I'd just like to lobby all animal loving musicians out there to boycott purchasing Chinese instruments and accessories, even other things you use at home, in protest against the awful trade in dog and cat fur in China. As we all know, we DO have a choice about the products we buy and there are lots of good, non-Chinese instruments on the market, just as there are lots of good products for everyday life that aren't made in China.

These traders steal animals, usually young puppies and cats, and brutally beat them to death before skinning them. Some of the poor animals are tied down and skinned ALIVE!!!! There are even fur farms in China, where cats and dogs are purposely bred for their fur. Much of the fur ends up here in the UK as fur trim on clothing or accessories!!!

There is a campaign going on to stop the import of fur into the UK, but the entire cat and dog fur trade needs to be stopped altogether, so please help by not buying Chinese products. The Chinese government has to know that people around the world will not stand by and let this cruelty go on.

Not convinced?? If you have a much-loved pet at home take a look at them and imagine how you'd feel about them being skinned alive to make you a fur trim for your jacket.

I love animals, and was involved in animal rights activism for many years. But my main reason for boycotting as much chinese product as I possibly can (and let's face it, that's hard in the chinese product flooded market) relates to the gross human rights abuses that continue to be perpetuated.

Agreed with unanimously. Looks as though we will be adding to the reasons to boycott.

I saw the documentary by Stella McCartney and was so upset by it. It was so cruel. I understand that people living most of the time under zero temperatures like in northern Russia/Canada or in the Artic probably do need to wear fur but WHY do the Chinese breeders have to do it SO cruelly? Can't they give them a sudden and painless death? I felt really UPSET for the cute mink.

VN

I have sympathy with your concerns on both the human rights and animal rights issues, however I don't think you should use these forums for political camapaigning. There are plenty of other web sites for this purpose.

Also, can we be at all sure that the makers of instruments have any connection whatsoever to animal cruelty? Should everyone in China be punished for the behaviour of a few? Should the livelihood of innocent people be spoiled as some of their fellow countrymen behave poorly? There are umpteen abuses here too, but we don't boycott British because of our own compatriots' misdemeanors.

I know it's emotive, but we need balance really. Also, it's unlikely to make any real difference.

I kind of agree...

Personally I think that these incidents of atrocious cruelty to animals should definitely be addressed. I didn't watch the McCartney documentary but heard about it and such events really upset me. However, I don't think we should take the situation out of proportion. Like Elisabeth RB, I don't think all the Chinese should be punished for this, or all Chinese manufacturers of instruments. Only a select few of extremely sick minded people. It doesnt mean a complete boycott on Chinese instruments (I'm sure there are equally upsetting things done by other countries but this doesn't necessarily mean we have to boycott their goods), but we should just take care on what we are buying and if you don't trust where its from, don't buy it...thats all.

We don't need to boycott anywhere. Just need to educate our fashion gurus. They dictate what the majority of people are going to wear.

No need to cause bad relations with other countries, just dispel the need for it over here. The problem lies with us, not them. If we want it, then there is no market for it. End of story.

I agree. Anyway, there is no point in trying to boycott chinese instruments: 1) Unless you are going to make it known to the world, there is no point, it will make almost no difference. The US buy lots of things from China. 2) If there is a problem, stand up to it's face and deal with it. The companies making instruments have nothing to do with animals. China is too big for the Goverment to monitor what everyone does. If you want to be heard, boycott the fur companies which are being creul.

There is no point in trying to create unwanted tensions while the US still aren't sure about how to treat China.

But it needs to be remembered that a lot of people don't realise this goes on or indeed where the fur comes from, or what animals are being used for fur. I have never worn and never would wear real fur - I would always check before purchasing a piece of clothing or an accessory. Fashion gurus don't care what they sell, all they want is their money and they aren't likely to take any notice of any campaign while the public are buying up their products by the thousands. The GENERAL PUBLIC need educating about what goes on. Once they know, they are more likely to stop buying and only then would any fashion house change what they sell.

