The popularity of fur in fashion has returned, but without the concern for the millions of animals slaughtered for the sake of needless luxury, writes Tara Watson.

In the height of the anti-fur revolution of the 90s, the thought of wearing real fur outside was akin to being a walking target.

This was a time when in 1994 supermodels Naomi Campbell, Claudia Schiffer and Elle Macpherson proudly posed for PETA nude, proclaiming that they would "rather go naked than wear fur". This was a time when the cruel killing of a living creature just for a luxury fashion piece was thought of as nothing more than a needless waste of life.

Fur was taboo. Fur was unacceptable. Fur was viewed as ethically wrong.

Times have changed.

Fur has crept back into fashion, but spared of the outcry of controversy. In the autumn/winter 2013 runway collections alone, according to British Vogue, nearly 70 per cent of fashion designers used fur.

The Head of International Marketing for Saga Furs, one of the major fur manufacturers worldwide, claims this is "almost the golden age in fur".

So, where is the fur coming from? While many pro-fur lobbyists have argued that fur is simply a by-product of the meat industry, this justification is mostly unfounded. The world's fur trade is largely sourced from animals such as minks and foxes. Unlike some areas of the leather industry, these animals are bred purely for their skins alone.

Traditionally fur is mostly sourced from fur farms, where animals are born and raised in the confines of small cages.

"Eighty-five percent of the fur industry's skins come from animals raised in 'battery' cages, where animals are deprived of quality of life and of the ability to perform their natural and instinctual behaviours," says a spokesperson for Animals Australia.

The killing methods in fur farms have been argued to be especially unethical by animal activists, ranging from anal electrocution to gassings and beatings.

The other method in acquiring fur is from wild trappings. This occurs especially in the US and Canada and The Humane Society of the United States have found these kinds of killings to be especially brutal.

"In the United States - one of the top trapping countries - animals can suffer for hours or days in steel-jawed leghold traps before the trappers return to kill them," says a HSUS spokesperson. "In the meantime, they may die of their injuries, exposure to the cold, predation, or chew or twist their foot off to escape."

While these methods of killing are long entrenched within the industry, sadly, there are growing concerns that the fur trade is become even crueller, with China now becoming a major fur manufacturer.

According to the World Society for the Protection of Animals, up to 80 percent of global fur is now produced in China. Unlike fur produced in North America and Europe, China has no animal welfare legislation and protection laws.

What has been uncovered in investigations into Chinese fur farms by organisations such as Animals Australia and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is grotesque. It has been documented by these organisations, as well as featured in a video from the Swiss Animal Protection group, that animals are commonly being skinned alive.

Alarmingly, most of the fur from China is exported overseas, including to Australia.

"Much of the fur used in trims and cheap garments sold in Australia is from farmed rabbits and originates in China, where there is very little regard or protection for the welfare of animals," says an RSPCA spokesperson.

Another controversial aspect of Chinese fur farms is the use of cats and dogs. According to Animals Australia, up to 2 million dogs and cats are killed each year in China for their fur.

While in Australia it is illegal to import dog and cat fur, deliberate mislabelling is common. Professor Adrian Linacre of Flinders University conducted DNA analyses of several Australian furs in 2012 and found that items labelled as rabbit contained cat fur. In 2011, the Humane Society International analysed a fur jacket labelled as rabbit and it turned out to be dog.

With this in mind, arguably the only way to ensure the buyer will not be supporting an industry of cruelty is to turn to faux fur instead. Luckily the faux fur industry has been increasingly expanding, with the quality and range of furs growing by demand.

One Australian company, Unreal Fur, saw a gap in the market for the ethically conscious shopper that loved the look of fur but not the inflicted pain that comes with it.

"Unreal Fur was driven by a personal love of animals and a growing frustration about the lack of awareness there is to the cruelty behind the industry," says designer Gilat Shani. "Fur has been a desirable 'fabric' for women for as far back as we can see. However, sadly this has affected the animal kingdom, where there is no justification for it."

While Australian brands such as Ladakh, Peter Alexander and Jigsaw are saying no to real fur and international fashion houses Zara, ASOS and Topshop refuse to stock anything other than faux, it is the high fashion retailers that appear to be fuelling a needless industry that could repurpose manufacturing to source purely synthetic materials.

According to Mark Oaten, the CEO of the International Fur Trade Federation, because high fashion labels such as Fendi, Marc Jacobs, Mulberry and Gucci are putting fur at the forefront of what is considered fashionable, the global sale of fur has increased by 70 percent to around $15 billion in the past decade.

As the demand for fur increases, one may wonder, where are those same supermodels of 1994 that once proclaimed they would never wear fur again? They have all since reverted unashamedly back to wearing fur once more, suggesting that maybe taking a stand against the fur trade in the 90s was merely just another passing fashion trend.

Tara Watson is a writer whose work has been published in magazines including Upstart and Colosoul. View her full profile here.