Mass media can pick sides or create caricatures on any issue. It’s not always intentional but it moves the role of reporter from umpire to advocate, which puts the burden on the public to separate the straight story from the spin.
The latest case study? The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), an animal rights group that has been leveraging the media in its advocacy campaigns for years. Advocates know if they can engage your emotions, you are closer to taking action. If they also suggest the action and it happens to be “donate now,” it’s lucrative, too.
A group called “The Humane Society” has a big advantage in the media. People like pets and have strong emotional connections to them. It’s easy to get a reaction from an audience through pictures of cute (or abused) animals. Moreover, it’s hard to appear “against” an animal protection group.
Unfortunately, having a media “untouchable” isn’t in the public’s best interests.
Consider the status quo: There is no humane society umbrella organization, but most people – 71 percent, according to recent national polling – think the Humane Society of the United States is just that. HSUS only gives 1 percent of its budget to pet shelters. Never mind the TV commercials filled with dogs and cats in cages, just like a shelter would use.
HSUS makes fundraising appeals in which more than 85 percent of the animals shown are dogs and cats even though only 1 percent of the money raised from the public is shared with pet shelters. More than 99 percent of the ads don’t have the disclaimer that HSUS assures us will protect donors from any confusion about where the money goes.
National groups raise awareness about issues. Local groups provide hands-on care for animals and the public remains largely unaware of the difference. I’ve worked for HSUS and local animal control. I understand both sides of the story.
Pet shelters can’t compete with the leverage enjoyed by HSUS. When there’s an animal-rescue situation with multiple responders, HSUS can be counted on to show up with cameras rolling for future promotions. In 2011, HSUS has put out more than 400 press releases.
So, last month, I started working on a national project to help clear up the misunderstanding called the Humane Society for Shelter Pets. Our message is simple: Know where your money’s going. Give local if you want to help pets in shelters. If you want to help a national group with political campaigns, that’s fine too.
Sadly, the response from HSUS has been rather inhumane—amplified by media complicity.
In response to my announcement that I’d joined this project, why would HSUS help another former HSUS employee make a formal complaint about me to my employer, an animal shelter in Maryland? Or ask my local paper to write about the complaint, and include a copy of the complaint (usually a confidential personnel matter) and a letter of support from HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle, defaming the downtown PR firm that is helping us get the word out and its owner?
Sometimes it’s personal. Last year New York Times reporter Stephanie Strom wrote a hit-piece on HSUS’s critics after receiving a request from HSUS to do a story. HSUS also helped file a baseless ethics complaint in New York State that was picked up by Albany media. It didn’t matter that the complaint was bogus. The story was already written.
That’s not all. HSUS sent strangers to my workplace to question me and did the same to other people working on this project. They’ve filed Freedom of Information Act requests to have copies of all my emails and phone conversations. What that has to do with helping animals, is hard to get at.
Ironically, HSUS created a pledge for “Humane Discourse and Conduct Within Animal Welfare.” The pledge reads, in part, “Verbal attacks, threats, harassment, defamation … do not ultimately help animals.”
I agree. But if I have to defend myself against false accusations or quit helping animals altogether, I’ll be defending myself and the animals that need assistance.
Speaking truth to power often draws a hostile reaction. But thankfully, I’ve heard personally from more than 700 shelters who support our “give local” mission. The truth often prevails, as it will here. Especially once the media is ready to stop playing the fool.
Diana Culp is director of the Humane Society for Shelter Pets and former Director of Education for the Humane Society of the United States.
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
164 Comments
Good for you, Diana. I fast-forward through those commercials without a twinge of conscience, because they are designed to mislead the audience. You want to help suffering animals? Give locally.
I agree, I too ignore every stupid "heart string" pulling ad these suckers put out as I've learned the truth oh so long ago about where the money goes.
It is so sad that another liberal scam is been perpetrated upon the good people of this country. 1% return to shelters is criminal. Al Gore would be soooo proud.
Keep getting this message out.
WHAT A SHAME!!!
Always give locally. National and international orgs sometimes have a huge admin cost.
Mike K I agree with you give locally. Here is the link for One Tail At a Time a rescue here in chicago. My daughter is law is one of the founders.
http://www.onetail.org/
I work at the Humane Society of the US, have worked at a shelter, and continue to volunteer my time with a local animal rescue. HSUS helps animals on a national level, and those 400 press releases are to inform our members about the work that we do. You can't argue that we put out too many press releases about the work we do, and then argue that people don't know what we do. Our members and supporters know exactly what we do, it's clear on our website, our tax forms, our CEO's blog, and communications with our supporters.
I'm glad you brought up our commercials – all of those animals are from rescues and investigations the we've done. The seal hunt. The Hallmark Westland case. Puppy mill cases. Hoarding cases. We spend millions carrying out those rescues. Helping shelters is a small part of what we do, and you can't put a number on it. Take for example, the Shelter Pet Project , an ad campaign to promote adoption of shelter pets. Or spending nearly half a million on rescuing 700 cats, and finding all the adoptable/treatable cats (including feral and FIV/FELV cats) homes, which started with a local shelter asking for our assistance. I consider that helping shelters.
When you have a organization who's existence is made possible by having the help of a man who refuses to divulge specific companies financing his dirty work (such as attacking groups ranging from Mothers Against Drunk Driving to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to The Humane Society of the United States.), and launched this line of work by taking money from tobacco companies to battle those seeking restrictions on smoking, then yes, it is hard to believe that this is "just about helping shelter animals." It's not just a downtown PR firm, it's Berman and Co. So look closely at who is sending out the message here. Because the message I'm seeing from hssp is mostly, don't give to HSUS, rather than simply being all about "give to local shelters. " Just take a look at this piece – 90% of this piece is about why the author doesn't like HSUS – with a few sentences here and there about oh and donate local.
Asking HSUS to fund local shelters, it's like saying that an AIDS charity should spend all its money on hospice and nothing on prevention. We need to attack animal cruelty from all angles – and that includes working to prevent animals from ending up in shelters in the first place, as well as working to stop cruelty to all animals – not just dogs and cats.
So what I encourage everyone to do, is research charities before you support them. Whether you decide to help animals by supporting your local shelter, the HSUS, another national org that helps animals – in my eyes it's all great, because you're helping animals. Genuine attempts to help animals are great, no matter how small, they make a difference. Even if you can't donate financially, you'd be surprised how helpful a bag of towels donated to a shelter is, or an extra volunteer at an adoption event.
For anyone interested in learning more about what HSUS is about, and also more information about Berman, visit http://www.humanesociety.org/about and http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/opposition/fa....
Just curious: is your post the official HSUS response, or are you just a concerned employee?
