cirrhosis, and so on. "Even the RH factor was not discovered on the macasus rhesus. The observations of Banting and Best on diabetes, attributed to experiments on dogs, were already well-known. Every discovery derives from observations on humans, which are subsequently duplicated in animals, and whenever the findings happen to concur, their discovery is attributed to animal experimentation. "Everything we know today in medicine derives from observations made on human beings. The ancient Romans and Greeks gained most of their knowledge from epidemiological studies of people. The same goes for surgery. Surgery can't be learned on animals. Animals are anatomically completely different from man, their reactivity is completely different, their structure and resistance are completely different. In fact, exercises on animals are misleading. The surgeon who works a lot on animals loses the sensibility necessary for operating on humans." ~ Prof. Bruno Fedi, M.D., 1986, Director of the City Hospital of Terni, Italy, anatomist, pathologist, specialist in urology, gynaecology and cancerology.
"Since there is no way to defend the use of animal model systems in plain English or with scientific facts, they resort to double-talk in technical jargon...The virtue of animal model systems to those in hot pursuit of the federal dollars is that they can be used to prove anything - no matter how foolish, or false, or dangerous this might be. There is such a wide variation in the results of animal model systems that there is always some system which will 'prove' a point....The moral is that animal model systems not only kill animals, they also kill humans. There is no good factual evidence to show that the use of animals in cancer research has led to the prevention or cure of a single human cancer." ~ Dr. D.J. Bross, Ph.D., 1982, former director of the largest cancer research institute in the world, the Sloan-Kettering Institute, then Director of Biostatics, Roswell Memorial Institute, Buffalo, NY. "Much of the enlightenment of the extremely cruel vivisection portion of this cartel is revealed by the writings of Swiss medical historian Hans Ruesch in the books 'Slaughter of the Innocent' and 'Naked Empress' [see these book reviews], which have both suffered international suppression. Vivisection is a paramount symptom of the "Greed Disease" and of the inhumane, unscientific, ignorant individuals who perpetuate it throughout the world. "Animals are not human beings and do not react in a similar fashion to a drug. What might be beneficial in an animal might be lethal to the human, and conversely. Where is the logic to transfer information from animal experimentation to human usage of toxic chemicals? It is in the pocket-books of the members of the conspiracy - the Greed Disease!" ~ Roy Kupsinel, MD, medical magazine editor in Oviedo, FL 32765, November 22, 1986
SUPPORT RELEVANT ALTERNATIVES! There are alternatives to vivisectional animal research with results that ARE transferable and applicable to humans...
4) To promote and practice putting the chins' best interests first: advocating compassionate, responsible care, providing veterinary attention when needed and improving on their living conditions now that they are valued as pets. (introduction, topics not addressed, exercise, vet care, housing, stress- induced cushing's syndrome, socialization, breeding, myth and misinformation) Side note of interest concerning recommendations for ranching standards in Europe: "Standing
Committee of the European Convention for the Protection of Animals
Kept for Farming Purposes (T-AP) Recommendation Concerning Fur Animals"
adopted by the Standing Committee on 22 June 1999 (.doc)
"The
Welfare of Animals Kept for Fur Production Report of the Scientific
Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare Adopted on 12-13 December
2001" (.doc)INTRODUCTION:
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TREATING CHINCHILLAS AS PETS VERSUS LIVESTOCKThis section is based on our extensive firsthand knowledge, experience and research on chinchilla ranching, the commercial fur industry and U.S. pet chinchilla breeders. We are not anti-pet breeder or anti-rancher but we ARE anti-pelting because it is unprofitable and unnecessary killing. We are not breeders ourselves nor members of ECBC or MCBA but we've been to pelting ranches, attended shows, own a large reference library with many books authored by ranchers (.doc, and our purchase of rancher-authored books did not contribute to the continuation of pelting), have corresponded extensively with ranchers and pet breeders, bought chinchillas and supplies from them and have friends in pelter clubs, etc., so the following is an informed and relatively objective statement: In the U.S., nearly all pet chinchilla breeders (pelter clubs are for breeders) are members of one or both pelter clubs where they signed pro-pelting contracts to join and where they are subsequently indoctrinated in pro-pelting and ranch husbandry information through shows, literature and "live pelting demonstrations" (MCBA). We know that most U.S. pet chinchilla breeders belong to ECBC or MCBA (they hold the majority vote in both clubs, actually) because since 2002 we've hand-reviewed all English language pet chinchilla care sites (over 700 as of 2008) on the web for the educational purposes of our other site, and U.S. pet breeders announce