Really? No point? As a South African, who watched the transition to democracy that was aided by a large scale economic boycott of South African products, I have to disagree. The boycott helped to bring Apartheid to an end. China is engaged in widespread human rights abuses, and has been for decades. I don't believe the particular involvement of individual manufacturers is terribly relevant to be honest.

And pointing out the horrors of the conditions under which some of these instruments are made is hardly irrelevant to musicians, nor is it political campaigning.

Yes, agreed. The general public including the fashion gurus We've done it before, we can do it again. I remember the previous campaign. Worked wonders. Surely that must be tried first.

Erm, what has musical instrument manufacture got to do with the fur trade? I can't see any link myself, it's like someone saying 'let's boycott British computers (or other random item) to protest against hunting (or other controversial policy)'. That's not to say I don't agree with stopping the fur trade, but I don't think that musical instruments have much to do with that.

Matt

Yes, except hunting should never have been banned....another stupid 'big brother' thing from our stupid government.
(Yes, I am from the country so understand what a hunt actually does and how they work with farmers).

Just one thing I'd like to point out, that puts the hunting ban into perspective. If planet Earth could talk I think it would consider us humans as pests - there are seven billion of us (and increasing) greedily clogging up the planet, rapidly squandering its resources and destroying the parts of it that replenish the air we breath. When all those resources are gone, they're gone. This little blue planet is all we have to support us; there ain't nowhere else for the human race to go!

Very well put, Amanda!

What many people tend to forget is that Earth and all the other parts of creation were not put here for us to play with, take advantage of and abuse, but for us to care for as the beings with the highest intellect and ability and to remember that we are very much part of the whole thing! As the famous Chief Seattle said, what we do to the web of life, we do to ourselves, as we are part of it and not in charge of it!

There is much to be said about hunting, beyond the animal cruelty, sheer lack of real necessity for it and how farmers and others feel about having their private property (the land that the hunters used to ravage over) ripped up without so much as a 'by your leave', but this is not the place for any of this.

Bottom line: If you want to campaign, go to the right place for it and make your own conscientious decision about what you buy, be it fashion or musical. This really isn't the place for it. This is the 'General Music' forum. This kind of debate, if deemed fit at all, should at least be in the Café.

Trouble is...us humans have to survive and the main source of survival is food.

Hence, in comes farming for veggies e.t.c, ways to protect all that is growing in the fields from pests, rearing animals for food and ways to protect them from pests such as foxes, who kill lambs as they are being born, because that is what their instinct is...not because they need food.

That's the difference with farmers..they grow and rear food to be eaten.

We've gone way beyind the basic survival instincts of years gone by, where you had to kill your own reared animals for food...it's done for us now and put in nice packaging without much blood.

I wonder how many people would go veggie if you were out there on your own. Who would be prepared to kill pests such as foxes and bunnies to protect your food?

Yes, in an ideal world with rainbows and floating clouds and happy music.....

Incidentally, this is the debate I had last week with my cousins who live in the country. Many of the arguments I've put forward came from them...some interesting viewpoints..

...not sure where I stand, there are lots of pros and cons...

...fur trade however, is disgusting and unnecessary...

...yes,Elisabeth....this should never have been posted in this forum....see if we can get it removed tomorrow.

Well then we might as well stop boycott the entire British manufacturing industry. Ever seen the inside of a battery chicken farm? Or seen what really goes on in British slaughterhouses?

You could say there's a difference between the fur trade and the meat industry - ie 'we need meat' but I've lived 35 years without eating any 4-legged animal, thereby proving meat is as unnecessary for survival as fur.

Plus, you'd have a very hard job avoiding Chinese-made violins at the less pricey end of the scale - even if they say'made in Romania', you'll often find the wood was sourced in China, or part, but not all of the manufacturing was done there. Violin-making at that level can be very international these days and it's often virtually impossible to find out what was done where.

Violinia

I will wholeheartedly agree in the condemnation of abysmal and inappropriate (for the species) conditions and the hunting of endangered species. However, would anyone like to explain how the fur trade is different from sheepskin/leather/bow hair/hide glue/end of egg laying/cat food or any other reason for slaughtering animals? Certainly intelligence of the animal is a factor (under appropriate conditions) but why should the kind of animal be such an issue and fur trade so vilified?