Am I the only one who sees the unbelievable hypocrisy of a hit piece on the Humane Society of the United States, complaining that they do not work hands-on with local shelters – from a so-called "Humane Society" that does no hands-on work with local shelters, and which, in fact, doesn't even HAVE a shelter.
Unlike the HSUS. Which runs 5 sanctuaries.
I also LOVE how Ms. Culp makes some sweeping accusations against the HSUS, without a single piece of corroborating evidence. Except her word, as a disgruntled ex-employee, whose website is devoted to slamming HSUS' VERIFIABLE work and successes for animals.
What, exactly, has H$$P accomplished (except to ask for money so they can run even more expensive full-page newspaper ads)? How many local shelters could that advertising money have helped? What percentage of H$$P's hefty advertising budget has been donated to ANY local shelter?
Let me help you out, folks. The answer to the above questions is $0.00. Big. Fat. ZERO. DOLLARS. And ZERO help to local shelters.
And since H$$P does NOT share any of its (obviously) well-stocked bank account with local shelters, why are THEY using ads featuring dogs and cats in cages?
Talk about selling faux outrage. This hit piece is filled with half-truths, outright lies, and breathtaking hypocrisy.
Really, Ms. Culp…
You sell yourself to a faux "Humane Society", supported by some of the most notoriously anti-animal lobby interests, ask for money to help your organization's faux "mission" of bashing the HSUS for not ignoring their organizations stated mission…
…while YOU sit back, collecting a salary for duping animal lovers, using a tax-payer funded shelter to further YOUR agenda WITHOUT that shelter's knowledge or permission, and spread slander, rumor, and lies to try to cover YOUR misdoings and bad judgement.
Have you NO shame?
This issue has been in the cellar for far too long. And it is not just pet non-profits.
Our pathetic, disgusting, inept and corrupt Congress should be demanding that all non-profits retain only 5% of proceeds for administrative purposes. But of course that would require an introspectively quid pro quo.
But why when the Status Quo pays?
For the official HSUS response, I would refer you to our PR department directly. You can reach them at: 301.548.7793. Our CEO has also blogged about this issue here: http://hsus.typepad.com/wayne/2011/10/voice-for-a... and here: http://hsus.typepad.com/wayne/2011/11/rick-berman...
It's the official response. This is from a person on the HSUS payroll who exists only to put out the company line every time a story like this one appears on the net. It has happened time and time again in publications all across the country.
I'll tell you what. If you HSUS guys were are so concerned with helping the very animals in your ads, why don't you tell people that direct. Tell them flat out in the ads and in the publications that any monies raised will NOT go to their local shelters but to your larger effort. No one would think there is a problem, and the people interested in actually helping you would continue to do so.
The fact remains that you won't simply because you know that by and large the majority of the people who donate are duped into believing that they are helping local shelters. This is a myth that HSUS doesn't mind putting out.
Give to local shelters. With budgets these days, they need the money more than any national organization ever would.
I'll leave you with this thought. Does the head of HSUS (Wayne Pacelle) live paycheck to paycheck, or does he live like any other DC lobbyist? Ask him what he took in last year and what his expenses were. That should tell you all you need to know about HSUS and what their priorities are.
I also love how you never qualify yourself as a paid employee of HSUS whose job it is to troll websites simply to put out the same talking points again and again in an effort to curtail the company line.
Your indignation would carry more water if it weren't copied line for line from other postings out on the web every time a story like this appears.
And BTW: Way to not actually respond to her claims. Basically you are saying that everything she says is TRUE but we shouldn't care because of her past. Thanks for clearing that up.
Ms. Culp is not "speaking truth to power". Ms. Culp is speaking lies to animal lovers, and railing against the media for not falling for them.
Let's be clear about a few facts.
1. The HSSP is funded by "supporters of the pet breeding industry", according to co-founder Jeff Douglas.
2. The HSSP provides no services to any shelter, anywhere.
3. The HSSP provides no funds or grants to any shelter, anywhere.
4. Despite having no money to share with shelters, HSSP has launched an incredibly expensive nationwide ad campaign in major newspapers in order to attack the HSUS.
5. HSSP has hired a notorious astroturfing PR firm, Berman & Company, which operates by creating phony nonprofits on behalf of its corporate clients.
6. One of Berman & Company's more lucrative "nonprofits" is the Center for Consumer Freedom, also known as HumaneWatch, which demonizes welfare groups in general and the HSUS in particular.
7. A quick perusal of the web shows virtually no support for HSSP from shelters and rescues. Who does support HSSP? Big Ag proponents who resent the HSUS' work to confront animal cruelty in factory farming.
8. When several shelters spoke up against the deception of HSSP, they were met with bullying and legal intimidation from millionaire Rick Berman.
So let's recap. A front group for pet breeders is spending millions to attack a charity that confronts puppy mill abuses and irresponsible breeding practices. Heading this group is a disgruntled former employee of the HSUS. This front group attacks national charities that spend millions every year in grants to local shelters and rescues, provide valuable services to shelters, provide a national voice for shelters, and fund shelter promotions like Spay Day events and the Shelter Pet Project… yet the front group provides no such services, even with a multi-million dollar budget. And when shelters speak out against them, they are slapped with legal threats and intimidation.
The ethics complaint against Ms. Culp was far from baseless. Ms. Culp abused her position with Frederick County Animal Control and used taxpayer-funded facilities in her smear campaign against national animal welfare groups. She did so without proper authorization and oversight. It is a serious breach of ethics, and it warrants investigation, which is why several *private citizens* — including me — have asked that agency to investigate Ms. Culp's behavior and to initiate disciplinary action.
Unsurprisingly, Ms. Culp — or more likely, her hired PR firm — are trying to spin this as an attack on her and the HSSP. They wail about "media complicity"; apparently, journalists aren't simply reporting the facts of the matter, they're conspiring to get poor Didi. It's personal, you see. Everyone is out to get her.
This is all part of Berman & Company's strategy to undermine animal welfare work and legislation protecting animals from cruelty, and it dovetails nicely with the personal vendetta of a disgruntled former employee of the HSUS who now looks out for the interests of commercial pet breeders.
But when you look behind the front group and the phony facade of caring, the truth becomes clear. Funding from pet breeders. Ms. Culp's statements against spay/neuter. Her opposition to legislation confronting puppy mills. Her often paranoid and extremist rants about how national groups want to take away your right to own pets. The HSSP's big budget advertising campaign and lack of support for shelters.
All of this points to a carefully orchestrated smear campaign.
The problem here is not with promoting donations to local shelters. That's something every animal lover should be doing!
The problem lies in using those shelters as pawns in Ms. Culp and the pet breeding industry's attack on national charities. It's dishonest, it's destructive, and it's absolutely a betrayal of our love of animals.
