Fur ban and slaughterhouse ban proposals rejected in Denver
Two pro-animal initiatives have failed to gather enough support after appearing on the ballot for all Denver voters.
Mink in a fur farm. Photo: Jo-Anne McArthur/We Animals Media
Two pro-animal initiatives that would have banned fur products and closed industrial slaughterhouses in Denver have been rejected by voters.
The two separate citizen-initiated ordinances both appeared on this week’s ballot for all Denver voters.
Ordinance 308 would prohibit the sale of new fur products in the state. The proposed legislation is said to include “commonsense exemptions” for second-hand fur products, and fur products used by Native Americans for cultural purposes.
The ordinance follows similar political rulings across the US, as sixteen municipalities have already passed prohibitions on the sale of new fur products. And in 2019, California successfully passed the country’s first statewide fur ban.
Alongside these bans, the fashion industry itself has responded by increasingly shunning real fur. Over 1,500 fashion retailers have now implemented fur-free policies, including major brands like Chanel, Canada Goose, and Saks Fifth Avenue.
However, voters at the polls in Denver this week have rejected Ordinance 308 with 58 percent share of the vote against, meaning a ban on new fur products won’t be introduced for now.
Another animal rights proposal was similarly rejected. Ordinance 309, which aimed to ban slaughterhouses in Denver, lost the vote with those against at 65 percent and those in favor at 35 percent.
The slaughter ban proposal was brought forward by activist group Pro Animal Future, which argued slaughterhouses are inhumane to workers and animals, and pollute the surrounding communities.
While a recent survey by ASPCA found that the vast majority of Americans (89 percent) are concerned about industrial animal agriculture, the proposed ban failed to convince Denver voters.
The ordinance had faced pushback from Superior Farms, a business that operates Denver’s only slaughterhouse and which would have been shut down if voters agreed on a ban.
Superior Farms said that a ban could restrict the economy and result in the loss of local jobs.
In their campaigning, Pro Animal Future had pointed out that slaughterhouse workers face significant rates of serious mental health conditions.
A file photo shows campaigners collecting signatures for the “Ban Slaughter Houses” ordinance to be added to the ballot. Credit: Pro Animal Future
The group also highlighted how Superior Farms was sued by the federal government for animal welfare violations. Its Denver slaughterhouse had recently been exposed in an undercover investigation earlier this year in August, where footage showed terrified lambs being kicked and violently thrown, and lambs continuing to vocalize and move after being ‘slaughtered’.
The environmental impact of animal agriculture was a contentious point of the campaign too. Superior Farms’ slaughterhouse contaminates air and water in the “nation’s most polluted zip code”, according to Pro Animal Future.
Tellingly, the only precinct in Denver to vote “Yes” for the slaughterhouse ban was a nearby precinct connected by a trail that goes right by the slaughterhouse.
With the slaughterhouse ban failing to pass, Superior Farms’ Denver slaughterhouse will remain open and operational. Located in Globeville, the facility is estimated to slaughter half a million animals per year - mostly baby lambs.
We Have A Favor To Ask…
Species Unite amplifies well-researched solutions to some of the most abusive animal industries operating today.
At this crucial moment, with worldwide momentum for change building, it’s vital we share these animal-free solutions with the world - and we need your help.
We’re a nonprofit, and so to keep sharing these solutions, we’re relying on you - with your support, we can continue our essential work in growing a powerful community of animal advocates this year.
