Humane Society do not help pets.

[Guest]

Check this video out. HSUS and PETA do not help pets find homes. They spend almost all your donations to lobby Congress to make pet ownership and working dogs ownership completely illegal. They almost made it with the Reptile ban act (H.R. 669) - because, you know, most everybody do not want pet snakes.

[NeuroTypical]

HSUS and PETA do not help pets find homes.

Well, I don't know about PETA, but saying the Humane Society does not help pets find homes, is an obvious falsehood. Anyone can go walk into any of the Humane Society buildings and sit in the parking lot and watch grinning families pour out of the building with their new pets.

When someone wants me to hear what they have to say, starting out by claiming false=true isn't the best way to go about it.

LM

[ryanh]

For those that don't already know, your local Human Society, and the Humane Society of the United States are in no way related. The HSUS does not support local shelters/societies, and does not run a single shelter. Their mission is very PETA-like, and IMO, they are using the similarity in names to garner donations deceitfully.

Edited November 11, 2009 by ryanh
Spelling correction

[ryanh]

Well, I don't know about PETA, but saying the Humane Society does not help pets find homes, is an obvious falsehood. Anyone can go walk into any of the Humane Society buildings and sit in the parking lot and watch grinning families pour out of the building with their new pets.

When someone wants me to hear what they have to say, starting out by claiming false=true isn't the best way to go about it.

LM

I'm too slow to point out the truth before you posted. You've been snookered by the very name confusion the HSUS is using to confuse the public and garner donations to ban pets.

[Guest]

I apologize... the thread title is misleading. I meant HSUS and not the local Humane Society. As pointed out by ryanh (thanks!), they are not the same. Mods, I don't know how to change the thread title. Can you do it for me? Thanks!

[john doe]

There is a website dedicated to exposing PETA, I believe it's called PETAkillsanimals.com, or something like that. It had some interesting news clippings pointing out how in some areas PETA has been killing animals in shelters they run while making almost no effort to have them adopted. I'll have to find the link sometime.

[Guest]

PETA believes it is cruel to make animals as pets. They equate it to slavery. So yeah, they prefer to euthanize than to adopt them out if they can't be released into the wild.

[Generally_Me]

Here's the story from a dog training blog about some people who tried to adopt from an SPCA, I thought of it when I saw this thread.

Trying to Save Buddy, an SPCA Dog From a High Kill Shelter

[NeuroTypical]

ryanh's explanation makes sense. I already had my torch and pitchfork picked up and was marching on PETA, I'm happy to add the HSUS to the list.

[Guest]

Here's the story from a dog training blog about some people who tried to adopt from an SPCA, I thought of it when I saw this thread.

Trying to Save Buddy, an SPCA Dog From a High Kill Shelter

Stupid idiots! Grrrr... Makes my blood boil...

I got denied from adopting a dog as well. Reason given was I have children under 10. I bought a dog instead. I know, I shouldn't have. But, I really wanted a dog and I couldn't find a dog match for my house that the pound would let me adopt.

[Jenamarie]

PETA believes it is cruel to make animals as pets. They equate it to slavery. So yeah, they prefer to euthanize than to adopt them out if they can't be released into the wild.

Do you have a source for this? I'm looking at peta.org and I don't see anything that says they're anti-pet. Infact, they sell pet supplies through their website's store: Dogs & Cats: PETA Catalog

[Guest]

Do you have a source for this? I'm looking at peta.org and I don't see anything that says they're anti-pet. Infact, they sell pet supplies through their website's store: Dogs & Cats: PETA Catalog

They're all over the place. You can look it up if you feel inclined. Ingrid Newkirk is the head and founder of PETA. She's a big supporter of the ALF. The ALF's mission statement is to end the "property" status of non-human animals.

Here's a few quotes from Newkirk:

"In the end, I think it would be lovely if we stopped this whole notion of pets altogether."

- Newsday, 1988 February 21

"Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation."

- Harper's, 1988 August 1

"I don’t use the word 'pet.' I think it’s speciesist language. I prefer 'companion animal.' For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding. People could not create different breeds. There would be no pet shops. If people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets. You would have a protective relationship with them just as you would with an orphaned child. But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship — enjoyment at a distance."

- The Harper's Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223

"You don't have to own squirrels and starlings to get enjoyment from them ... One day, we would like an end to pet shops and the breeding of animals. [Dogs] would pursue their natural lives in the wild ... they would have full lives, not wasting at home for someone to come home in the evening and pet them and then sit there and watch TV."

- The Chicago Daily Herald, 1990 March 1

"The bottom line is that people don't have the right to manipulate or to breed dogs and cats... If people want toys, they should buy inanimate objects. If they want companionship, they should seek it with their own kind."

- Animals, 1993 May 1

"Euthanasia is the kindest gift to a dog or cat unwanted and unloved."