Thankfully, animal advocates — and the media — are smart enough to see through her charade.
Maybe you should ask Ms. Culp how much HER lobbyist PR hack took in last year, and what his expenses were. Even better, ask H$$P what their expenses were, and where they allocated their funds.
That will quickly tell you where THEIR priorities are. And while you're asking pointed questions, ask why THEY are duping people into thinking that THEY help local shelters.
I'll tell you what: if H$$P was so concerned about helping local shelters, their communications would not be filled with HSUS hate-mongering.
It's blatantly obvious that the ONLY thing they care about is attacking HSUS. Anything else they put out is a myth.
In my neck of the woods, the Humane Society DOES work with the local shelters, since they have no shelters themselves. They work WITH Animal Resue, Animal Control and the shelters. They place strays in foster homes where they are cared for until they can be adopted. They advertise the pets on PetFinder where you can contact them by e-mail and they show the pets at the local pet stores.
These groups benefit from the Humane Society. But, as you said, it's always good to know where the money goes for ANY group you donate to.
My Humane Society kitten agrees with me.
P.S. I don't like the commercials though. Too sensational.
My donations go local, where I can see what they're doing.
Actually Larry, there is a disclaimer on the most recent commercial, which says the HSUS is not affiliated with local shelters. However, lets say someone comes to our site, and thinks we run local groups. So they see seals, farm animals and companion animals on the home page, but still aren't sure what our role is. So they search for local humane society. One of the first results that comes up is "How is the HSUS affiliated with your local humane society?" http://www.humanesociety.org/animal_community/res.... Like I said, we are clear about our work and what we do, and proud of it.
As for Wayne, he runs an organization with hundreds of employees, and is paid much less than others running organizations of similar size. He doesn't live in a nice mcmansion in a wealthy DC suburb though, that would be Berman. We're transparent about our work, and finances – and you don't need to ask Wayne about where our funds go – it's all on our website. This is the guy who spent Christmas eve with a local Oregon group building fences for chained dogs. He's helping animals every day – and it's because of his effective leadership we've been able to make a difference.
Larry, I am the only paid employee of HSUS on here. The way I know that, is because HSUS employees disclose that they work for HSUS when the comment.
Also, I would like to point out that Culp is misrepresenting her title, she was a director for Humane Society University—an affiliate of The Humane Society of the United States.
That's great that your local humane society does that! I We (HSUS) aren't the same as your local humane society, as it's a general term, much like "medical center." You can see more about the differences here: http://www.humanesociety.org/animal_community/res...
Not an employee of HSUS. Sorry to disappoint you.
Also, your reading comprehension is way off. I specifically stated that Ms. Culp's hit piece above "is filled with half-truths, outright lies, and breathtaking hypocrisy." Somehow you skipped right by the plain-speak, in your rush to obfuscation.
I'm saying readers should consider the source before accepting everything H$$P, or Ms. Culp puts out , as fact. I'm not sure why you'd object to that suggestion. After all, isn't that exactly what you are suggesting?
Then again, you're endorsing a demonstrably hypocritical organization, so it makes sense that you'd toe the company line. Thanks for clearing that up.
Way to throw out the red herring, though.
It was a piece that was prewritten. Just by how fast the posting came up.
Thanks. I always thought that local groups were somewhat autonomous. One thing I forgot to mention is the local animal hospitals also contribute by neutering and spaying HS pets. We, the public pay an adoption fee that gets spread around………….Pretty cool system, if you ask me.
That IS awesome. Is that the adoption fee that adoptors pay, or do they collect it some other way?
LOL, you obviously haven't been involved in online debates for very long, Oregontea. It only takes a minute or two to refute the kind of bullcrap Didi and her PR flack are spewing.
"as for Wayne", you mean this Wayne?
http://activistcash.com/biography.cfm/b/3366-wayn...
http://activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm...
http://www.consumerfreedom.com/2004/04/2482-wayne...
It appears even his former domestic terrorist buddies don't like him anymore either:
http://www.animalliberationfront.com/News/2011_08...
When you pick up your critter, you pay the fee. They give a detailed print-out of all the shots received and when the next shots are due and when and where they were neutered or spayed (5 pages!) They even document a bath!
Oh, I forgot to mention that they also give the pets a micro chip, too.
For instance, my kitten had everything except a rabies shot because she was too young. But I new the exact date she could get it. They even have a deal with the area vets for a discount on your pet's first visit. You give the 5 page print-out to the vet and they scan it into their computer so they have all the records for your pet. It's a very good deal, too. If you paid for all those things separately, it would cost 3 times as much money.
Totally awesome system.
Thanks for posting these links. They're quite an education.
You're welcome.
He has some old Earth First! ties too, apparently, but as usual with controversial figures "reforming from within", most citations have disappeared from the web.
So, I guess skb2005 is Sarah Barnett, (former?) Emerging Media Manager at the HSUS? If so, then I guess it's pretty obvious that she'd be here trying to undermine Ms. Culp.
The "Humane Society University?" You mean the HSUS' non-accredited diploma-mill that pumps out future activists?
As for "activistcash" and "consumerfreedom", you mean these guys?:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center... http://www.consumerdeception.com/index.asp http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2010/02... http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Activi...
As for Culp's PR hack, it appears that even his own son speaks out against him and his sleazy tactics: http://www.prwatch.org/node/8168
As for "activistcash" and "consumerfreedom", you mean these guys?:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center... http://www.consumerdeception.com/index.asp http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2010/02... http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Activi...
As for Culp's PR hack, it appears that even his own son speaks out against him and his sleazy tactics: http://www.prwatch.org/node/8168
What's not mentioned is that activist cash is a project of CCF – take a look at the real deal behind them here: http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/opposition/op...
We don't support the idea that violence towards people helps animals, and state that on our website as well. So thank you Barbara, for pointing out that we are separate and more mainstream, by showing that article.
Again, I"m going reiterate that it should tell you something, when all of these sites parroting the "HSUS is bad" party line, lead back to one single PR firm in DC…..
EVERYTHING should be as local as possible. EVERYTHING. By giving power to any national organization you lose accountability. Her point is valid. If you want to see results where YOU live, take care of your own. If on the other hand you want to help fund advocacy on a national level, feel free, but don't attack someone who is only trying to do good and defend herself in the process. Keep up the good work Diana, God bless.
I see the Humane Society apologists are out in force!
There's a place in society for large national organizations that raise awareness. The problem is the perception that the Humane Society is primarily concerned with helping animals currently in shelters. That's not the case, and it can't be. The Humane Society should focus largely on education and advocacy, which it already does. But HSUS should also work harder to inform potential donors that their money isn't going to go to the local shelter and is more likely to go to an ad campaign, a PR event, or to cover administrative overhead. That's just how it goes in large organizations. And that's okay, provided the public is informed.
