“The world is not full of crocodiles, except the stock exchange!” – Patrick Thomas, Former CEO of Hermès

Once upon a time fashion accessories made of exotic animal seems were viewed as ultra-luxurious. But these days, greater awareness with regards to ethical and sustainable sourcing of materials have led these items to fall a tad out of favour. High-end brands that produce such items are also facing scrutiny. In 2018, Chanel became the first luxury fashion brand to completely stop using exotic skins. Chanel said that it has become increasingly difficult to source for exotic materials in ways that aligned with their ethical standards. In addition, as a result of the decrease in meat consumption around the world, the number of animal skins available has also dropped significantly over the past three decades. Following Chanel’s lead, other designers and brands have stopped using exotic skins, including: Vivienne Westwood, Diane von Furstenberg, Victoria Beckham, Topshop, H&M and Adidas.

But while some have hailed this as a righteous move, there may be more to this decision than mere ethics and sustainability. According to industry leaders like LVMH and some animal-welfare groups, ethical sourcing of animals can actually contribute in wildlife conservation, contrary to common belief. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature has stated that: “globally, there are urgent and growing threats to the conservation of wild species and habitats, with some wild populations declining due to poaching and their habitats being lost to agriculture. With reptiles, the luxury goods companies sourcing wild skins have empowered people to engage in excellent conservation programmes, in many countries.” It is important to point out that, unlike some of its luxury competitor brands, Chanel did not acquire or invest in any farms or tanneries to secure access to high-quality and ethical skins. Meanwhile, Hermès and luxury conglomerate Gucci both own their own exotic skin farms. This may have been one of the reasons in shortages of supply for exotic skins.

If you still want to purpose exotic-skinned products, but are also ethically conscious, you could procure your accessories from smaller, independent labels that source sustainable and high quality leathers bound by the CITES agreement. Before commercial crocodile farming, wild crocodiles were almost hunted to extinction. Nowadays, the strict trade regulations and high quality demands from the market has helped to save the dwindling crocodile populations worldwide.

At the same time, ethical sourcing programmes can support indigenous livelihoods in local communities. South Africa dominates the crocodile farming business on the continent; Zimbabwe, Zambia and Kenya are also homes to the biggest crocodile farms in Africa. According to industry estimates, the African crocodile farming sector is now growing at 22% per year. Thailand is also home to some of the world’s biggest crocodile farms, with some 1.2 million crocodiles kept on more than 1,000 farms. Without the demand for exotic skins, there would be no farms. These farms create jobs for people, and income for the country.

On a completely separate but still very relevant note, crocodiles are cannibalistic – after mature crocodiles are slaughtered for their skins, their meat is also sold on the market. The excess unsold crocodile meat is often fed to other crocodiles because of its naturally cannibalistic characteristic. Although this may sound awful, it does help to save feeding costs and eliminates waste in the industry. Bones and osteoderm of the crocodiles are sometimes also crumbled and used to produce fertilizers and food for poultry. Therefore, the farming of exotic skins is not a black and white issue – where there are drawbacks, there are also benefits.

The case for ivory is very similar. The trade of elephant ivory started centuries ago, used to make billiard balls, piano keys, buttons and a wide range of ornamental items, but have become controversial in recent decades as they have contributed to the significant decline in elephant populations. The Wildlife Conservation Society has pointed out that the global ivory trade leads to the slaughter of up to 35,000 elephants per year in Africa. Many countries have banned the trade of ivory; China was the biggest market for poached ivory but have stated, alongside the US, that they would enact a nearly complete ban on ivory trading.

In recent years, fossilised ivory from woolly mammoths in Siberia and Alaska has been promoted as an alternative to elephant ivory, and as a way to deter the continuation of illegal trade in tusks. Yet with some anti-poaching campaigners and elephant conservationists trying to end ivory consumption entirely, mammoth ivory is also gradually being regulated. However, given the continued demand for ivory in countries like China, the use of mammoth ivory could actually help to preserve elephant species, though it is important that we never use an endangered species.

There is no solid proof yet, and there definitely must be more research on this topic. Nevertheless, the call to ban ivory completely on an international level has been growing before the CITES. Some jewellery designers have found another alternative to elephant or mammoth ivory – nut ivory, or nuvory, that comes from the South American elephant palm tree. It may well be a more sustainable and compassionate alternative to animal-ivory.

We’re not trying to justify anything here, just giving you some food-for-thought.