Will the Goose be cooked?
The Canada Goose (Branta canadensis) is abundant on this continent, especially in Canada. In recent decades they have even become some sort of nuisance.
Between a high fertility rate, few natural predators, and lots of city folks feeding them in winter, many decided to forgo the long-distance migrations to warmer climes when winter approached. That also removed the need to travel north again in spring, giving the local population a head-start on multiplying and expanding their range.
The “other” Canada Goose
But this post is not about the fowl but rather the enterprise known as Canada Goose, (CG), a retailer headquartered in Toronto, Ontario, and majority-owned by Bain Capital Specialty Finance Inc.,.(BC), located in Boston, Massachusetts. According to its website, BC is “… one of the world’s leading private multi-asset alternative investment firms with approximately $140 billion in assets under management…”
CG is well known for its sizeable collection of parkas, sold in many countries, as warm winter outerwear. These parkas, traditionally, had a real fur trim around the parka’s hood, mostly made from coyote or fox hides.
That’s where CG ran into opposition from PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals ), and similarly-minded activists, already several years ago (like in 2016). And now, CG and/ or BC appear to have thrown in the towel.
As CNN reports, CG will stop using actual fur trim on its parkas by the end of 2022 – a victory for PETA?
Not so fast!
It reminds me of another version of the “fur debate,” namely the fur hats traditionally worn by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) in winter in the northern country-side, for well over a century. I described it in more detail in 2014 (https://canadafreepress.com/article/fur-hats ).
That “fur-hat-skirmish” was quickly laid to rest with a ministerial order to keep using those muskrat fur hats. Really, even the most colorful and well-knitted woolen tuques or “synthetic furs” are no match for the real thing.
That’s also why non-hibernating animals, like beavers, muskrats, coyotes, foxes, deer, and others grow “winter coats” that will be shed in the next spring.
The Truth of the Matter
The idea that “synthetic fur” will be just as good is mistaken. The thin and soft-pointed longer winter hair on the real fur offers more comfort and better protection for the forehead and face in winter.
The truth of the matter becomes apparent when you actually need to protect your body from winter’s fury, biting cold winds, and potentially permanent damage to your exposed skin.
As a youngster, only having to walk half a mile or less to school, I did manage to get my ears somewhat “frozen.” Of course, you don’t feel that when it actually happens. It only becomes apparent in the warmth of a room. And, believe me, it was not a pleasant experience.
In Short
While the Canada Goose company may think to be expedient or responsive to some deluded activists by planning to use faux fur in a year or two, I suspect it will change its anti-fur ideas when their customers start getting frostbitten foreheads and begin shopping elsewhere for what they really desire and need.
Either CG will change its stance – or the Goose will be cooked.
Header image: Wikipedia
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Lunatictoctarian
| #
I consider “hunans” to be a nuisance, tbh.
Reply
Howdy
| #
“The Canada Goose (Branta canadensis) is abundant on this continent,…..and expanding their range.
But this post is not about the fowl but rather the enterprise known as Canada Goose,”
Then why mention the superfluous in the first place? It gives the glancing reader the wrong impression, as It did me. I really do wonder about people some times.
Reply
LaGrange
| #
I cannot figure out what this article means …
Reply
K Kaiser
| #
To:Lunatictoctarian, .Howdy, and LaGrange,
1Sorry, I fail to understand your gripes.
— What’s the meaning of “tbh”?;
— Is it too difficult to make a connection between “C. goose and C. Goose”?;
— Perhaps it would help you to read it again.
Regards,
KK
Reply
WhoKoo
| #
Hi Dr. Klaus.
tbh is to be honest.
Where I live, Noo Xiland, Honkers are a nuisance introduced species. Breeding too successfully. James Michener described C. Geese as honkers in his book, Chesapeake.
The jackets with artificial fur would slowly break down into microplastics which would conflict and stress the PETA people. Further gnashing of teeth.
Cheers. Whokoo
Reply
Howdy
| #
“Is it too difficult to make a connection between “C. goose and C. Goose”?;”
I thought I allready explained K Kaiser. The difficulty is seeing why the feathered variety is included at all in the first place when It is irrelevant, other than the name of course.
I guess It’s just me, but I find It an unnecessary distraction.
Reply
WhoKoo
| #
How do you do, Howdy.
Dr Kaiser has a broad knowledge of things science and things general knowledge and often throws a little humour or satire into his articles. I can assure the good doctor that I have gained from his informative articles as well as exhibited a goodly number of wry smiles.
Disparate connections make for exploring the universe.
Cheers. Whokoo
Reply
Howdy
| #
Hi WhoKoo,
I don’t doubt Dr Kaiser’s knowledge, or sphere of experience. I just like to get down to business.
The first time I had a quick look, I saw actual Canada geese spoken of. when I went back to look again, the focus was different. One of my quirks. Ignore It.
Thanks for responding.
Reply