(continued in next comment)
(continued)
Look, I know it's hard to get money for prevention and education efforts; I used to work in alcohol and drug abuse prevention, so I get that. But by not being completely upfront and transparent about goals and motivations, both prevention AND current care facilities suffer. Prevention efforts suffer because of a lingering sense of duplicity the public feels toward the organization in question. Actual shelter facilities suffer because donations taht might have done demonstrable good for rescued animals never materialize due to the larger public's belief that HSUS distributes the bulk of its money to shelters. Clarity of purpose is crucial, or public trust is undermined and ultimately lost, and the ones who suffer most are the animals that everyone wants to help.
Always donate local first, and make adoption your first option.
They do have a deal with one local animal hospital for people who can't pay. It's the same hospital who does it for their pets. And, I think they have made a deal with the vets at the pet stores. I don't know exactly how it works but, if people contact them, they refer them to the hospital for a hugely discounted service.
This group has got some good sales and marketing people working (or I should say, volunteering) for them!
Larkin, stop being so knee-jerk liberal apologist. Both of you need to stop worrying about partisanship and focus on the HSUS and the HSSP.
"Also, your reading comprehension is way off. I specifically stated that Ms. Culp's hit piece above "is filled with half-truths, outright lies, and breathtaking hypocrisy." Somehow you skipped right by the plain-speak, in your rush to obfuscation."
Specifics please? Otherwise you're just a ranting lunatic who can be dismissed as irrelevant, as I am about to do.
*dismisses you*
Well, Diana, you certainly started a kerfuffle here. That's OK, we're good at kerfuffling. Hey, just check-out the article about legalizing pot! Dang, I put kevlar on to read those comments!
If both of these warring organizations would take the TIME and ENERGY they are devoting to bickering with each other and spent that time a shelter shoveling poop, we'd all be better off. Give Local. it's that simple.
The HSSUS has deep copnnections to PETA and also helps with or supports the sponsoring of laws that restrict breeding and other aspects of pet ownership like required spaying.
They are not your lilly white defenders of pets by any means.
Keep your money local. My wife retired from a long time job at a local Humane Society, not HSSUS, and that is where you should be giving your money and volunteering if possible.
We do.
If the HSUS wanted my attention, they'd stop running ads that made it look like they abuse the animals they take in. Every image I see from them shows wounded animals shivering and suffering behind metal cages. Shock tactics like that don't work. I'm not going to open up my wallet for an organization that tries to guilt me into donating.
They rarely ever show happy and healthy rescues in their ads. Which already lead me to believe that the HSUS has nothing to do with actual rescues and shelters. If I'm going to give, I'll give locally, where I know it'll be put to use.
@ mnemosyne237966p – While there is confusion about HSUS' relationship to local organizations, (a) most of HSUS' donors *do* know that HSUS is a national animal advocacy organization, and (b) they support HSUS' mission of advocacy.
The fact is (as we see from Ms. Culp's organization) that ANYONE can call themselves a "Humane Society" of wherever or whatever. Even when they do not do hands-on work with animals.
And when an organization chooses to name itself after an existing and well-known national organization (calling themselves, say, the "Humane Society for Shelter Pets"), who is to "blame" for any resulting confusion?
And many local Humane Societies do, in fact, make note of the fact that they receive no direct support from HSUS, in their own marketing materials.
Where is personal responsibility, in all of this? Doesn't some responsibility lie with the individual to know who, and what, they're supporting?
HSUS has REAMS of information about its programs, its mission, its initiatives, and its overall work and purpose. NONE of that information is hidden. Furthermore, HSUS posts its tax returns and annual reports in downloadable format right on its website. You can just click, and download. No sign up, no hoops to jump through, no having to file an FOIA request to get the information.
All there. All waiting. And all completely transparent.
Let me be clear: I do not object to an organization formed for the express purpose of helping animal lovers connect more easily with their local shelters. (I support both my local shelters and HSUS, and many of HSUS' donors do the same.)
What I object to is an organization that is CLEARLY formed for the express purpose of undermining and derailing another organization, not being transparent or direct about its true purpose. And, in this case, yes, the ones who suffer most ARE the animals.
We have a political system that permits special interest groups, of all stripes, to lobby in Washington. And the anti-animal groups have well-funded lobbyists representing their voice.
Yet somehow, it is "wrong" for HSUS, which – in spite of the half-truths spread in Ms. Culp's hypocritical hit piece here – is nowhere near as well funded as its animal opponents, to speak on behalf of more humane treatment of ALL animals.
So, it's just fine for the backers of Ms. Culp's PR hack to be able to lobby in Washington for their interests, but it is *not* OK for animals to have an organization that advocates for *their* interests? And H$$P claims to care about animals?!?
The hypocrisy takes my breath away. It truly does.
H$$P is a skillful and deceptive attempt to silence a voice that speaks for those who have no voice. H$$P is a despicable attempt to advance a personal and corporate agenda of greed and ego, at the expense of animal suffering. Compare the transparency of HSUS to H$$P, and the duplicity does not lie on the side of HSUS.
H$$P is a true wolf in sheep's clothing.
Yes, but you didn't use your name, so I was wondering. I didn't want to make a statement of fact without being certain. However, I've spoken with you before–my name is already being used as someone else's login, so I couldn't register under it–and I know that you are employed to do damage control for the HSUS and to discredit anyone or any organization that the HSUS considers a threat.
The HSUS does nothing but lobby for anti-pet/anti-breeder/anti-agriculture bills or lobby for initiatives that will make it easier for them to do or to protect the same. Tell me, how is that Missouri lobbying effort going? It protects animals . . . how?
At least the HSSP is willing to attempt to fill a void left by the current national groups that have become nothing more than factory fundraising organizations.
HSUS doesn't *claim* to have any shelters, either. What's your point?
What's "hysterical" are the ridiculous half-baked and ill-informed accusations being thrown about here. Especially by someone who had her breeding license yanked for being a repeat animal abuser.
Basically, the assumption being parroted here is that HSUS donors are a bunch of slack-jawed yokels, too stupid and illiterate to stop big, bad HSUS from deceiving them.
While H$$P – with more than a little help from anti-animal industry sources who would like nothing more that to eliminate HSUS – have motives purer than the driven snow.
What a crock.
So… you'd give to HSUS if they just changed their advertising images?
Mighty superficial of you.
I work with the Humane Society for Shelter Pets, and I’d like to clear up some of the misinformation provided by the HSUS employee and other critics.
Since our launch, HSSP has received support from more than 750 pet shelters and rescue groups that are generally too afraid to speak out publicly. (Judging from the caustic replies by HSUS, it’s no surprise.)
