I talked to a NAFA rep the other day and asked about those lots that Indicated they were dressed fur.
Well He said NAFA doesn't have fur dressed. It was most likely some buyer who bought up a large amount of rats had them dressed then decided to place them on the auction. I would assume since they had buying and dressing costs In those rats they would be dealer lots with a minimum bid placed on them.

The scenario you describe is probably correct. Any dressed fur you occasionally see an auction house is not "part lotted", ie. several different shipper's skins mixed together.
In the past I've seen dressed fur at one of these auctions actually sell for less than raw skins. Virtually none of the buyers are interested in small lots of dressed skins. However, if a couple of small time buyers who have a particular use or novelty use for these skins is at the auction then there may be some competition for dressed skins, otherwise they are usually a bargain for the person buying them.

It seems when this question came up there were 1000s of rat hides In that one lot.

Some guys on here shipped raw fur and had a couple skins show up in the dressed lots.Who had them tanned?TCT(FHA) sells tanned fur to individuals.

NAFA told me they don't Dress fur for the auction.

Do you believe everything that NAFA says?

Well I see no need to doubt them.
And If they did dress fur how does that effect me and my raw fur? They would still have to buy It at hammer prices or PT.
Do you have anything of value to add?

I assume you talked to some one at the Stoughton office, possibly Brian McMillan.

One thing that I've noticed over the years I've done business with NAFA is that even the management folks at Stoughton dont know what the big wigs in Toronto are doing. That Gould be the case here. Just saying.

That's a point well taken.

I have one of those dressed rats in my lotting letter

Lot # 351404

You sent that muskrat in raw/dried. Correct?

Do you remember about when you sent it in or dropped it off?

Does your lotting letter list any value for it?

I assume it is listed as Bought Back.

Just gathering facts right now. Thanks.

Well Is It possible It got mixed up In the wrong lot? Was that one pelt you have In that lot sent In for the March sale? If so It would be pretty hard to have It tanned and then returned to the auction house and placed In lot #351404. Just saying.


Did any of the dressed pelts sell? How many lots were made up of dressed pelts?
Was there pre sale evaluation on those lots or lot?

I just can't see why NAFA would buy rats then get them dressed then turn around and sell them through the auction. It would make no sense at all. Especially In this down market.

I can see them taking hides out of show lots having them tanned and then taking them to fur work shops for educational purposes. But to have them tanned then brought back to the auction no way.

I have one in lot 351404 as well. It was sent in as a raw fur. I can’t recall the exact date but it was picked up on the local Nafa route the end of February. All of the muskrat lots in the dressed fur have said “To be auctioned”. Has never said “bought back” on them.

There is more than one Tman that has a rat (or rats) in the mysterious lots of tanned rats - 351404 and 351405 (it is a string lot).

With the last receiving date for the May sale being in March and with some fur dropped off earlier than that, there is plenty of time for NAFA to get 3,000 rats dressed and ready for auction at the end of May.

Since the shippers shipped dried rats and haven't been paid for them, I'm thinking that NAFA had them dressed as an experiment to see if dressed rats of better quality would sell. Just a guess on my part despite what Beav and Stoughton say.

I can't think of any other logical reason. But I will be happy to,listen to other theories.

I have one in this lot as well. Shipped dry mid March. Currently shows "to be autioned." Not sure what it said day of sale.

I think it would be interesting if one of you guys called up NAFA and ask them how your rats got dressed.

Nancy - Could it be the case those rats were dressed and sold to some of their new client or used for workshops, and they will be give the same price as rats of the same grade that sold through the auction?

I know some furs/lots are pulled for this, and I am assuming NAFA dresses them for the clients. But until the checks are sent it is all up in the air if they actually sold or not!

Since the shippers shipped dried rats and haven't been paid for them, I'm thinking that NAFA had them dressed as an experiment to see if dressed rats of better quality would sell. Just a guess on my part despite what Beav and Stoughton say.

Why would you Let's say place a $4.00 dressing charge on a rat when the rat market Is In the crapper? The buyers are not buying or not willing to pay $5.00 averages On good rats do you think they are going to tack on another $4.00 on top of that. The bottom line is this, the rat market sucks.

49er I called and they said they don't dress fur for the auction. But Misswiss doesn't believe It so It can't be true. I wonder why she doesn't call and get to the bottom of this?

I'll do another call on Mon.

Sometimes nafa doesn’t even know what nafa does.

As I said in another post nafa tries at transparency but fails at it sometimes.

I like that statement very much!! It should be a slogan/motto on every NAFA thread.

Mike Kelley - it is true that NAFA pulls representative pelts for demos, exhibits, workshops, etc. the problem with that theory on the dressed muskrats is that we are talking about 3283 skins. All the same size and grade. That is way too many rats for those projects.

Beav - I'm doing some research. Some times getting info out of NAFA is not easy. If I find out anything, I will let every one know.