The defence minister has been pressed by a cross‑party coalition of MPs and a peer to halt the use of genuine Canadian bearskin for the iconic caps worn by the King’s Guard at Buckingham Palace. In a letter to Luke Pollard, the parliamentarians argue that sourcing the pelts is ethically indefensible and demand a swift switch to a credible faux‑fur alternative, warning that bears continue to be killed while negotiations stall.
Ethical Concerns Raised
Eighteen MPs from Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Green Party, together with one peer, told the minister that “both Parliament and the British public have consistently rejected the cruelty associated with the fur trade.” They highlighted Pollard’s own public opposition to fur use and stressed that the government’s reliance on real bearskin “is impossible to justify.” The letter urged an immediate suspension of further orders while a suitable synthetic substitute is developed, noting that bears are still being shot with crossbows, leaving cubs orphaned.
Historical Context of the Bearsikin Cap
The towering fur caps were first introduced into the British Army after the Battle of Waterloo in 1815, intended to make soldiers appear more intimidating on the battlefield. Today they are worn by the King’s Guard, the soldiers tasked with guarding Buckingham Palace and St James’s Palace. Data obtained by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta) under freedom of information laws shows a sharp rise in demand: orders climbed from 22 caps in 2024 to 96 in 2025 – a more than fourfold increase since the Labour party took office.
Government Response and PETA’s Campaign
The Ministry of Defence has said it backs replacing bearskin with a faux‑fur alternative and has established five tests any substitute must meet. A spokesperson confirmed the department is “happy to resume work with Peta should they wish to re‑engage.” The previous Conservative administration had explored synthetic options but concluded none matched the standards of real fur. PETA, which has long campaigned for the change through petitions and legal action, welcomed the renewed dialogue but warned that delay continues to cost animal lives.
Why it Matters
Shifting the King’s Guard away from real bearskin would signal a tangible commitment to animal welfare from one of Britain’s most visible institutions, aligning military tradition with contemporary ethical expectations. It would also set a precedent for other organisations that rely on fur, potentially accelerating broader industry moves toward cruelty‑free materials while preserving the historic look of the guards’ iconic headgear.
