ruptcy in early October. The high-profile collapse, on the heels of a previous collapse, under-scored the continuing crash of the fur trade. Despite the Fur Information Council of America claim that retail fur sales rose to $1.1 billion last year, ending a four-year decline, other data newly released by the fur trade itself confirms the ANIMAL PEOPLE projection based on gar-ment and pelt prices that sales actually fell to between $648 and $750 million. Evans Inc., annu-ally accounting for about 10% of U.S. fur sales, sold $107 million worth of goods––but trim items with minimal fur content accounted for $30.4 million of it. The fur trade claimed mink pelt prices were up 30%, but Wisconsin, accounting for nearly 25% of U.S. mink production, recorded a 16% drop in sales and a 13% drop in revenue, indicating only a marginal price rise. The number of U.S. fur garment wholesalers also fell, from 2,200 at the start of 1992 to just 1,500 going into this winter. Finally, a study of the fur trade done by Southwick Associates for the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies confirms the accuracy of the ANI-MAL PEOPLE model of fur trade economics, coming within 11% of the ANIMAL PEOPLE projections in 17 of 18 major categories of information. The only wider variance is in the esti-mates of retail jobs produced: Southwick found four times as many by counting all employees of retailers who sell fur, instead of counting only those who actually work in fur sales. The ANI-MAL PEOPLE model was developed in early1988 by editor Merritt Clifton, under contract with the Humane Society of the U.S., and has been used to produce yearly estimates of fur trade eco-nomic data ever since. The Southwick Associates model is based on 1990 statistics obtained directly from the fur trade and state wildlife departments.