- At a press conference in 2005, after two PETA employees were arrested for animal cruelty after dumping hundreds of dead animals in a dumpster

Make of it as you will...

[Tarnished]

What I don't understand about this idea of getting rid of pets is this, dogs took a step up in their survivability when they became pets. Consider the fact that many wolves are on the endangered species list. If we got to a point where dogs were no longer pets it would mean the extinction of many of the dog breeds. I find that to be sad, I find the idea of not having pets to be a sad idea. My dogs are part of my family, they sleep in my bed, they spend their time with me and they are well cared for. I know they care for me as well.

[Maxel]

Interesting. Good to know about the similarity in name between local Humane Society chapters and the HSUS (I was also confused at first, because 7 out of the 8 animals my family has owned have come from the local chapter of the Humane Society). Sickening and intersting. Thanks for posting, anatess.

BTW, I think you might be able to edit the title by editing your OP? Don't know if you can do that on this board, but on other forums you can...

[bluedreams]

I got denied from adopting a dog as well. Reason given was I have children under 10. I bought a dog instead. I know, I shouldn't have. But, I really wanted a dog and I couldn't find a dog match for my house that the pound would let me adopt.

You're supposed to adopt them????.....oops, I bought mine at a local flea market for $50. Ahh well....he's happy and I'm happy and according to PETA I'm a crappy vegetarian as well. Life, what are you going to do about it?

That said, I could see the need to having stricter laws about buy/selling pets for the number of abuses that can happen in the process.

With luv,

BD

[Maxel]

You conservatives just don't understand why it's so wrong to own pets.

Animals are a part of nature. Nature is better than mankind- we've done nothing but screw this planet up since we got here. In fact, things would be better off if we didn't exist. Since natural beings ('animals') are better than unnatural beings ('human'), it's wrong for humans to own animals. The idea is preposterous!

Think about it: in all of beautiful nature, what is the one creature that can think and act for itself, exhibiting acts of especial cruelty? Man. In all of beautiful and innocent nature, which is the one creature that innovates new ways to subject other entities to itself, in essence enslaving the natural world? Man! It's clear to any clear-thinking, level-headed, caring, kind-hearted, rational person that mankind's presence is ruinous to our animal superiors. The first step in righting this tragic wrong is freeing all domesticated animals from their slavery and let them run wild, enjoying their natural habitat.

This message brought to you by animal rights kooks everywhere.

Animal Rights: Because Humans Suck.

[/sarcasm]

[Elphaba]

Check this video out. HSUS and PETA do not help pets find homes. They spend almost all your donations to lobby Congress to make pet ownership and working dogs ownership completely illegal. They almost made it with the Reptile ban act (H.R. 669) - because, you know, most everybody do not want pet snakes.

1) The video says nothing about PETA.

2) The video does not say HSUS lobbies to make pet ownerships, etc., completely illegal.

I'm not defending either organization, nor am I saying you're wrong. I'm just saying the video does not support your initial claim.

I have seen television documentaries that show puppies rescued from puppy mills, but did not know they then went to local shelters. However, I'm not sure why that is a bad thing, given how horrible the puppy mills are.

I do recognize there is a danger the puppies won't be adopted, and thus will be euthanized, but what is the alternative? Where should they put the rescued puppies?

I'm not being saracastic, or superior. I really do not know.

Elphaba

[Tarnished]

Truthfully I think that there should be breeding laws, I think if there were laws that regulated breeders and laws that made it illegal to sell dogs or cats unless you were an authorized breeder then we might see less of the puppy mills in existence. Puppy mills are around because there is a market for cute puppies. I actually walked into a PetLand about a year ago and had a rather disturbing chat with one of the people who worked there. I asked him about the puppies as most of them were "designer breeds" or what most people a few years ago recognized as mutts. These mutts were being sold for insane amounts of money, a couple thousand per dog. Now as someone who has always bought my dogs after doing extensive amounts of research into their background and history and has only bought from breeders who answer my questions correctly I know that you can get a quality dog for much less money than what PetLand was selling these poor mix puppies for, and these are for dogs with a genealogy that is better kept than mine. When I questioned the employee about where the dogs come from he said that they came from Iowa, as they couldn't trust the breeders in IL, and that they were part of the ACC (American Canine Club), which they trusted more than the AKC, he told me that the puppies cost so much because the price included vet visits and shots from the vets affiliated with their stores.

After visiting the store I went home and did some research, I found that one of the largest puppy mills that Petland gets its dogs from is in Iowa, I found that the ACC is not quite as accredited as the AKC and I discovered many accounts of people who bought dogs from a Petland store that discovered that the dogs had kennel cough (referred to by the store employees as a little cold) and were not given the correct medication from the store vets. Sad to say that the little puppy we looked at that night had kennel cough, I would be surprised if all of their dogs didn't have kennel cough.

