(Courtesy of QuinceAndCo.com)

A website that provides not just the tools and supplies you need to get started knitting your very own DIY fall wardrobe, but the patterns and indie fashion ideas too? We had to know more about Quince & Co. the minute we heard about it.

Quince & Co. was founded by two designers and a spinning mill owner with a penchant for natural, sustainably grown fibers. It’s eco through and through, as the website recounts:

We offer wool yarns that are sourced and spun in the US. Known in the trade as “territory wool,” our fiber comes from Merino, Rambouillet, and Columbia-based sheep that roam the ranges of Montana and Wyoming. All our wool and wool-blend yarns are spun in a New England mill with a venerable history. By sourcing our wool in the US and manufacturing our yarn locally, we minimize our carbon footprint.

But, hey, as much as we want to promote our American sheep and yarns, we also want to enjoy the pleasures of fibers that aren’t readily available in the US. We also want to be responsible for what we import. So, when we blend our wool with other fibers, we find out as much as possible where, how, and by whom they came to be. If we’re sourcing a yarn from a plant fiber, we want to know if it was grown in conditions that are healthy for the soil and for those who tend and harvest it.

If we’re looking for an animal fiber, we want to know if the animal was raised in a way that sustains the earth and preserves the culture of the people who raise it.

You can purchase four types of eco-friendly yarns by the skein and download your favorite from a plethora of patterns — from cozy sweaters to stylish berets — for $6 or less. Our entry-level DIY pick? The cuddly Cullin Cowl pictured here, using Quince’s chunky and felted Puffin yarn in “frost.”

(via DailyCandy)

(Courtesy of ShalomNewYork.com)

A controversial law that will ban the import and sale of fur in Israel is set for debate next week. If passed, the law will be the first one in any country that outright bans the fur trade.

AOL News reports:

On Sept. 2, the Knesset is due to debate the second and third readings of the groundbreaking bill introduced by Ronit Tirosh, a legislator from the opposition Kadima Party, to outlaw the production, processing, import, export and sale of fur from all animal species not already part of the meat industry.

There was some opposition from religious groups representing ultra-orthodox Jews, whose traditional festive headgear, known as a shtreimel, is made partly from fox fur. Tirosh introduced a clause in her proposed legislation allowing for the import of fox fur for religious purposes.

Israel’s fur trade generates only about $1 million a year in sales — a tiny slice of the overall $11 billion market. However, the people who do provide that demand for fur will be forced to turn to the black market to get what they want. And we’re not sure that’s an improvement.

Once fur is illegal, there will be no regulatory safeguards (like the Origin Assured program) that will protect how the fur was obtained. Therefore, a ban could potentially lead to worse conditions for animals raised for their fur.

Thoughts from the peanut gallery?

Two models wear sealskin coats by German designer Bente Houmann Andersson. (Courtesy of NunatsiaqOnline.ca)

The contentious European Union ban on Canadian seal fur has been temporarily suspended, pending a lawsuit filed on behalf of the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, a tribal group that represents 53,000 native Canadians who rely on the seal hunt for their livelihoods.

Canada’s CBC News reports:

The proposed EU ban does exempt trade in seal products that come from aboriginal groups, but [ITK president Mary] Simon said the Inuit fear their sales will still plummet when the ban comes into effect.

“When the market collapses, our market collapses with it,” she said. “This has a very direct impact, and therefore, this Inuit exemption, or so-called Inuit exemption, won’t work for us.”

Animal welfare advocates said the temporary court setback ultimately won’t change the fate of the seal hunt.

“The EU court may wish to look more closely at the ban, but the court of public opinion around the world is clear: the seal slaughter is uniquely cruel and no market wants the pelts,” said Dan Mathews of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

“At the end of the day, this is a consumer issue and seal skin has a worse stigma with the public than herpes.”

PETA may be exaggerating about the unanimous rejection of sealskin; recent surveys in China show young, affluent Chinese shoppers are open to it. But then again, the issue isn’t as cut and dried as animal-rights activists would prefer.

For more about the ban’s impact on Inuit communities, read up in our archives.

(Courtesy of WWD.com)

A fur-labeling assembly bill introduced earlier this year passed the California State Senate last week, and is now awaiting Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s signature into law.

Under current federal regulations, if a garment is trimmed with less than $150 worth of fur, the retailer is not required to disclose the materials used. Because of that loophole, clothes containing real fur were often mistaken for faux.

Sponsored by the Humane Society of the United States and supported by the fur industry, this new law would supercede that, requiring clothing labels to disclose the type of fur used on all garments with fur trim.

The bill was authored by Ted Lieu (D-Torrance) and Fiona Ma (D-San Francisco), who told the press:

“Many consumers choose not to buy fur products because they have ethical objections or are allergic to animal fur,” Lieu said in a written statement. “This bill will help consumers get the facts about the contents of these garments.”

Federal law requires that clothing manufacturers label all clothes that contain animal fur only if their value exceeds $150. Supporters of AB1656 say this bill will help shoppers distinguish between real and imitation fur, regardless of the price.

“There is an assumption out there that if a garment isn’t labeled it must be fake – this isn’t always the case,” Ma said in a statement.

This may be the first time that animal-rights activists and the fur industry have ever agreed on anything, but it’s a win-win for both sides: More transparency in garment labeling means consumers can know exactly what they’re buying.

We read with dismay the news that fur activists had anonymously taken credit for an act of arson against a couple who once owned a mink farm in Oregon.