HSSP is a new nonprofit that launched just weeks ago, so some programs are still under development. However, we have launched a national ad campaign to help clear up the well-documented confusion that exists among the general public. According to national polling, 71 percent of Americans wrongly believe that HSUS is a pet shelter umbrella group. However, just 1 percent of the money given to HSUS goes to local shelters.
HSSP simply points to this confusion and seeks to dispel it so that money goes where donors intend it to. Judging from the stacks of email and mail we’ve received from former HSUS donors who feel they’ve been duped, it is a common misperception. Obviously this is a sore spot for HSUS, because it started attacking the Humane Society for Shelter Pets within hours of our launch.
We don’t raise money from the public (in fact, we encourage interested parties to give directly to their local shelter), but it’s totally false to say we’re funded by the pet-breeding industry. “JohnDopp” seems to have fabricated that quote.
HSUS ads almost never contain disclaimers that HSUS isn’t affiliated with local shelters. According to one report, more than 99 percent of the HSUS ads that ran on TV between Jan. 2009 and Sept. 2011 didn’t have a disclaimer. A staff member in our office saw one on TV a week ago and it didn’t have a disclaimer, so the HSUS employee’s claim to the contrary is questionable. On the spots that do have a disclaimer you practically need a magnifying glass to read it.
It’d be fine if HSUS was clear in its advertising that it was about “prevention.” But it gives off the clear impression, augmented by the “humane society” name confusion, that HSUS is an umbrella group for pet shelters or that most of its money goes to pet shelters.
Want to find a local shelter near you to help? Visit http://www.humaneforpets.com/find-shelters.
Anti-animal industries? Please name them?
I think the point is that if the HSUS stopped using misleading and emotionally manipulative images in their advertising, then soulpile would feel more comfortable making a donation.
Hi Kim, I'm sorry I didn't immediately recognize you. There isn't any point in you and I going back and forth, over the same arguments. It is a waste of your time, and a waste of mine. Anyone who is familiar with our work knows what we do. We promote responsible pet ownership. We are anti-puppy mill, and have tips on our website how to find a reputable breeder. We support farmers and ranchers who treat their animals humanely. In fact just last week we provided grain for farmers who were struggling to feed their cows, thanks to a tornado.
So, whether or not you choose to support us is your choice – those that support us know the broad range of work we do, those who want to learn more about us, I encourage to visit our website at http://www.humanesociety.org/about. And regardless of whether you support us, do make sure to look up the real motives behind hssp.
At the end of the day, there are thousands of organizations out there one can support to make a difference and help animals. In my opinion, HSSP isn't one of them. To those coming across this page and wondering what a minefield this is, I encourage you to always research and be familiar with who you support, and feel free to contact me on twitter @SarahHSUS.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld...
"Neither Berman nor Douglas would disclose who's funding HSSP. Its IRS filing for 2010, prepared by a Berman accountant, lists donations of more than $1.2 million, including 11 of $50,000, one of $100,000 and one of $300,000. Berman said he wasn't one of them. Douglas said the money came from 'foundations and organizations that are involved in the pet industry.' He said he didn't know if any were involved in agriculture."
If your organization isn't funded by the pet breeding industry, who funds your million-dollar print advertising campaign that attacks the HSUS? Jeff Douglas accidentally let the truth slip — I guess he wasn't properly briefed by Berman and Company on the proper way to run a deceptive front group.
You don't raise money from the public? Neither do Berman and Company's other smear campaigns and phony charities. They're primarily funded by "donations" from industries with nasty, dirty secrets they'd rather keep covered. Like the pet breeding industry.
Berman and Company was soliciting donations for this project — then called "Humane Society for America's Pets" — more than a year ago. But it's still "under development"? Bull.
HSSP is part of a carefully orchestrated attack on the HSUS by industry special interests, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with animal welfare.
HSUS is also anti-gun and anti-hunting.
By the way, I find it curious that someone who "works with the HSSP" would decline to identify themselves or their position, and rattles off a reply that reads like a Berman and Company press release.
More deception from a corporate front group…
Those images are not misleading in any way. Every one of those images is from an HSUS disaster relief operation, hoarder or puppy mill seizure, dogfighting investigation, or other HSUS program. And every one of them was helped because people made donations to the HSUS.
http://www.humanewatch.info/blog/silent-victims
Gryphonesse, the entire purpose of HumaneWatch and the HSSP is to attack charities that confront the cruelty of Berman's corporate sponsors, so those industries can abuse animals in puppy mills, in factory farms, in seal hunts. And it's to HSUS' credit that they have NOT allowed Berman's smear campaign to derail their mission.
They've stayed focused and on target, and Berman hasn't been able to stop HSUS from making incredible achievements in animal welfare. Speaking out against the lies of Berman and his sockpuppets hasn't diverted them from helping animals, but that doesn't mean they need to stay meek and submissive and passively accept the deception being perpetrated against animal lovers.
Give local AND give national. Both are vital causes, and they aren't mutually exclusive.
Want to find a local shelter near you to help?
Visit http://www.petfinder.com/shelters.html – an organization that actually DOES help shelter pets, without bashing anyone else. An organization that exists SOLELY for the purpose of helping homeless animals find new homes.
@ "HSSP" – Since you work with H$$P, perhaps you can explain why a "group whose primary mission is to help local pet shelters" devotes the majority of its informational content to attacking HSUS?
Can you also explain why your organization buries the information that you "do not operate or directly support local pet shelters", instead of stating that clearly and transparently?
Here are a few more questions for you:
- Can you be more specific about the "support" you have allegedly received from "more than 750 pet shelters and rescue groups"? Wouldn't those be the shelters and rescue groups that you solicited to be added to your database? Why would they be "afraid" to openly support a group whose "primary mission" is to connect pet lovers to shelters and rescue groups? Since they're listed in your database, those shelters and rescues are already public information. Of course, if they didn't know that asking to be included in your listings would be generously represented as "support" for an attack group…
- Can you explain why – instead of actually helping local pet shelters – your organization chose to spend its "grassroots" budget on a lavish advertising campaign which specifically, and solely, targets HSUS with attack ads?
- Can you explain why your organization would (when its alleged "primary mission is to help local pet shelters") align itself with a PR firm which spends a great deal of *its* budget on expensive attack ads that specifically, and solely, attack HSUS? A PR firm which, it should be noted, has been vigorous and vocal in its defense of puppy mills, and against any and every piece of humane legislation that would reduce animal suffering?
- You say you don't raise money from the public. Who funds you, then? Don't your supporters have a right to know who they're ACTUALLY supporting? Who's paying for your national ad campaign (a national ad campaign, especially when run in major cities, as yours has been, sure ain't cheap!)
