Slaughter Free Leather Not Selling As Expected

[oldtimer]

I was fascinated by this thread and had to see where it went. From a marketing perspective, 'natural death' has a number of fairly major issues - some good and some bad, but all interesting.

Let's start with the concept of 'natural death' - Death is rarely a marketing advantage, but it wouldn't take marketing people long to sit down and think up a new way to describe this particular kind of demise. One that sounded as though the critter had lived a long and excessively happy (possibly even dissolute) life and was overjoyed to be giving its hide to make your boots, bag, belt (insert appropriate item here). Maybe as a way of making up for the fun it had.

Okay, so we now have a leather that is a by-product of farmyard fun and frolics rather than the meat industry. I can't see a problem with that.

The meat hater isn't going to change their attitude, but lets face it, plastic shoes are pretty grim. Sweaty feet are just the start... Plastic bags? I don't think so. Plastic belts? Well maybe, but they won't be selling out any time soon... leather is a natural product, perfect for a whole range of tasks and if it is marketed in the right way will sell - even to some of those who wouldn't normally buy.

If I lived in the US, I'd be on the phone to Mr Siegel right now ordering a couple of hides and making up some 'Special order only' bags that carry a premium because the leather came from HAPPY cows.

In the UK, people pay a premium for eggs that come from 'happy' chickens - in other words: free range, properly nourished birds that roam free and are not kept in battery cages. This is exactly the same idea and, frankly, I think it could be a winner. I just wish I had easy access to the stuff over here.

Ray

What makes you believe that a cow that died a "natural" death would be happier than a cow that is slaughtered ? It probably died because of illness, maybe a long procedure. Dying, either way, does not make one animal more happy than the other. The cow that was slaughtered maybe had a happier life than the one that died in the pasture ?

[Johanna]

I do remember some sort of disclaimer with these hides, that nothing should be built with them that a human life depended on, like climbing gear, for example.

Johanna

[UKRay]

What makes you believe that a cow that died a "natural" death would be happier than a cow that is slaughtered ? It probably died because of illness, maybe a long procedure. Dying, either way, does not make one animal more happy than the other. The cow that was slaughtered maybe had a happier life than the one that died in the pasture ?

I don't believe it for a minute... read my post again. This is a marketing exercise, not to be confused with reality. That is something completely different! LOL

[Lasse C]

This feels like another example of good intentions leading to a really bad idea. If "non-slaughter" leather is selling at all, it is still selling better than it should, if you ask me.

First, the entire concept is based on wrong assumptions. The idea that it should somehow be more ethical must be based on some Disneyesque misconception about "Billie Moo´s old age" where old Billie totters about in thick, green grass until she quietly falls asleep and never wakes up. Real life is very much different, I´m afraid. Should a cow live to old age (and they can get quite old!) unaffected by injury and disease (unlikely) and the owner can afford to let a cow who does not produce any calves or milk just walk around for years (also unlikely, given the economic conditions most farmers face) her teeth will eventually become worn down and she will slowly starve to death. And this is the best case scenario! The most likely is that she will die from some injury or disease. Intestinal parasites, kidney failure, infections or simply neglected care… you name it! Cows also have a tendency to eat things that should not be eaten; some of them are sharp and can puncture their stomach or intestines. Things like plastic stay in the stomach forever and disturb digestion and eating.

In other words: Letting a cow just die of what is so euphemistically called "natural reasons" is lightyears away from being ethical – it is downright cruel! In civilized countries there are laws against cruelty to animals. In Sweden, where I live, it is against the law to use any part of an animal that has died under such circumstances. Non-slaughter leather would be illegal here. (Forget about any export here, in other words... )

I find no ethical advantage whatsoever in non-slaughter leather if you look at the whole picture, not just the kill/no kill part. If anything, I find it hypocritical to think of it as more "noble" or "humane" to let the animal die in any of a number of highly unpleasant, often painful, and most often slow ways. You just don´t want any part of the "dirty work", that´s all. If we were talking about leather from an animal that has been given a good life, well cared for (in other words the "happy animals" that Ray is mentioning), and then killed in a quick and painless way while it was still healthy – then you would be talking really ethical leather! That would interest me.

