The Italian label Prada has been driven to follow Burberry's footsteps and prohibit the use of skins in his designs.
The British luxury fashion group Burberry confirmed this morning that it will no longer use real skins and angoras, following in the footsteps of Gucci and Versace.
However, Prada remains one of the few luxury homes that still uses it, and now the humanitarian charity Humane Society International (HSI) urged the brand to stop using skins.
HSI executive director Claire Bass said: "Brands like Prada that continue to sell animal skins are increasingly isolated because the best designers eliminate the cruelty of their collections, knowing that the vast majority of consumers consider them obscene and obsolete.
"Prada has a clear option to decide if he wants to be an apologist for the vile fur trade or move with the times and adopt a compassionate attitude.
A pair of £ 610 Prada sandals made of leather and lambskin & # 39; according to the description of an article on the luxury fashion site MyTheresa. The Italian fashion house has been urged to follow in the footsteps of Burberry, Versace and Gucci and to ban the use of skins in its products.
"We hope you take the ethical decision to stop using skins, joining more than 900 brands that have joined the Fur Free Retailer program worldwide."
HSI's #FurFreeBritain campaign is launched on the first day of fashion week in New York and will run during the fashion weeks in London, Paris and Milan.
Prada, which has a number of stores and points of sale in the United Kingdom in London, Manchester and Glasgow, is a major consumer of furs and its current range includes items made from fox and mink skins.
The fur products include a fox fur jacket for £ 4,550, a mink fur jacket for £ 7,880 and a full-length fox fur coat for £ 10,700.
Meanwhile, global designers such as Hugo Boss, Armani, Tommy Hilfiger, Stella McCartney and Vivienne Westwood have long bans on their skin.
Prada, which has several stores and points of sale in the United Kingdom in London, Manchester and Glasgow, is a major consumer of furs and its current range includes items of fox and mink skins (in the photo: a mink headscarf and a feather scarf from your current collection))
A Prada coat of £ 2,876 adorned with mink fur (left), and a black coat with a fox fur hood (right). The Italian luxury label has been urged to ban the products of animal origin of their designs
In a statement issued Thursday, Burberry CEO Marco Gobbetti said: "Modern luxury means being socially and environmentally responsible, and this belief is fundamental to us at Burberry and is key to our long-term success."
The activists gave to the news, with the animal rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) tweeting: & # 39; VICTORIA! Cartwheels are happening at PETA after the announcement that, after more than a decade of campaigns, @Burberry is banning the skin and angora of its collections.
However, Mark Oaten, executive director of the International Fur Federation, expressed his disappointment and said that more was needed to ensure respect for the environment.
& # 39; Replace natural fur with petroleum-based plastic materials, such as fake fur, is […] neither luxurious nor responsible and sustainable, "he said in a statement.
"Any fashion business with a commitment to sustainability should use natural products such as wool, cotton, leather, silk and natural leathers," he added.
Burberry confirmed earlier this year that he was "checking" wearing fur on her clothes and said that the skin had been banned in recent collections (pictured: Cara Delevingne wearing a faux fur coat at the Burberry Fashion Week show in London). the "limited" use of skins is ethically of origin)
Humane Society International (HSI) has previously suggested that Burberry's decision to ban the coat could be due to Meghan (photographed in London in April) and her credentials in favor of the animals
Upon completion of his participation in the industry's practice of burning unsold products, Burberry said: "This commitment is based on the goals we established last year as part of our five-year liability agenda and is supported by our new strategy, which is helping to address the causes of waste.
"We already reuse, repair, donate or recycle unsaleable products and we will continue to expand these efforts."
Burberry and his colleagues have been burning tens of millions of dollars worth of products annually to maintain the exclusivity and luxury mystique of their brands.
Burberry burned unsold clothes, accessories and perfume worth £ 28.6 million, according to his last annual report in July.
But Gobbetti, who last year took over from Christopher Bailey, is shaking the mark with a strategic review that aims to add even more luxury to the products of the fashion house.
Demonstrators against the skin fought with security guards outside the Burberry Fashion Show in the Dimco buildings, part of the events of the London Fashion Week, in February of this year
Demonstrators outside the Burberry show. "Trench skin would be the perfect choice for this brand: the driving force of fashion in Britain, so we strongly urge Burberry to embrace the compassionate trend," said Claire Bass of HSI earlier this year, before her decision not to have skins.
One of his first moves was to name Tisci, with whom Gobbetti worked at Givenchy, as creative director of Burberry.
Tisci also replaced Bailey, who left the double position of CEO and creative director.
At that time, Humane Society International (HSI) suggested that the decision of the brand could fall on Prince Harry's fiancee and his pro-animal stance.
Executive director Claire Bass said: "Burberry is famous for being a favorite of real fashion, so Meghan Markle, famous for her antipathy, joining the family will surely make the quintessential British brand be seen twice in her fur policy.
"The ditch skin would be the perfect complement to this brand: the power of British fashion, so we strongly urge Burberry to embrace the compassionate trend."
It is believed that Meghan is unconditionally anti-fur, is fond of vegan leather pants and reportedly convinced Harry to miss the annual filming of Boxing Day at Sandringham.