And another thought - bow hair is made from the tails of slaughtered horses, not the docked tails of living horses. No horse needs to die for meat. And yes I know we can use that horrible synthetic stuff, but...

So where does that leave us?

Violinia

Yeah..my grand piano, being the age it is , has real ivory keys.

I wonder, which has the greater environmental impact: ivory or plastic?

Both as bad as each other, in different ways.

Violinia

Imagine if people decided to stop buying Liz's lovely violins and violas in protest of the Iraqi war. I can't really see that it is an effective form of protest to be honest.

I abhor cruelty to animals and also the Chinese human rights record. Crimes such as fraud over there can get you the death penalty. It's like using a sledgehammer to crack an egg. The Chinese commit gross violations of human rights.

But I agree with many of the other posters here: a few people boycotting their instruments will acheive precisely what? I'll tell you, absolutely NOTHING. I know this becasue I am a graduate in law and my extened project and dissertation was on the topic of international human rights. I undertook detailed research into this and specifically on China's position on human rights. What people seem to forget is that China is a world power. They are not a Banana Republic and it will take ALOT to harm their industries enough to make them change their ways. Quite the contrary as a matter of fact, China could bring alot of countries to their knees and not the other way aronud.

For example, a few years back the United Nations itself was unable to bring China under scrutiny for it's human rights violations. There are a number of UN resolutions that when passed can bring a country under scrutiny and force it to change its ways and place sanctions on that country if it doesn't. Being investigated by the UN is damning and shameful for a country and they try to avoid it at all costs. People have been trying to get China investigated for YEARS. But the UN resolutions to enable this have always been blocked at the last minute, because China is a world power and an industrial national. They have alot of exports and commercial contracts with other countires. In order to pass a UN resolution to examine a countires human rights record, the support of 5 major nations is needed. So 5 nations need to vote in favour of it, to investigate a country. Last time this was tried, it wasn't passed and China got away again. The reason for this was that France and another country backed down and withdrew their vote becasue they currently had MASSIVE commerical contracts with China costing billions. One of those contracts was with Airbus, so bascially building jetliners. China threatened the countries with whom it had major contracts that they would withdraw them if they dared vote in favour of having their human rights record scrutinized.....! So the resolution was never passed as a few of the countries who did business with China backed down.

So there you have it ...! China is so powerful that even the United Nations itself couldn't get them. China has a massive amount of exports and multi-billion dollar commerical contracts all over the world. It's a romantic notion to boycott Chinese instruments but it will acheive absolutely nothing except harming a small minority of traders who have nothing to do with the gross violations of of human and animal rights their government is responsible for. Also I can't seem to connect the two .... stop buying Chinese wooden violins to protest at the animal cruelty issue I can't see a connection here and neither would the Chinese.

China is one of the biggest and most industrial nations on the face of this earth .... they could (and did) bring the most powerful nations to their knees by threatening to stop exports or refusing commercial contracts. Thinking that you can make a stand by not buying Chinese instruments is enough to make me laugh out loud. China could hold any nation to ransom not the other way around.

Also, there are alot of things about musical instruments that are not ecologically sound. As someone has already suggested ... using horse hair on bows! Also the use of ebony. Lets see shall we: piano keys, violin guitar finger boards, pegs and chinrests, Clarinets, Oboes, etc ... all the good ones are made with ebony. But, as a result of unsustainable harvesting, many species of ebony are now considered threatened. What are we gonna do when it's all gone eh? Musical instruments are contributing to the reduction of an already threatened species of tree. So it seems an odd thing to do to want to penalise Chinese instruments becasue of the way SOME of their people treat furry animals.

You left out pernumbuco, which is used for making the actual bow sticks. There are active projects to re-plant pernumbuco but because it is a relatively slow growing wood, it has to be sustainable in the long run. Many Brazilian bow makers (including Marco Raposo) sources his wood from sustainable crops. With the advent of good carbon fibre bows, it looks as though there may be a future for an alternative material in this area of manufacture.