When it comes to pet stores I think that only small animals such as fish should be sold, otherwise I think that animals such as dogs, cats, birds, and rodents should not be sold there but rather should be obtained through reputable breeders or through rescue groups.

When it comes to me I have always bought through breeders as I want to know what health issues I may need to watch for in the future, and I want to know what my dog's history has been. These are animals that I am bringing home to interact with my family and I don't want some part of the dog's past to come out and cause my family danger. This does not mean that I am against rescues, but rather the choice I make.

As I mentioned before I just don't understand the idea of getting rid of pets, as humans we are able to bring a lot to the life of an animal and they are able to bring much to our lives as well. If we are able I think we should share our lives with them.

[Guest]

1) The video says nothing about PETA.

2) The video does not say HSUS lobbies to make pet ownerships, etc., completely illegal.

I'm not defending either organization, nor am I saying you're wrong. I'm just saying the video does not support your initial claim.

I have seen television documentaries that show puppies rescued from puppy mills, but did not know they then went to local shelters. However, I'm not sure why that is a bad thing, given how horrible the puppy mills are.

I do recognize there is a danger the puppies won't be adopted, and thus will be euthanized, but what is the alternative? Where should they put the rescued puppies?

I'm not being saracastic, or superior. I really do not know.

Elphaba

Elphaba, the video is only a small glimpse of what HSUS is about.

Although, the video doesn't, the thread addresses not only HSUS but PETA as well. I showed the video because it is an official investigative news story and not just some video from some organization you've probably never heard of (which I have dozens of as well).

The point of the thread is to hopefully make people aware that donations to HSUS and PETA are not used to help pets get adopted. They are used to lobby congress to eventually make pet ownership illegal. A lot of people do not know this and that if they do, they might donate to their local SPCA instead (who do not have the funds to advertise extensively for donation requests like HSUS and PETA do).

My family among with thousands of other families across the USA have been fighting HSUS for the better part of a year to stop their lobby for H.R. 669, and now H.R. 2811 - both legislations a bid for HSUS to get a "foot in the door" to make exotic pet ownership illegal by starting with trade restrictions. In the process, we have learned what they are all about. I cannot begin to write here about my research on the organization. Wayne Pacelle, President of HSUS, and Ingrid Newkirk, President of PETA, share the same view on pet ownership. I have quoted Newkirk above. I can quote you similar stuff from Pacelle.

Our challenge is, HSUS is using the Burmese Python problem in the Florida Everglades to gain momentum. Coupled with most people's fear of snakes, all they needed is a few misinformation and the reptile community is sunk. We have 4 pet snakes, 2 hamsters, 2 African rats, an African Gray bird, and 10 cichlids. All of those pets would have been considered illegal to trade by H.R. 669. HSUS figured that H.R. 669 is much easier to pass than something impacting dogs and cats. You won't believe the educational blitz we went through (mostly done by my 6 and 8 year old kids!) just to gain support for our pets! It is not as easy to get people to care about snakes than dogs. Which is exactly what HSUS was hoping for. They have very deep pockets. They tried to use the burmese pythons killing their owners as a springboard for the bleeding hearts. If they would have been successful with that, it would have been very easy for them to expand this to dogs, like pit bulls, killing humans.

H.R. 669 did not make it to vote. But it is not dead. Just slumbering right now waiting for more support. H.R. 2811 is currently being debated. H.R. 2811 is a smaller version of H.R. 669 - just addressing snakes this time, and not just any non-native species. Poor snakes - they're really the most hated!

I'm open to this thread going into a discussion/debate on snakes as pets or any discussion on HR 669 and 2811.

[humanesarah]

I'm new to this site, but felt it was important to show the response to this video, Response to WSB-TV : The Humane Society of the United States from the HSUS website, Television Station Should Have Checked Sources

WSB-TV reporters should have checked their sources when they relied on information from the widely discredited Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF). While organized as a 501© (3) charity, CCF is a front group for a wide range of animal abuse industries and other corporate interests who wish to conceal their attacks on public interest groups and government. The group’s stock-in-trade involves taking aim at organizations that promote food safety, public health, or animal welfare. CCF has even attacked the National Cancer Institute, Mothers Against Drunk Driving and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for their anti-drunk driving and public health campaigns.

CCF has consistently sought to undermine The HSUS’s work to combat factory farming, puppy mills, the Canadian seal slaughter, commercial whaling, and other large-scale cruelties, and it would be most satisfied if we spent all of our money on animal sheltering instead of these industries that it so dutifully defends. The group attacks The HSUS precisely because we are effective and diligent, and because we pose the greatest threat to businesses that choose to continue to abuse animals as a core part of their operations.