The extremist group known as the Animal Liberation Front published the admission on its website:

We delivered eight incendiary devices to the lovely folks at Ylipelto’s Fur Farm, at 92659 Simonsen Loop Road in Astoria on the morning of July 27th. It is nice to see that the enslavement, torture, and death of thousands of innocent creatures affords certain people luxuries like boats, nice cars, and various (expensive, no doubt) farm machinery, and we were more than happy to alleviate them of these. A careful attack sent structures up in flame both in the front and rear of the property, simultaneously. We hope that this can leave an impression on our friends, Veikko & Eeva, that making such a living off of the subjugation of sentient creatures (for something as selfish and disgusting as the fashion industry, no less) will not be tolerated.

Trouble is, the elderly couple that owns the farm had given up the fur business after activists twice broke into their operation to release their minks in 2008 and 2009. So in addition to losing their livelihood, the Ylipeltos have now lost what remained of their property as well.

No matter where you stand on the fur issue, it’s just not right to bankrupt an elderly couple out of spite, just because you disagree on an ideological matter.

It seemed like international skating sensation Johnny Weir made bigger headlines this winter over his choice to wear fur than he did for his figure skating routine at the Vancouver Olympics — proving what a hot-button issue fur continues to be among the PETA set.

This week, he spoke to New York Magazine about why his preference for fur is an informed choice, and what we can expect to see from him fashion-wise in the future:

You encountered a spot of trouble earlier this year for wearing a bit of fur on one of your skating outfits. Do you own a lot of fur?
I do have a lot of fur. I’m a big fan of fur. I’m not a fan of nutria or fake fur and I’ve taken a lot of flack for that, but it’s just a choice that I make. I travel a lot to Russia and it’s usually in winter when I’m in Russia, so you can’t walk around in a plastic coat and plastic boots when it’s minus 40 degrees. I’m from the country, I’ve gone hunting, so I know what happens. I know everything there is to know about the fur industry and I choose to wear fur.

He also reports he has a men’s clothing line in the works, about which he says: “I want Chanel quality, of course — a different price point, but of course Chanel quality.” Love him or hate him, you have to give it to him that he knows what he wants and where he stands on fashion ethics.

Tomorrow morning, the Museum at the Fashion Institute of Technology in New York will open its doors to the “Eco-Fashion: Going Green” exhibit, on display through November 13.

The exhibition features innovations in eco-design over the past 250 years, from a hand-loomed silk brocade dress circa 1760 to modern-day names like Bodkin, Edun, and FIN.

According to the curators, everything on display represents one of the following broadly defined themes:

• the repurposing and recycling of materials
• material origins
• textile dyeing and production
• quality of craftsmanship
• labor practices
• the treatment of animals

Admission is free, so if you’ll be in the city over the next six months, stop in and kill an afternoon admiring these works of eco-art.

The Museum at FIT, Seventh Avenue at 27th Street, New York, N.Y., 10001. (212) 217-4700.

Pardon us for getting giddy over vintage fashion, but is there anything more glamorous than photos of classic Hollywood movie stars? In our second annual Vintage Issue, we challenge you to come up with anything better.

Break out the Brylcream and feast your eyes on the following:

• How does vintage inform our modern-day style? More than you might think when you go through photos from the ’50s, ’60s, ’70s, and beyond.
• Animal products drum up a lot of controversy, but it’s important to remember that these items are built to last. Check out our gallery of high-fashion leather, fur, exotic skins, and other treasures that are likely older than you are.
• Our DIY Doyenne, the ever-fashionable Kara Cook, guides you through her latest upcycling project: deconstructing a vintage skirt.
• Ever wonder how clothing sizes have changed over the decades, and how we’ve ended up with the “vanity sizing” phenomenon? Get a history lesson (and some hope for the future) here.
• Finally, because we know you can’t get enough of vintage fashion, check out these stories from our archives.

Attendees of the International Wool Textile Organisation (IWTO) conference last week were told to expect a large PETA presence opposed to the use of wool in fashion, but only one protestor showed up in Paris.

The protestor held up a sign that read “Australia Stop Mulesing Now,” gave a two-minute speech, and left peaceably.

The response to the one-woman protest was mixed, according to the Rural Press. Conference-goers felt the small showing meant anti-mulesing efforts are losing traction, but PETA insists that is not the case.

[W]hen Rural Press contacted PETA and asked if they felt they were losing support for their campaign against surgical mulesing, Ashley Fruno, Senior Campaigner PETA Asia-Pacific, denied it was.

Instead, Mr Fruno insisted that its protest in Paris was “very successful.”

“The activists didn’t expect to get in, but we were thrilled that they were able to and give such a long speech, as well as speak to many people afterwards,” Mr Fruno said.

Catch up on the mulesing debate here.

The sheep mulesing debate has been quietly raging on for ten years, and today a conglomeration of retailers including Macy’s, Nordstrom, Ann Taylor, and the Gap have signed a letter urging Australian wool farmers to come to a compromise with animal-rights groups pronto.

The letter reads:

“American retailers and brands take corporate social responsibility and ethical sourcing matters very seriously,” the letter states.

“At the same time, we understand that mulesing is a complex issue, and that finding an alternative would require a reasonable period of time to address.

“Thus, [Australian Wool Innovation's] decision to abandon the declaration and its internal problems this late in the game has left us in a very difficult position.

“Our companies cannot afford to put our credibility and brands at risk over disagreements regarding the propriety and effectiveness of particular animal-husbandry techniques, particularly at a time when apparel made from competing fabrics is on the rise in the US market.”

For a refresher on mulesing, check out our archives.