My Mom and I were talking about leather last week. There are still plenty of animals being butchered for meat but, where do all those hides go now? The post below has it wrong. They are assuming there is a demand for leather. When did you last see or touch anything that was 100% real leather from an animal? Think carefully because a lot can be labelled leather without actually being leather. Of course, its not quite false advertising because there are loopholes to get around almost any and all laws which used to govern marketing. So, it is unlikely anything called leather is actually authentic, real, actual leather from an animal hide.

Leather has always been a byproduct of the meat industry, and as Americans' beef consumption grew over the 20th century, the leather industry grew with it. The past three decades, though, have seen a decline of about 28 percent in Americans' appetite for beef, and the supply of hides has dwindled accordingly. At the same time, drought in the Midwest has pushed up feed prices. The result is that America has fewer and more expensive cows. Meanwhile, the world's consumers still want leather goods.

Source: Your Salad Lunches Are Killing American Leather - Bloomberg Business, 2015.

So, what does happen to all those hides? In Ontario we used to hear advertising (and even visited) the Olde Hide House in Acton, Ontario. Its been closed years ago, not enough business. No shortage of hides. Even though towards the end a lot of them were not coming from Canadian animals. Hides were sent from South America, not in the best of shape, but likely cheaper and maybe more available because it was not a great business for Canadian animal farmers to sell hides. The cost to have the hide processed was not balancing the money made from the sale of the hide.

Too much competition from the fake leather which did not need a lot of processing because it was not taken from any animal. Pleather, plastic leather, did not come from any animal. Carry on with all the other faux leather types, you can see how the business of making leather from animal hides went downhill.

But, we still have all those animals being eaten. So what does happen to all that could-have-been leather? It didn't disappear. Likely a lot of it is included in pet food. That's an easy way to sell parts of animal not sold as steaks, etc. Do you ever wonder what goes into that pet food they sell as pure beef, etc?

This leaves a whole possible business (if someone could come up with an idea) for animal hides to be used again, as something other than pet food, compost, or whatever it currently is going into. Can you think of any ideas? I can't either. The problem is still the cost of processing the hides. Turning hides into leather is not neat and tidy, it stinks, literally. Are there even any places still in Canada that cure hides? Its not something you can just hop into. Think of all the government control there would be for dealing with animal hides. Even before you can think of some new product (that would be cost efficient to make and sell well). Workers would need to be trained and its not a nice job so workers might not be found in Canada.

I don't think the leather industry, as it is, will see a come back. The faux leather is so much easier and cheaper to produce. It sells just as well as the real leather ever did. I doubt people, in general, could tell the difference. Another thing, real leather wears too well. It doesn't rip, fade, or need to be replaced often enough. So once you buy a real leather purse, coat, couch, etc. its not going to need to be replaced for a long time. Meanwhile all that faux leather can generate lots of sales - its not designed to last. Like most of the products made these days. The plan is to sell, sell, sell! Sell junk so you can sell more. Marketing at work!

Lastly, the beef industry and the guilt trip given about eating salad, or meals which do not heavily include beef/ meat. This idea of meat heavy meals is a more modern thing. People long ago did not have the amount of meat in their diet as we do now. Plates at restaurants, on cooking shows, and so on are at least two thirds meat, if not far more. That is not even healthy for people. Long before people could not choose to butcher an animal more than once a year. They were needed to provide milk and eggs, or eat bugs, some kind of service. The plates of pioneers, people from even 50 years ago would not have been meat heavy. It was expensive, not as available and people ate more vegetables. Dishes were more likely to include meat as an ingredient than to be on the plate at all. Soups, stews, all of those would use meat bones boiled down to create flavour. If there was still some meat from those bones it could be added. Meat was not abundant as it is now.

So these meat farmers complaining about salad eaters are basing this on an inflated market. A market created to sell beef/ meat. Like the faux leather, the marketing went wild, with no control over what the market actually could support in sales. Generating sales worked, too well. If you knew how many animals are slaughtered to feed people every day... its a kind of sickening. I'm not a vegetarian, I do eat meat, but I don't take it for granted. I do balance how much meat I eat with more vegetables on my plate. I don't eat out very much because those meals are just too meat heavy, not practical or realistic for what people really need to eat.

Protein is shouted all over the ads for anything edible now. I would not be surprised to see some company marketing ice cream as protein rich. It will have protein. But also a lot of sweetener you don't need. Protein can be found in food other than meat and dairy. How much protein are people eating, being kind of obsessed with it (like a food fad) versus what they really need? Eating too much of anything is not good. That is something you could look into for your own health/ needs.

Anyway, if people could stop eating so much meat they could be healthier and the environment would be better with less production of meat (meat takes far more resources than it does to produce vegetables and fruit). Don't take for granted all those animals which would not be born, live less than a year, and then slaughtered. I'm not expecting, or wanting, to stop eating meat, but there is no need to mass produce it at the current rate. Especially when so much of that animal is not being used but left as byproducts. Have you ever thought about the amount of bacon sold versus the rest of the pig killed to produce bacon? Its not just beef cattle out there being served up on a platter.

I don't like seeing people treat animals like infants or babies. Why are people so needy?!

