Hermès and Ethics: Sustainability, Animal Testing and Treatment, Corporate Social Responsibility

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

A really good topic. And I've read it all with great interest.

There is nothing, actually, to defend killing other beings for their skin. Or even for their...nutritional value. Nothing at all. We try to explain it away and to justify it with a myriad of perfectly reasonable explanations but honestly, if we look very deep down inside, don't our custumer preferences simply make us willing participants in mass slaughter of innocent animals?

Look, I've got lots of leather items (including exotics) so if you see my post as a judgement, it is foremost a judgment on myself. I wish my back bone was a bit stronger to support my actions against my views.
 
Can you clarify? What I was saying is that I don't think the culling of the gator population in Louisiana is producing hides - Hermès uses farmed hides - and offering a reason. Anyone who has seen a wild gator understands they are not in perfect condition.
I don't disagree with that at all :)

Basically there's a theory that farming is a way to preserve the wild population. As far as I know, the gator population in the US deemed "least concern", so it isn't that much of an issue. But let's say there were no or few farms and with the price of these bags, there would probably be a potential for poachers hunting enough gators until they got a good enough hide. Which means hunting even more gators given that their hides from the wild animals have more imperfections.

Another advantage related to the farms, and specifically that they are a part of the H conglomerate, is that it's easier for Hermès to make sure the suppliers are adhering to certain standards and to make sure that everything is transparent.

There's a documentary about exploitation in the tanneries in Italy posted many times on this forum already that basically shows how the further down the chain with sub contractors you go, the less control the companies have. Which makes sense. By the way, the issue in the tanneries they exposed are mostly about exploitation of migrant workers who don't have or are aware of the safety net and safeguards that apply to nationals which leaves them open to exploitation. H isn't mentioned in the documentary, I'm just mentioned this as an example of why owning these farms may be positive for transparency and compliance (which often are connected). The tanneries are used by contractors to the LVMH and kering brands though.
 
It could also be to keep the wild population from over-hunting and poaching. Hermès has full control ovdr the conditions and it's easier to adjust and make sure the suppliers are compliant. There was a documentary posted somewhere on the forum about bad conditions in Italian tanneries where basically foreign workers were exploited.
it was a french documentary. I saw it on youtube, and it really opened my eyes, it turned me off to some of the brands under the LVMH umbrella mentioned in the video.
 
I don't disagree with that at all :smile:

Basically there's a theory that farming is a way to preserve the wild population. As far as I know, the gator population in the US deemed "least concern", so it isn't that much of an issue. But let's say there were no or few farms and with the price of these bags, there would probably be a potential for poachers hunting enough gators until they got a good enough hide. Which means hunting even more gators given that their hides from the wild animals have more imperfections.

Another advantage related to the farms, and specifically that they are a part of the H conglomerate, is that it's easier for Hermès to make sure the suppliers are adhering to certain standards and to make sure that everything is transparent.

There's a documentary about exploitation in the tanneries in Italy posted many times on this forum already that basically shows how the further down the chain with sub contractors you go, the less control the companies have. Which makes sense. By the way, the issue in the tanneries they exposed are mostly about exploitation of migrant workers who don't have or are aware of the safety net and safeguards that apply to nationals which leaves them open to exploitation. H isn't mentioned in the documentary, I'm just mentioned this as an example of why owning these farms may be positive for transparency and compliance (which often are connected). The tanneries are used by contractors to the LVMH and kering brands though.
Sure, I agree with all this but don’t understand your quoting me - I was responding to the poster who was talking about the necessary culling of wild gators in the South. Not related to the issues you mentioned. Maybe you meant to reply to them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Liberté
A really good topic. And I've read it all with great interest.

There is nothing, actually, to defend killing other beings for their skin. Or even for their...nutritional value. Nothing at all. We try to explain it away and to justify it with a myriad of perfectly reasonable explanations but honestly, if we look very deep down inside, don't our custumer preferences simply make us willing participants in mass slaughter of innocent animals?

Look, I've got lots of leather items (including exotics) so if you see my post as a judgement, it is foremost a judgment on myself. I wish my back bone was a bit stronger to support my actions against my views.

Just thinking about sustainability is a huge privilege for many people. Historically, humans struggled to survive, and often had to rely on animal products to do so. There are plenty of communities worldwide who still do. I spent some time in northern Russia growing up, and I know that back in the day, furs were critical to surviving the winter -- its gets really, really cold. Similarly with hunting and eating meat, it was critical to supplementing the diet with protein when the only thing generally available in the winter was root vegetables and preserves. That is how my ancestors lived -- they fished and hunted; the bears were turned into dumplings and their furs were then turned into winter gear. And that that was a much more sustainable lifestyle than flying in exotic fruit year around and buying sustainable down jackets made halfway across the world. It was better for the environment, maybe not so good for the bears.

Of course, now many of us live in a very different world. My husband and I have been cooking vegetarian only at home. We both get three meals a day at our jobs, so there is plenty of access to meat if we so desire; but we like to cook dinner together, and we are lucky to live in California with fresh fruit and vegetables always available. It's healthier for us, and we feel very self-righteous about it (if we are being honest). So in my mind, I offset the cows that I don't eat for dinner with the cows that are used for my bags. I know that I am very lucky to be in the position to be even contemplating these choices, and I am so happy to see there is so much informed opinion available.

I will say that it do read the annual report from Hermes rather keenly, because it does matter to me. And I decided against buying a Canada Goose parka after reading about coyote fur on this thread. But I think in many ways we are doing the best we can.
 
It's interesting to me. I have a handbag collection, yes. Some pre-loved..some not. I've had these bags for YEARS. I'll watch people I know buy "Vegan Leather" bags (numerous bags and wallets/year) these items are made from PVC which is the furthest material from sustainable. Just another marketing ploy.
Not all vegan leather is made from PVC. I have bags made with "leather" from apple skins and from cork. There are alternatives.
 
Top