Would You Consider This Sustainable Clothing?
Writing for three green business blogs, I come across and write about my fair share of ideas. My greenwash filter is quick, swift, and merciless. And then you come across something like Wild Wool, and everything gets confused.
The front page has pleasing images of piles of soft, fuzzy fabric and clothing, made from what it describes as, “…a 100% natural fiber product made from 60% merino wool and 40% paihamu spun together to make a premium cashmere-like fabric that is softer, warmer, and lighter than plain wool.” Sounds good so far, right?
My eyebrow started to cock when I read a seemingly throwaway sentence, without a connecting justification for it: “Eco-friendly and practical - talk about a great way to reduce, reuse and recycle.”
Going to the Ecological Profile page to learn more, I was surprised to read what I can say is the most unique claim to being sustainable I’ve seen in a while - Basically, by killing them for their fur, they are helping restore ecological balance on New Zealand.
- » See also: #SmallBizChat—Twitter at its Best
- » Get Ecopreneurist by RSS or sign up by email.
For context, it explains that the Paihamu is a non native animal without natural predators, has overrun New Zealand and now numbers an estimated 70 million. They consume 20,000 tons of vegetation nightly, and go after, among others, the kiwi bird, and endangered icon of New Zealand. They are potential carriers/spreaders of Tuberculosis. New Zealand’s official way to deal with them is by using a poison (1080) that’s been banned from US Federal lands since the 70s, and results in other unintended deaths of other animals.
While this may make sense on a pragmatic level, it’s troublesome that that be used as a way to claim being a sustainable product. And in a recent article on Ideal Bite, it sparked a fierce debate.
In the FAQ, they seem aware of this tightrope they walk on, making sure to mention, “The vast majority of Paihamu are killed using cyanide laced bait and they are unconscious within seconds. A smaller number are trapped in humane traps or hunted.”
So, readers, what do you make of this? I’m undecided. Taking the emotional component out and being purely rational, it makes sense, from an overall perspective. And yet, it was we humans that introduced it in the first place, should we live with the consequences?
I look forward to hearing your thoughts, below.
Yes, humans introduced these animals into the environment, but we are not the only ones having to live with the consequences. These animals are destroying entire ecological structures in New Zealand and this company is addressing that issue and creating a valuable product at the same time.
You wanted controversy? Too bad - there is no controversy here. If you think that being an environmentalist is about cuddly animals then you are just another retard. Invasive species have wreaked havoc on NZ for decades and eliminating them is very much for the benefit of the environment there, not to mention the economy. When rabbits overrun your agriculture as they did in Australia, what are you going to do? Cuddle them? No, you poison the bastards en masse. Seems cruel? too bad. At least in this example they’re making something useful from the pelts. Not that I’d ever wear fur. That’s gross.
Thanks you two, great perspectives. Naipi, it seems you’re the one wanting controversy here
I’m asking a question about something that’s not got a clear cut answer.
This only poses more questions for me. Yes, there’s an immediate issue that must be dealt with, but overall, wouldn’t migrating these animals back into a system that takes care of itself be the long term answer? Or will the breeding/trapping/killing/marketing cycle just continue with no end?
That’s sad. They obviously meant to deceive, so the question as to whether or not the product is sustainable is a non issue to me.
Actually, this company is far from intending to deceive. As Paul said, they are clearly aware of the risks and controversy creating a business in hopes of solving an environmental catastrophe in NZ. If you take the time to visit their website they are very informative and educational about the nature of the product. They are also working on a solution for both the invasive species and the 1080 problems.
It’s just that most of us don’t want to know where the wool came from. And it’s easier to wipe out annoying zebra mussels than a furry little creature. These cute little creatures cannot be shipped, spayed, neutered, trained, domesticated, etc.
It is a dilemma and it is a business and it shows that there are rarely black and white answers.
Until someone else comes up with a better solution before NZ is devastated beyond belief, it’s a workable solution. I hope that opponents would offer alternatives rather than judgment.
Thanks for the post. Here is a recent post from Ideal Bite–someone who lives in New Zealand and deals with this issue directly.
http://www.idealbite.com/blog/comments/animals-and-the-eco-equation/
The possum issue here in New Zealand is highly controversial.
The question is not whether it is “green,” “sustainable” or “eco-friendly,” but how the possum problem should be dealt with, if indeed the problem is as dire as our government would have you all believe.
(Lots of money involved here of course, & mainly taxpayer dollars.)
New Zealanders have two options.
1. The possum on the bush fringes (near the farmed cattle) are killed quickly and cleanly for their fur, skins and meat. (There are so many we could clothe third world countries or feed the starving.)
Option 2.
We back the cheap & nasty government-approved multi-million dollar pest control industry methods. This means dropping four tonnes of 1080 poison from the air each year - yes, over our beautiful clean green country, killing hundreds of thousands of, not only possums, but deer, pigs, birds, insects, pet dogs, cats, not forgetting the “accidental” stock deaths, etc. 1080 poison is not only indiscrimate, (killing everything through either direct or secondary poisoning) but it is also a cruel, slow and extremely inhumane killer.
And so the battle goes on. Check out: http://www.stop1080poison.com
@OL Well I wouldn’t say they’re trying to deceive, they’re quite transparent about it, in several places on the site. But it’s not clear cut if this, or any other solution is the one. And a local commented on Reddit, the name is the Maori one of Possum. Is that true?! Eek. That would be for many a deal breaker.
I assume that Paihamu is the New Zealand name for our Australian brushtail possum, which was introduced to NZ and wreaks huge environmental damage there. Not so much here (in Australia) where it’s a native because it is generally in balance with its surroundings, although it is one of those creatures which does better when living with humans and populations can get quite dense in the suburbs. However they are more of a nuisance than a real problem, as they eat growing fruit and vegies and make a lot of noise at night. I have knitted with and worn the merino/paihamu blend wool, and it is fabulous- soft and warm. I think harvesting it is a great way to help protect NZ’s environment, which has numerous unique species at risk. My only concern is that the animals be killed humanely. With regard to relocating the animals elsewhere, this is probably impractical. These possums are about the size of a large cat and fiercely territorial. They inflict terrible damage on each other when they invade (or are put into) each others territory. There wouldn’t be anywhere in Australia where large numbers could be introduced, and in anywhere other than Australia they would do the same damage as they do in NZ.
So yes, I think that these woollen products are positive for the environment. It’s a good use of a resource that would otherwise be wasted, as whether or not the fur was used, the possums (or Paihamu) would be killed anyway by NZ authorities to protect their ecosystems.
Hi Paul. It is a different species of possum than the one you are picturing. This one was selected and brought over in the 1800s for its amazing soft and silky fur property to establish a fur trade (much like the fur trade starts in Oregon, Washington and beyond. Indeed, the hollow fiber of the fur is one reason it is so warm. The silky property means the “prickle” factor is exceptionally low–which is why Wild-Wool is softer, warmer and lighter than plain wool. Also, this is 100% sourced and manufactured in New Zealand which pays 1st world living wage and supports local industry. Letting this problem continue unabated will cause the extinction of native flora and fauna. The only other alternative is inhumane and wasteful. Thanks for your comments on transparency–I have tried really hard on that level. If you read through the comments on Ideal Bite, you will see more information from me.
http://www.idealbite.com/blog/comments/animals-and-the-eco-equation/
Paul, I truly appreciate and respect that you read the FAQ and Ecological Profile (many people do not) and that you researched my Press page to see more. Great job. This product is not for everyone, but if you use leather, you are OK with this. What better source of leather or fur than an animal whose existence requires humane abatement…