- Why, whenever someone raises any of these questions on your FaceBook page, are those comments removed, and the poster blocked? Why not just answer the questions? HSUS does.
It would be fine if you didn't try to maintain the fiction that your organization has any interest in shelter animals. It would be fine if you were clear that your primary mission is to attack HSUS, exploit confusion, and ultimately, remove a thorn in the side of your sponsors.
It would be fine if you would tell the truth.
Politics has nothing to do with this Kim. Individuals from the entire political spectrum are involved in the fight against HSUS. Your nonsensical name-calling post underscores my decision to "de-friend" you. Have a nice day.
You mean, "stopped using misleading and emotionally manipulative images in their advertising" like H$$P does?
So, the images that duplicate between ASPCA commercials and HSUS commercials . . . are they stock footage? Or which organization borrowed them from which?
Couple of general observations here.
One, why does an organization, which purports to be for helping animals have paid employees whose job it is to go on the web to "correct" whatever it deams as misinformation. Even if HSUS is all these people claim it to be (doubtful) it has a major PR problem which needs to be addressed.
If you've given to HSUS in the past, and you now find that people are being paid to go out on the web and post comments like the ones you've seen here today, you now know where your funds are going. Think about that the next time you want to give.
If you have read all the information and agree with the mission of HSUS, which is to promote an animal rights agenda and lobby for such an agenda, then by all means, donate to them. They are one of the few organizations out there for that purpose. HOWEVER if you want to help pets and animals locally, or simply want your money to go ONLY for helping animals directly, then donate to local shelters and those organizations which actually give their funds to local shelters.
Give and support local animal shelters. It's better for all involved. Think about it, even if you agree with HSUS you want to put them out of business by making it so that organizations like theirs are not needed. The place to begin is to give local. After all charity begins at home.
You're right, Sarah, rehashing old arguments is a waste of time. What do you say we try something new? How about you answer my question about the HSUS-backed Missouri ballot initiative that changes how MO revises or rescinds ballot initiatives that were passed? Can you tell me how that legislation helps animals?
Oh, and yes, I've seen how your website advises people to screen breeders. Kind of useless, actually. I don't know many breeders who will let strangers into their homes any longer. It's not safe. Now update those requirements for the 21st century and we might be able to find a little common ground.
So how'd that Feld Entertainment lawsuit work out for the HSUS, John?
Really? Back that up with proof?
H$$P ads, honey. Just look at the H$$P ads. I'm assuming you haven't lost your licence to see.
You make the accusation, you bring the proof. This is right off their website:
Are you against the Humane Society of the United States?
We’re not against HSUS. We’re for any organization that stands up for the standards and ideals of true animal welfare. But let’s be honest, HSUS is trying to change the world in a lot of different ways. They’ve got their own ideas about what’s right and wrong regarding the status quo of animals in society. That goes for farming and food, family pets and wild animals too. At the end of the day, we think our country’s policies and laws should reflect the will of an informed public, not just an activist agenda.
The problem is that many people think HSUS is working hard to improve the shelter situation in communities across the country, but frankly, they’re not. People respond to their poignant and emotional fundraising appeals, but the money isn’t going where donors think it’s going. In fact, just a penny of every dollar HSUS raises actually goes to pet shelters.
Fundamentally, donors’ money isn’t getting where it’s really needed. It can’t buy the food and medicine shelter animals need and it can’t pay the electric bill. And the thing is, conditions are getting worse, not better. Government budgets are getting squeezed more every day, and that’s going to mean less support from localities for pet shelters.
http://www.humaneforpets.com/about/frequently-ask...
You next.
Thanks for reinforcing my point, Larry, although you probably thought you were making the opposite point.
Supporting animal shelters is extremely important, but it does NOTHING to eliminate the abuse and cruelty that makes shelters necessary. That's the job of the national organizations, who address issues beyond the scope and mission of local groups.
Comments like the one HSUS made above are crucial. HSUS is doing no more than countering misinformation and lies with facts. I would expect ANY reputable organization to educate the public about what it does, and to stand up and set the record straight when someone attempts to spread lies about them.
For the record, I am not paid by HSUS. I am not associated with them or employed by them. I am not paid by any animal welfare organization, anywhere. But I stand up for the HSUS because I *have* done my homework, and I know the good that they accomplish.
It disgusts me to see demagogues misrepresenting that good work — and slandering the men and women who devote their lives to it — in order to protect the profits of animal abusers.
Support your local shelters, and support the national groups that work to ease their load. Both are needed to protect animals from cruelty.
Sort of like how Ms. Culp is being paid to submit whiny attack pieces aimed at defaming another organization? Whither, pray tell, is H$$P's money being spent? Is "penning whiny attack pieces" part of her job description?
Certainly not on animals.
And since there's just ONE HSUS employee who has posted here, who did so in a personal capacity… you're kinda finding a conflagration where there isn't even a match, aren't you? It must suck to have to hunt so hard to find some manure to stir.
Also, please direct us to where HSUS states its mission thus: "to promote an animal rights agenda and lobby for such an agenda". That's a mighty big statement based on… on… gee, looky here… based on NOTHING.
BTW: just a little hint before you embarrass yourself with more specious and ignorant assumptions: HSUS helps more animals than just cats and dogs. If you had done your homework, you'd know that.
I gave you a link to a scene by scene breakdown of one of HSUS' most widely-aired ads, and that link includes references to the original source of the footage — which you can see originates with the HSUS.
Feel free to indicate which image you think has been borrowed by either organization.
until the national organizations can pull their heads out of their collective butts I'm not giving them a penny. Local shelters need money and volunteers far more critically and immediately. I guess my two thumbs down are from HSSP and HSUS representatives.. HAH. I adopt local and I support local. I'd be embarassed to work for or support either one of these national organizations at this point.
this has turned into a pissing contest/comment war. I'm not reading any more.
Dude, get a life. You do realize that there are people in this world who may disagree with you.
You claim there's only one HSUS employee who has posted here, but the only way anyone here can know that for sure is for guys like you to actually sign your names to the posts you type. The only way anyone knows that you are not on the payroll of HSUS is because you said so. Pardon me if I don't quite take your word for it.
So take Berman out of the picture and the author of the original post. I ask you, how much money did HSUS actually give to local shelters last year and over the years and how does that compare to the total amount of funds that they have received during that time.
You claim Berman and anyone who might read what he says is a hack. OK, whatever, so using your own resources, break that down. How much does HSUS actually give to the local shelters it claims to work for, and how does that number compare to it's total contributions.
And when you do that, then explain to me where I didn't do my homework when I expressed an opinion that people who wish to help local shelters donate their funds there instead of HSUS. Tell me, why doing that is flat out wrong.