Surveys may show many things – depending on how you phrase the questions you can, intentionally or not, direct the answers just about anywhere. Especially when ethical issues are concerned, people have a tendency to say what they would want to do, not what they will actually do. When the time comes to open the wallet, the two might differ significantly. Words, as we all know, are cheap – actions cost...

OK, the ethical advantage of non-slaughter leather is highly disputable at best. Why does it not sell? If you ask me it is not that remarkable. Apparently one angle is to attract vegans, but consider the real situation: Vernon the Vegan is going to buy new boots. In the shoe store he faces three pairs, all pretty much the same, except on two points – material and price. The boots of conventional leather cost $100, the non-slaughter leather pair cost $500 and the "guaranteed animal-free, vegan approved" synthetic pair cost $70. I would say that the odds for Vernon going home in the $500 pair are about one in any of those numbers that are normally only used by astronomers and bankers in Zimbabwe. Or, to put it short: Dream on.

Sorry if I sound harsh, but this kind of reasoning really goes against my grain.

Lasse C

[UKRay]

I can't fault your reasoning or your arguments, Lasse C. I'd kinda like to know how these cows die myself - can you tell us please, Steve?

(I still love it as a marketing concept though!).

Ray

[whinewine]

This feels like another example of good intentions leading to a really bad idea. If "non-slaughter" leather is selling at all, it is still selling better than it should, if you ask me.

First, the entire concept is based on wrong assumptions. The idea that it should somehow be more ethical must be based on some Disneyesque misconception about "Billie Moo´s old age" where old Billie totters about in thick, green grass until she quietly falls asleep and never wakes up. Real life is very much different, I´m afraid. Should a cow live to old age (and they can get quite old!) unaffected by injury and disease (unlikely) and the owner can afford to let a cow who does not produce any calves or milk just walk around for years (also unlikely, given the economic conditions most farmers face) her teeth will eventually become worn down and she will slowly starve to death. And this is the best case scenario! The most likely is that she will die from some injury or disease. Intestinal parasites, kidney failure, infections or simply neglected care… you name it! Cows also have a tendency to eat things that should not be eaten; some of them are sharp and can puncture their stomach or intestines. Things like plastic stay in the stomach forever and disturb digestion and eating.

In other words: Letting a cow just die of what is so euphemistically called "natural reasons" is lightyears away from being ethical – it is downright cruel! In civilized countries there are laws against cruelty to animals. In Sweden, where I live, it is against the law to use any part of an animal that has died under such circumstances. Non-slaughter leather would be illegal here. (Forget about any export here, in other words... )

I find no ethical advantage whatsoever in non-slaughter leather if you look at the whole picture, not just the kill/no kill part. If anything, I find it hypocritical to think of it as more "noble" or "humane" to let the animal die in any of a number of highly unpleasant, often painful, and most often slow ways. You just don´t want any part of the "dirty work", that´s all. If we were talking about leather from an animal that has been given a good life, well cared for (in other words the "happy animals" that Ray is mentioning), and then killed in a quick and painless way while it was still healthy – then you would be talking really ethical leather! That would interest me.

Surveys may show many things – depending on how you phrase the questions you can, intentionally or not, direct the answers just about anywhere. Especially when ethical issues are concerned, people have a tendency to say what they would want to do, not what they will actually do. When the time comes to open the wallet, the two might differ significantly. Words, as we all know, are cheap – actions cost...

OK, the ethical advantage of non-slaughter leather is highly disputable at best. Why does it not sell? If you ask me it is not that remarkable. Apparently one angle is to attract vegans, but consider the real situation: Vernon the Vegan is going to buy new boots. In the shoe store he faces three pairs, all pretty much the same, except on two points – material and price. The boots of conventional leather cost $100, the non-slaughter leather pair cost $500 and the "guaranteed animal-free, vegan approved" synthetic pair cost $70. I would say that the odds for Vernon going home in the $500 pair are about one in any of those numbers that are normally only used by astronomers and bankers in Zimbabwe. Or, to put it short: Dream on.