Feeding young animals with bottles past the time they are able to eat or drink without one. I've had cats and kittens in the past. Kittens can eat solid food and drink from a saucer very early on. Something like this (image below) is just humans treating them like infants. Think of the animal - not yourself. Give the animal some respect. Do not try to find psychological support from a pet or animal. You're asking too much. You need other human beings, your own species at the very least, for that. Don't make a pet your baby blanket.

Kittens can fend for themselves long before any human child - in terms of actual time/ age. That animal you are bottle feeding was walking when you (at the same age) were unable to lift your head.

Grow up! Are you uncomfortable talking, interacting with other people? Well, how do you think that animal/ pet feels? Stuck with you babying it instead of letting it live its own life.

A pet or animal can be a companion - not your security blanket.

An adult animal is an adult, not a fur baby. Pets are not your babysitter.

I remember reading about this project when it was a new idea. I thought it sounded like a smart solution. I guess others didn't, but there are always going to be people who don't agree (sometimes they turn out to be right). But, until it is given a try, no one really knows if it will work. There are unpredictable factors, especially with wild animals and changes to technology as far as vehicles too.

I'm glad its working and especially nice for it to be here in Canada.

Since the 1980s, the Canadian government has allotted more than $400 million to upgrade and twin the four-lane highway, with a quarter of the budget set aside for projects that would reduce wildlife collisions, a growing concern. Parks Canada decided they would use part of that money to fence the entire highway — roughly 180 kilometres — and construct several dozen wildlife crossing structures in hopes of lowering the mortality rate.

In November, Parks Canada marked the 20th anniversary of the completion of the first wildlife overpass in Banff National Park. ... the six overpasses and 38 underpasses that criss-cross the Trans-Canada are today considered a worldwide conservation success story, reducing wildlife collisions by 80 per cent. Delegations from around the world now visit Banff to learn more about their crossing structures in hopes of building similar systems in their home countries, where new roads are cutting through wilderness areas at unprecedented rates.

Roads don’t only imperil wildlife through vehicle collisions; they can fragment habitat and cut off critical migration routes for species. It’s estimated that 25 million kilometres of new road will be built by 2050, the majority in developing countries who have never before had to confront the impact of highways on biodiversity.

Clevenger now has 17 years-worth of data proving the efficacy of the crossings. Among large carnivores, mortality rates are 50 to 100 per cent lower along sections of the highway where overpasses and underpasses exist. In those same sections, mortality rates for elk are almost zero, compared to 100 elk-vehicle collisions per year in the mid-1990s. Clevenger’s research has shown that 11 species of large mammals in Banff have used the structures more than 200,000 times, including unexpected species such as red fox, hoary marmot, boreal toads, wolverines, lynx, garter snakes and beavers.

Black bears and mountain lions prefer to use these shadowy, damp tunnels, says Michel, whereas grizzlies and ungulates prefer the open sightlines offered by the overpasses.

... away from passing motorists’ eyes, lies a grassy oasis. Against the odds, pine trees and wildflowers have taken root here, giving the overpass a fringe of greenery. On the edges, wire fencing provides safe passage for roaming animals.

In 2010, Parks Canada joined forces with CP Rail on a $1 million, five-year joint study to figure out why animals, mainly grizzlies, were dying on the railroad in unprecedented numbers. Their research revealed that a number of factors were drawing animals into the rail corridor, from increased vegetation to an inability to detect oncoming trains, with bears often running toward them, instead of away.

Paraphrased from Canadian Geographic - As Banff’s famed wildlife overpasses turn 20, the world looks to Canada for conservation inspiration

Animal rights for pets seems like an oxy moron. Animal slaves (pets) don't have any real rights like autonomy or privacy.

Would you support pigeon feeding stations in your city? The idea of pigeon feeders is to move them from areas where they are not welcome and prevent rats/ rodents in general from eating the food intended for wild birds. Also, keeping the birds for those tourists who think feeding pigeons is something to do while visiting cities. (I'd skip it).

I don't think there are parrots and other exotic pet type of birds living in Toronto. I know I haven't seen any in Barrie, where I live now. Could they migrate this north and live through the winters? Winters are milder overall but one good, cold snap could be too much for birds used to a southern climate.

The Parrot Sanctuary (Toronto) From what I read the birds are from people who had them as exotic pets. So, parrots and other exotic birds are still not able to survive winters north of New York.

Brooklyn Parrots - about a non-native species which is surviving and doing well, without causing problems for the native environment. Or at least merging with the existing pigeon population and not causing more trouble than the pigeons.

The site has a wild parrot FAQ, intended for the local, New York area.

The Monk Parakeet, also known as the Quaker Parrot, is an adaptable, hardy bird from South America noted for its intelligence, sociability, creative approach to nest-building, and general resourcefulness. They were first detected in the wild in New York City in the late 1960s, and continue to be seen around Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, and occasionally in Manhattan.

For more than 40 years, the birds have survived on New York’s tough streets, weathering tornadoes, hurricanes, and a multitude of predators — both avian and human. Populations have come and gone in New York City, and this will likely recur as urban habitats change.

Monk parakeets are considered by some scientists to be an example of “charismatic megafauna” whose ability to charm humans helps keep them alive and viable as a species.