See, this is where we can have an honest debate.
I feel animal shelters are best served locally and thus give to local shelters. You believe that giving to HSUS is the best way, and that's OK. If you have done the research and actually read both sides for what they say instead of what they say about each other, and in doing so, find that HSUS is an organization which fits your purposes, then by all means donate.
I just think that it makes more sense to give at the local level as that is where the funds are needed most. The last thing, in my opinion, we need more of, is lobbyists, red tape, and people who get rich from of the goodwill or intentions of others.
I appreciate that you approached this in a rational way rather than an emotional way like the poster below. You can't win a debate by insulting those who may disagree with you. And sometimes, we need to accept the fact that there are those who will disagree with us. I have, and I am glad that you have as well.
What is wrong with pet breeders? Don't you want future generations of pets to be born?
"…I just think that it makes more sense to give at the local level as that is where the funds are needed most. The last thing, in my opinion, we need more of, is lobbyists, red tape, and people who get rich from of the goodwill or intentions of others…"
Then why not just say THAT? I got no beef with your opinion.
But I *do* have a beef implying stuff that just. doesn't. exist. Which is what your post did.
HSUS doesn't claim to work for local shelters. That has been explained several times now. They are a national animal advocacy organization, and that is what they "claim" to do: advocate for animals.
When you take out the FACT that HSUS does *not* claim to work for local shelters, the entire argument becomes moot.
THAT'S where you haven't done your homework.
How could I possibly tell you that giving to your local shelter *if you wish to help locally* (and exclusively) is wrong? *I* donate to my local shelter AND HSUS.
If you wish to have your donation used exclusively at the local level, then go for it. It's YOUR money; use it however you want.
Either way – your way or mine – animals are being helped. And isn't that supposed to be the point?
Sheesh.
Keep up the good work.You're obviously on the road to success.They would'nt go through so much trouble if they did'nt feel threatened.
Very true, Carol! HSUS only seeks to bury what they can't control.
See: Berman & Co.: Clients.
Oh – sorry – I forgot. Like H$$P's funding sources, they're supposed to be a secret.
You'll have to ask H$$P. I'm sure they'll be only too happy to tell you. Not.
As if you cared.
You still haven't said anything about anti-animal organizations. Personally, I think that any organization that pushes ownership limit laws and mandatory spay/neuter laws is pretty anti-animal. Aren't those things part of the HSUS modus operandi?
I suppose you could infer that HSUS doesn't actually "claim" to work for local shelters. But when you put up pictures of abused animals, play sappy music and then say something like "Your donation will go to help animals such as the ones you see here", and then only give the minimal, you are going out of your way to distort what you do.
I'm sorry, but if HSUS doesn't want this sort of image, then it needs to re-evaluate it's methods and be more truthful about what it actually does because, judging by this message board alone, there is some confusion.
I've also noticed that you didn't answer my main question. You haven't signed your actual name to any of your posts here so no one can know if, in fact, you are not on the payroll of HSUS, nor have you used any source independent of HSUS or Rick Berman to demonstrate how much money HSUS gives to local shelters compared to how much they take in, in total.
You can smear me for having a different opinion all you want, but at the end of the day, what it boils down to is, I asked you a question, and you have refused to answer it.
Actions speak louder than words.
LOL. Activistcash is a Center for Consumer Freedom (Rick Berman) front group. Smoke and mirrors barbarausa. Big fail.
Supporting your local shelter is great. But it's like putting a bandaid on a gushing wound. That's why I support my local humane society and the HSUS. HSUS is most effective at legislation, anti-cruelty campaigns and spay/neuter campaigns which directly benefits all local shelters.
If part of your objection to Rick Berman is that he's a lobbyist, then you should also be aware that Wayne Pacelle is also a lobbyist registered in at least one state (Missouri) in which the HSUS is fighting the process by which the state changes ballot initiatives that have passed. Tell me again how that helps animals?
So LoupGarouTFTs Now that we have Ms. Barnett's bona fides, how about yours. Which of the following occupations do you engage in? Puppy miller? Cockfighter, excuse me, game fowl enthusiat? Circus? Factory farmer? Backyard breeder? Exotic animal trader?
I'm not "inferring": I'm saying. Show me ANYWHERE in their literature, their website, their ads – ANYWHERE where HSUS claims to work for local shelters.
If you're going to criticize them for using an emotional appeal to generate an effect, then they are guilty as charged. As is every non-profit you care to mention.
INCLUDING HSSP. ESPECIALLY HSSP.
Doesn't the sheer hypocrisy of that impress itself on you in ANY way?
From there on, every criticism you've made of HSUS, can be leveled equally at HSSP.
I'm not sure what kind of answer you expect me to give you about how much HSUS "donates to local shelters" vs how much they bring in. I'm not their accountant.
If you're looking for the actual, hard numbers on how HSUS uses its funds, then I recommend you go read their annual reports, and tax returns – both of which you can download from their site. And which I have already suggested you do. Everything *I* can find out, you can too. If you would just bother to do a smidgen of work in your search for truth.
If you truly don't know how HSUS funds are used, then why are you making derogatory statements that you do not know to be facts? Why would you proclaim with such authority, when you apparently have no idea what you're talking about?
The only "source" I can give you for how HSUS uses its money are HSUS' tax returns – which you can get from their website, and which you would discount, anyway. But, since their mission does NOT include directly supporting local shelters, what is your point?
I have no "insider" information (which you seem to assume I have). But I do donate to both HSUS, my local shelter, and a couple of local rescues. I also volunteer, and foster. All my animals are adopted. Somehow, I manage to resolve all that with my support for HSUS' work on behalf of ALL animals, not just cats and dogs.
What's more, I took the trouble to know how my donations would be used. And I highly recommend that anyone donating does the same.
I also highly recommend investigating an organization that claims to have one agenda, while clearly pursuing another. As I did.
I am NOT an employee of HSUS. And I will not give you my name because everyone who has spoken out against H$$P's deception has been served with a threatening letter from Rick Berman. It appears that Mr. Berman has a problem with people who don't fall down and uncritically worship his creations, and who don't share his opinion. And since I don't have the advantage of big corporate money behind me, nope, sorry, I shall remain a poster of mystery.
In spite of that, I suspect your life will go on much as it did before you were denied this crucial (it seems, to you) bit of information.
I don't believe I have smeared you. Challenged your assumptions, certainly. You, on the other hand, have now insinuated several times, that I am a liar.
Tacky.
the most perfunctory glance at this thread suggests that HSUS has a 'rapid-response team' at the ready to attack ANY adverse information. my question is this: if HSUS isn't pulling some unethical crap, why do so many have a problem with the organization that they feel the need to have storm-troopers fanned out in cyberspace looking to beat back dissenters?
