Far Farms and PETA

I woke up today and decided to peruse through my usual websites: Myspace, Facebook, Livejournal, BBC, and the NY Times. I can't tell you how I came across it it was probably on the daily news feed) but I managed to find myself on ,http://www.facebook.com/friends/?ref=tn#/group.php?gid=22974356867&ref=mf. a Facebook group. Curious, I read about it and then watched the video at the website EXTREMELY GRAPHIC/DISTURBING (I'm not joking in the least): http://www.peta.org/feat/chineseFurFarms/index.asp.
Jumping back and forth between the two websites, I noticed that a lot of the people leaving comments on the Facebook pages were making the same sort of statements: "These people are so cruel", "They have no conscience, no morals", and similar type comments.
As appalled as I am by the video (I had to steel myself to be able to watch half of it), I cannot help but feel that PETA is employing the same tactics that I find bothersome with some advocacy groupds. Is it true that what happens in the video occurs in other fur farms? Yes, I don't doubt it for a minute. What can be done about it?
Therein lies the moral/ethical problem. PETA (an organization that has soured on me over recent years: when my dog needed two similar leg surgeries over two years, PETA's pet health insurance refused to cover the second surgery, and after nearly 3 months of getting the run around, they relented after we threatened to tell everybody we knew not to use their insurance program) suggests that we a) boycott stores that sell fur b)donate fur already owned to them, where they give it to the homeless (why not just donate the fur directly to the homeless?) or to animal shelters that use the fur as bedding or c) set up an information booth outside of the stores that sell fur (information and pamphlets provided by PETA, of course).
A and B are noble options, but C is the option I am weary about, because "information" often equates "agenda" with PETA (my sister subscribed to PETA's literature for some years: the experience with my dog's insurance soured our opinions of them, which may make this post biased).
But back to the fur industry. I for one think fur is anachronistic and unneeded in today's society, and that the methods displayed on the above website are reprehensible. I did not need a website to tell me that. But the remedy for such reprehensible behavior is one of what apepars to me to be mild protest, where economic sanctions would be more effective (boycotting stores that sell fur is right up that alley). But the fur farm issue, as I read it, is being viewed as a strictly ethical issue rather than an economic issue.
Those fur farmers live in certain districts of China that suffer from economic hardships, and chances are these are the only jobs they can get, and are probably rushed into employment with little if any training. Do I think fur farming is right? No. Again, it's a pointless, outdated mode of fashion and there is no need for it. Banning work of this sort is likely to infuriate those who are employed therein, and fur farming will continue to operate in black markets.
So, again, what can be done? Government regulations and oversight would be the best course of action for a short term solution to elimnate the suffering of animals. China is not likely to impose this (the fur trade is an unregulated business). I'm not opposed to government oversight. I'm not opposed to ending the fur trade. BUt fur farming is going to continue for the immediate future, unfortunately. The least we can do is make it as painless for the animals as possible (and a calm animal is easier to manage than a scared, stressed one ---a la Temple Grandin).
I hate to play devil's advocate, but I had to realize that this pointless trade is going to continue at least into my lifetime. If it's got to exist, why not make it painless for everyone, including the unfortunate animals?