their relationship with pelter clubs right on their own pet websites, where they also link to pelter club sites and resources. Our U.S. PET chinchilla forums are full of pelter club news and events, where pet breeders post with "proud member of ECBC/ MCBA" on their forum signatures, and their administrative contributions to pelter club forum and websites are routinely indicated in the online credits. So, while the liberal media may villify ranchers, at home (pet venues) where it counts and where U.S. pet chinchilla breeders monopolize the leadership positions (club owners, forum administrators, etc.), ranchers are revered, the pro-ranching bias is preached, and any pet owner or rescuer that voices a pro-pet objection is instantly lynched, censored and silenced. In reality, many U.S. pet chinchilla breeders are simply the next generation of ranchers. Some even kill and pelt. They believe, stubbornly defend and enthusiastically emulate ranchers in nearly everything, calling upon rancher experience as if reciting Gospel truth despite the fact that rancher knowledge of chinchillas is LIMITED due mainly to the infeasibility of dedicating real time, attention or interaction to individuals when their "livestock" numbers in the hundreds or thousands. Also of prominent significance is the fact that when animals are deemed unfit, sick, injured or troublesome they can be killed and/ or pelted on the ranch as opposed to being worked with or treated as pet owners are obligated to do for their pets.
We aren't saying that all U.S. pet chinchilla breeders that belong to pelter clubs are "ALL bad," because many have helped in both our ranch and rescue outreach projects. What we ARE saying is that most U.S. pet chinchilla breeders belong to pelter clubs and as a result many of them regard chinchillas as livestock, not pets, and it is the bias of these people in influential pet community leadership positions that is seriously misleading the pet chinchilla community in the care of their PET chinchillas. Ranchers don't recognize (because they don't have to deal with) many of the consequences that shortchanged (tiny cages, no exercise, improvising treatment rather than seeking professional vet care, etc.) care has on chinchillas in the long run, but the pet community DOES have to deal with the long-term consequences and when U.S. pet chinchilla breeders/ pelter club members imitate ranchers and instruct the pet community to do the same, pet owners and ultimately rescuers pay the price. For U.S. pet chinchilla breeders, becoming more like ranchers raises their authority and esteem in ECBC/ MCBA circles and adopting the shortcuts to time and expense that ranchers take comes in handy once they expand and discover that "what works best" (treating their chinchillas as livestock rather than pets) is what serves their needs, first. When pro-ranching U.S. pet chinchilla breeders claim that everything ranchers do is right (and is worth repeating) just because it's been done for a long time, they are arguing against common sense, USING FAULTY LOGIC: "Appeal to Tradition is a fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that something is better or correct simply because it is older, traditional, or 'always has been done.'" (ref- nizkor.org, also see .doc, about the Logical Fallacies) If the "time-honored past" was always what's best for the present, then our American society would have to return to the enslavement of blacks, the witch hunts of Salem and denying women the right to vote. In fact, we'd still be living in caves. Thankfully, we have PROGRESSED past that.
When ranch chinchillas are extolled as the ideal it's because U.S. pet chinchilla breeders/ pelter club members are only considering what they see at ranches and shows: the young, beautiful and strong ones kept in breeding, the rest have been eliminated by being sold or killed and/ or pelted, so the big picture of the effects of ranch husbandry is NOT self-evident, not even to ranchers. The breeding animals look good because only the best-looking ones remain, and their quality of life is summed up by fur industry standards unrelated to the animal itself, in other words, as long as the chinchilla has good size, conformity and coat quality they're presumed to be "healthy and happy." But as a result of no exercise ranch chinchillas lack muscle tone, they cannot run or judge height and depth in order to jump and play. An animal that is not physically fit and that cannot act on its natural instincts is NOT "healthy and happy." Ranch husbandry practices also cause other health and behavioral abnormalities described in the sections below. Relegating chinchillas to the status of "livestock" needs to remain in the past just as large chinchilla pelting ranches are becoming a thing of the past, and U.S. pet chinchilla breeders should be initiating a new phase where pet breeding uncompromisingly prioritizes chinchilla health and temperament and where they insist that the chinchillas they produce be given the benefits bestowed on valued PETS. There are good pet breeders of course, and good ones in ECBC and MCBA, the bottom line is whether they treat their chinchillas as valued PETS or as livestock, and whether they encourage the pet chinchilla-owning public to do the same. Pet chinchillas should be provided with The Essentials and should be allowed to enjoy the things they didn't get on U.S. fur farms: exercise time, a variety of fun chew toys, exercise wheels, a large cage, the companionship of other chins, affection and bonding with people, etc. That said, the following sections detail the differences between the ranching business that regards chinchillas as livestock and the pet chinchilla community that should be parting ways with that and treating chinchillas as PETS:
TOPICS NOT ADDRESSED It is true that before chinchillas became popular as pets in the mid-1980's (marked by the increase in books sold relating specifically to pet chinchilla care), ranchers did monopolize the information on breeding and basic care of chinchillas. Decades of fur farming had made them familiar with the basics in regards to breeding and genetics; health requirements in the areas of sanitation, temperature and light; and nutritional guidelines such as the necessity of a high-fiber diet. Beyond that, the value of what the pet chinchilla community can learn from ranching degrades significantly. Chinchilla husbandry and breeding on a ranch do not lend themselves to a true understanding of the animal, it's social dynamics, it's behavioral psychology, or how to bond and relate to it. Of course, given the strictly business approach to ranching, those subjects (and more) aren't addressed because they're inconsequential to profit-making. The ranching perspective lacks familiarity with many subjects that are absolutely essential to the pet community: preventative health care (exercise, supplementing calcium when needed), neutering, the care of senior chinchillas, bonding with our pets, behavioral rehabilitation, chinchilla group dynamics, introductions and compatibility.
NO EXERCISE Regular exercise, which benefits mental alertness, physical agility, muscle tone and overall health and longevity hasn't always been neglected by ranchers, at one time there were more spacious cages with wheels built in (ref- "Chinchilla Care," 1962, Houston and Prestwich, p.203, figure44). But when battery cages, the tiny (less than 2' square) cages now used by ranches worldwide, came into use as a way to reduce business expense and effort, the necessity of exercise was rationalized and minimized to the point where the myth of "exercise can be dangerous" was invented, a lie to justify rancher convenience at the animals' expense. Ranch chinchillas still need exercise, but they spend day after day sitting alone in a tiny cage until the rancher reaches in and they race about the confined area frantically, this is called "ranchie racing." Ranchies have poor depth perception and literally cannot jump or run as nature intended. The ill-effects of denying exercise (ref- Chuffy's Story) are cumulative and may not manifest until later in life. Pet chinchillas should never be denied exercise, as pets they are entitled to regular out-of-cage exercise time, the more the better, and wheels are strongly recommended.
VET CARE WITHELD Ranchers notoriously prefer their own resources over that of an exotics specialist vet, whose fee may cost more than the animal's commercial value. Yes, there are exceptions where ranchers call in a vet, but unfortunately those are the exceptions, not the norm, the norm is to treat the animals as livestock and prioritize business considerations first. It's not uncommon for ranchers to minimize the importance of veterinary care, to dismiss it as an excess and advise pet breeder/ pelter club members (who then project that attitude to the pet chinchilla community) that it is a useless waste of time and money. They even give treatment advice in matters that should be left only to a qualified professional, such as performing surgical techniques where their improvising (sometimes using painkillers but usually without anesthesia, which old school ranchers distrust based on outdated problems that the veterinary profession has long since overcome) inflicts horrible pain and suffering, if not death. When a clean ranch environment is stressed, it's not for the sake of providing comfort and enjoyment for the animals. Cleanliness is emphasized in order to prevent a disease epidemic and only then does veterinary assistance become mandatory, to protect business investment. On the ranch, routine illness and injury, including fever, broken limbs and birthing complications are tended to by the rancher, deferred to "let nature takes its course," or result in the animal being killed and/ or pelted. Malocclusion, a problem much more common to the captive versus wild chinchilla, has always been regarded by ranchers as hopeless and untreatable, an inevitable death sentence, and the recommendation was to pelt the animal immediately to salvage the fur before it was spoiled. The pet community is slowly discovering differently despite the negative outlook imposed by some pet breeder/ pelter club members who reflect the rancher attitude rather than encouraging x-rays and treatment options. It is a fact that in many cases malocclusion is treatable and even reversible. "Given that the American government does not regulate fur farming and that the states do not force fur ranchers to comply with existing cruelty statutes, severe abuses occur... And it's often more economical for ranchers to hope sick animals will survive rather than to hire a veterinarian to care for them." (ref- Orange County People for Animals and Delaware Action for Animals) The pet community should reject |