Some woodwind makers are now turning to the use of a combined resin and African Blackwood powder mixed together. Hanson clarinets (British made) have had much success with these and they don't crack or split in extremes of climate either. Buffet (French makers) also have a Greenline version of their oboes, which again is this resina and wood powder mix. The wood powder is produced from all the off-cuts of wood that otherwise get thrown away.

Purchasing second-hand is one way of cutting down on destruction of further resources. In our throw-away society everyone wants new, but it won't always be that way.

Rosewood is sometimes used as an alternative for pegs, tailpieces and fingerboards. This can be stained darker and does look very much like ebony.

Piano keys, well, whether they are plastic or wood depends on whether you own a Steinway or a Casio.

Horse hair, the use of. Don't even let me visit that one. As someone who loves horses and has owned one, it upsets me every time I go and have my bow re-haired, because I am contributing to and benefiting from the killing of an innocent animal. I hate myself for it, but as Violinia has said the synthetic alternative is pretty useless.

Well I hope you'll forgive me for saying this and please don't think I am trying to have a go at you (as I am not, I assure you) but I find it interesting that you started this topic.

You advocate the boycott of Chinese musical instruments to protest against the awful dog and cat fur trade when I'm pretty sure there is no dog or cat fur in a violin or a clarinet or indeed any musical instrument. But you yourself are contributing to and benefitting from the killing of an innocent animal in buying horse hair for your violin bow.

Shouldn't you be practising what you preach and be true to your principals by using synthetic materials no matter what?

Quincy you are quite right, but, as much as I do not like using horse hair I am a professional violinist and I would very rapidly find myself out of a job and on benfits if I used the synthetic stuff instead. Thankfully, I only have the bow re-haired twice a year, so although, yes, I admit to having comitted the cardinal sin of using a direct animal product, I have not done so in the name of fashion, status or vanity. The wearing of fur in western society is normally a sign of affluence and the previous three reasons I have stated.

How difficult is this moral dilemma...

...some bow hair is harvested from live horses by plucking their tails. The horses however still need to be left with enough tail to be able to switch away flies. So it appears that there is a source of "real" bow hair which does not involve slaughtering horses. YAY!!!

However, just a minute before we celebrate and insist on our bows being rehaired with "live" hair... how cruel is this to the live animal? Is it like having your hair cut, or having your hair pulled out by the roots, and how are we to know that enough tail has been left on the horse? Also to add to the confusion, and to go back to the original point of the thread, this is mainly done by Chinese bow hair suppliers.

Another thing to consider is that the tails of horses used from slaughtered animals for bow hair, are a by-product of them being slaughtered for meat. No horse is ever actually slaughtered for its tail alone, and if we did not use it as bow hair, it's tail would thrown away (or used to make paint brushes). So we don't actually save any horses' lives by using synthetic or harvested bow hair.

Further confusion is added when you know that horse lovers (or at least those horse owners who show their horses, I assume therefore that they are horse lovers), actually use tail hair from slaughtered horses as extensions to their own horses' tails to make them look more beautiful, (much as we might have extensions added to our own hair), apparently having no (or few) qualms about doing this.

Hmmmm, food for thought.

Huh? I didn't think Romania started the war with Iraq!

Still this Chinese issue is a problem for us and for many other instrument retailers. The conclusion reached by many over on maestronet was that the quickest way to stop human rights abuses in China was by the Chinese themselves realising that they had rights in business but not in their personal lives and them putting pressure on their own government to get the sort of rights we all take for granted in the West.

As for the fur issue, I can hardly believe real fur is still being used in the fashion industry over here - I really thought that the fur trade had been shamed out of existence in the UK some time ago. But evidently not

Liz

I *think* that Boo meant, in protest to the UK's involvement in the war, tho I could be wrong.

Jane: "No horse is ever actually slaughtered for its tail alone, and if we did not use it as bow hair, its tail would thrown away (or used to make paint brushes). So we don't actually save any horses' lives by using synthetic or harvested bow hair."

Yup, I think it would be a greater insult to the horse to throw its tail away (have had this discussion before on here!)

I did mean that, sorry I should have clarified. I was just trying to illustrate the point I was making.

Ah, I see.