Sorry if I sound harsh, but this kind of reasoning really goes against my grain.

Lasse C

But,there are people who think like that. And there are many people out there who have more money than brains :brainbleach: , who will spend according to their beliefs, no matter what the cost- those who spout rhetoric against leather while eating a $100 kobe beef hamburger; those who think that meat comes in nice shrink wrapped packages from the supermarket without considering that the animal was killed; those who are violently against hunting because the animal is shot (poor Bambi...) but don't have the ability to conceptualize starvation for an animal faced with lack of adequate food supply... and that's mild compared to the PETA folks who refuse to let reality get in the way when comes to their beliefs about how all those noble animals live in the wild (or would, if we humans would just stop killing them ...)

[StevenSiegel]

Hi,

This is me again....

First, I am not making any value judgement. These hides exist. They can either go in the dump or they can be converted to leather. I have a unique method to track custodial records of the hides from the farm/ranch to the tanner. I also have the unique ability to supply hides which are suitable for conversion to many leather articles.

I believe only animals which have died from "Mad Cow" are restricted from use of any part of their carcass. I won't argue with the fellow from Sweden. I have not done business in Sweden in a long time. Just out of curiosity , do you still raise Black & White Lowland Cattle in Scandia? In the district of Gothenburg and the whole of central Sweden, do you still raise Brown, and Brown & White Spottled Cattle? In Varmland, Dalucarlia and large parts of Norland do you still raise Dark Brown Hornless Cattle?

As far as marketing value: with the examples of: $100- conventional leather product, $500- slaughter free, $70- synthetic .... there is marketing history to indicate that SOME people really would pay the $500.

Just trying to offer something to the trade where an additional profit could be made by the maker, with the intent of helping the industry. I just believe so strongly that leather is grossly underpriced in value when compared to other commodities AND the leather worker is not generally rewarded for his efforts when compared to other industries.

Best Regards,

Steven Siegel

[bruce johnson]

I have worked both sides of this animal death deal in some pretty good numbers - slaughter, natural death - attended and not, euthanasia, gunshot for something you can't handle, etc. and am not about to argue the merits of one vs the other. A good share of the population is now removed from the farm and seeing death first hand by a few generations. They are 40ish and thanks to health care advances, both grandparents are still alive. The first death most of them personally face is their pet.

I do have some thoughts on the rest of the discussion.

I think one thing that is continuing to be overlooked and Steve just mentioned it is that animals die and these hides do exist and they can go to the tannery, get processed into another byproduct, or drug to the back pasture bonepile. These hides are still by-products. These animals all were raised with some economic or production goal in mind. They may have outlived that, or they may never have lived long enough to fulfill that. These cattle are not frolicing in the pasture or living on some pensioner farm awaiting death so they can be skinned for "slaughter free hides" as their primary goal in life. The only difference between these hides and the others is a premortem inspection (at least in the US)and being pulled off the animal in an inspected facility. The slaughter-free die and are then loaded to go to a processing facility.

Just how big that niche market is for leather coming from cattle who didn't die in a packing house I don't know. It hasn't been around long enough and explored enough to be tested yet. This is really the first time out, and for the right maker with the right clientele, it could be a bonus.

[catskin]

Interesting subject.

Now to through a cat in the tub of feathers. (as the saying around here is)

A question for Steve. Would all the horses that are dying in the US since horse slaughter for food, has been banned, from all sorts of things including starvation and the "pet" horses that are killed with a needle (by a vet ) qualify for this program?

Edited December 20, 2010 by catskin

[rawhide1]

Steve

If you get any in the 15oz. or better give me a holler. I would also take any rawhide made from the beloved horse.

Mike