I note that none of the huffy replies from the HSUS addressed the appalling fact that HSUS only donates 1% of its income to shelters.
And that's the whole point, isn't it?
Sad stuff. What I would like to know is this. Was the Humane Society a once-noble org that simply lost its way when they got into the business of pedalling Sarah McWhatsherface CDs or were they always PETA-lite?
SKB
While I applaud your personal effort, worked myself for 25 years in local shelters and with Vets and ASPCA believing all the while I was making a difference, let alone a dent in this national travesty. After seeing this cycle repeat year after year one has to ask the obvious question.
Why in its decades of existence has the ASPCA not used that money to buy "for sale by the buck" congressmen and ended this misery by getting them to pass laws that
1) Require licensing of breeders and genetic certification for their animals
2) Oversees their operations as they do the planting of every crop grown in America
3) AND LEVIES HEAVY FINES AGAINST UNLICENSED BREEDERS FOR SELLING ANIMALS AS A COMMODITY AND REQUIRES MANDATORY JAIL TIME FOR FIRST OFFENDERS?
They could, in short, have ended this cycle of horror decades ago. But then, where's the profit in that?
Sarah MacLachlan represents the ASPCA.
And the HSUS hasn't lost its way. Its mission has ALWAYS been confronting cruelty on a national scale, since its foundation more than 50 years ago. It has stayed true to its mission, which is why the industries that profit from animal abuse have invested so much money in trying to stop them.
The HSUS is the most effective advocate for animals in the US today, and the enemies of animal welfare know it.
The HSUS was never intended to fund the daily operations of shelters. That's not its purpose, and never has been.
Despite that, they provide a tremendous array of services to shelters and rescues, and donate millions to those local groups every year. That's in their Form 990 tax returns, freely available on their website or on independent charity evaluators like GuideStar.org or CharityNavigator.org (both of which give HSUS high marks, by the way).
Both the idea that HSUS was formed to run shelters, and the myth that HSUS gives less than 1% of its budget to shelters are creations of the PR firm Berman and Company. To reach that ridiculous number they had to willfully ignore grants for spay and neuter programs, grants to sanctuaries, and every dollar invested in programs like the Shelter Pet Project.
The actual tax returns tell a very different story than the fiction that these front groups spin.
If you want the real facts, get them from an authoritative source — not shills for animal abusing industries.
Ultimately, pretty good, though not in the way anyone expected.
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-11-29/us/us_ringling...
The ASPCA and Fund for Animals didn't have the standing they needed to make the court case stick, but the truth of every abuse and cruelty they alleged was upheld by the USDA. That never would have happened if animal welfare groups hadn't had the courage to confront an animal abuse industry with billions in financial backing.
None of the above. I am a graduate student in a counseling psychology program. I exhibit my Toy Fox Terriers in conformation shows (I currently have a TFT in the United Kennel Club TFT Top Ten) and compete with them in agility, obedience, and Rally obedience trials. On rare occasions I will breed a litter from titled, health-tested parents. I have bred five litters since 2002 and have not produced a litter of puppies for about 18 months. I have two rescue dogs–a big black and tan (actually trindle) Heinz 57 named Jack and a small red and white possible-Rat Terrier mix named Trooper. I occasionally foster dogs and last April I found homes for two abandoned puppies that were huddled under my car when I went outside one morning.
I make my living as a writer, both as a pet writer of SEO articles and as a fiction writer. I also do some editing. Oh, and till the end of the month, I will be processing venison for dog food. I steward at conformation shows and performance events. I actively campaign against the HSUS and other AR groups online and support small-producer animal agriculture–I have backyard chickens that I keep for eggs (buff Orpingtons, black Australorps, Golden Campines, bantam Easter Eggers–a total of less than 20). I plan to add a few meat rabbits this year. I will have a small organic garden this year and will be learning to can both meats and vegetables as well.
I'm trying to think of what else I can disclose, but that will do for now.
The HSUS has turned into a factory fundraising behemoth and a lobbying organization for animal rights extremism. Since about the 1980s, the HSUS has been ''PeTA in s suit." John is right; Sarah McLaughlin is the PeTA supporter–but in my opinion, she's just another celebrity that's fallen for their feel-good message and is unaware of their true anti-animal/anti-pet agenda.
I think you just proved the main points of the article. You are a Marxist organization, using the animal cruelty issue as a way to push your anti-human agenda, and will not stop at anything to attack those who expose you for what you are. Is it any wonder that dog breeders would want your activities scrutinized? After all you really are trying to take away the ability to own pets. Oh, BTW, and I was in California when you pushed that monstrosity called CPAWS. So don't tell me that you are anything but a Marxist vehicle.
You not incorrectly. That has been addressed several times. Try reading the replies. That's the whole point, isn't it?
You note incorrectly. That has been addressed several times. Try reading the replies. That's the whole point, isn't it?
The animal right movement has been driven by socialists since its start during the late 1800s. But many people care about the issue so others bedsides socialist have been involved. At one point, one would be hard pressed to find any obvious lefty slant. During the 60s, Marxists started to make big inroads into a lot of organizations, including Human Societies. By the mid 70's they pretty much had control of the HSUS. But because of the "marvelous" job our educators have done at indoctrination, most Marxist don't even know that that is what they are. That is why they can hear about a plan to legislate the neutering of all dogs, and believe that its "for the animals".
Go to humanewatch. Berman has sent the puppymillers, backyard breeders, factory farm apologists, cock fighters, exotic animal traders and horse eaters over here to comment on this page. If Culp and Berman aren't pulling some unethical crap why is Berman sending out all these oxygen theives to comment here.
Really? How interesting . . . where does that fit in with the the reversal of those findings when the "whistle-blower" was discredited as a paid plaintiff and Feld being given the green light to go after the HSUS for the court costs associated with this case?
http://www.feldentertainment.com/Press/PressRelea...
http://www.ringlingbrostrialinfo.com/uploadedFile...
Oh, and in the file "Facts and Conclusions of Law," there is two or three pages of decisions in regard to the treatment of the elephants, particularly in regard to the "bull hook." Interesting–the court found all of the treatment to be reasonable and humane, as well as in accordance with good animal husbandry practices that have been accepted worldwide for centuries.
http://www.ringlingbrostrialinfo.com/uploadedFile...
Oh, and the USDA/APHIS? Full disclosure, John . . . the chief of the Animal Health and Welfare
Enforcement Branch Investigative and Enforcement Services, Sarah Conant, used to be a litigating attorney for the HSUS, who once brought a lawsuit against the USDA! Lots of credibility there, John . . .
You must be logged in to post a comment.