The WSB-TV story is chock full of inaccuracies, one of which concerns the HSUS response to Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana. HSUS was recognized nationwide for its enormous deployment in response to the crisis created by Katrina. Since Sept. 1, 2005, The HSUS has committed or spent more than $34 million on general disaster relief and recovery efforts in the Gulf Coast states, the enhancement of its disaster response capacities, and the transformation of public policy concerning animals in disaster. The most recent accounting is available to the public here.

The line of argument that we did not spend money properly was promoted by Louisiana cockfighters, CCF, and other political opponents of ours, and it never had a basis in fact. These groups exhibited little knowledge of our actual spending practices—they just did not like the level of public support and media attention we received during the Katrina crisis. The HSUS and state authorities in Louisiana and Mississippi work very closely on disaster planning and response, and we continue to fund a range of projects to help shelters, vet schools, and other institutions in the Gulf Coast. The HSUS is the lead disaster response agency for animals in the nation.

The HSUS has invested millions of dollars in local spay and neuter programs and is about to launch a national public service campaign encouraging people to adopt dogs and cats from their local animal shelters. We gave more than $6 million in direct grants to those organizations in 2007 alone and provide extensive ongoing training, evaluations, and other support. The HSUS also operates a network of animal care centers, provides rural veterinary services throughout the country, and offers a range of other hands-on programs. In 2008, we rescued and/or cared for 70,460 animals. We also work with law enforcement agencies to rescue animals from dogfights, puppy mills, and other large-scale cruelties. We are rated a four-star charity by Charity Navigator, the highest possible rating, and in 2007 84 percent of our costs were spent on animal protection programs.

In no written materials do we claim that all of our money goes only to animal shelters. Rather, we provide a wide range of support services to shelters because they serve critical functions in their communities. But they would be the first to concede that they do not have the reach or the resources to tackle the national and international problems of animal fighting, puppy mills, inhumane slaughter and transport, canned hunts, the fur trade, and other problems—campaigns that we work on every day. Through our wide range of programs, we help tens of millions of animals every year and prevent cruelty to countless others. Our work is complementary to these organizations, and we work with them throughout the nation.

The HSUS is very active in Georgia, particularly on anti-dogfighting efforts. We staff a 24-hour hotline for Atlanta-area residents to report dogfighting activity, and we offer up to $5,000 for information leading to arrests and convictions in dogfighting cases. We’ve paid four rewards and provided information to law enforcement agencies resulting in seven dogfighting busts in Georgia alone. We also run a community-based program that reaches young people on the streets of Atlanta to make sure they don’t get involved in dogfighting in the first place.

The full range of our programs is set out on our web site, and we invite people to participate in the wide range of programs that make The HSUS the largest and most effective animal protection group in the world.

Wayne Pacelle

President & CEO

[Guest]

Thank you for posting this Sara.

This letter from Pacelle shows 2 things:

1.) If you don't like the message, shoot the messenger. CCF do not support animal cruelty. They support consumer choice. HSUS has been active in making it more and more expensive and difficult to farm food animals. CCF combats that. For example, HSUS backed legislation in Florida to ban farrowing pens for pregnant pigs. People did not understand what the big deal was with banning. I mean, you don't want pregnant pigs to roll on their piglets, right? HSUS has the advantage because they pull on emotions. CCF fights that by informing consumers on the consequence of that legislation and what is actually at stake before they go to the voting booth. CCF do not lobby for legislation, they inform consumers to balance the decision. Unfortunately, the people of Florida did not care enough to study the issue. They go to the polls with their emotions and the bill was passed. HSUS backed the same legislation in Arizona for veal, California for fois grass etc. etc. They all passed because the farms impacted were small enough to care about. HSUS then tried legislation on the reptile community and completely underestimated the number of reptile enthusiasts.

2.) Out of the $34M they reported as donations received after an advertisement pleading for donations to reunite Katrina victims with their pets, inquiries can only account for $7Million after 2 years. Louisiana launched an investigation on the fundraising practices of HSUS... So, what did HSUS do... they built a brand spanking new shelter. Yeah, okay, whatever. And they're still riding on their "activism during Hurricane Katrina". Pacelle, the cat is out of the bag on that one.

If you notice, the title on the thread is HSUS does not help pets (okay, so I still couldn't change the title of the thread from just Humane Society to HSUS to differentiate them from the local humane society shelters). It does not say anything about HSUS does not help the animals in the wild...

FACT remains. There are tons of people out there who think that their $25 check that they donated to HSUS after watching an ad on TV actually goes to help pets get adopted. No, majority of the $25 goes to lobby Congress (like HR 669 and HR 2811) to make it more and more difficult for anybody to have a pet.

By the way, puppy mills are like burmese python invasion of the everglades. They pick one problem and magnify it to make it seem like that's the norm in the puppy industry. If you ask any regular joe, they will tell you pythons eat children. That's how successful HSUS is.

Edited November 12, 2009 by anatess

[humanesarah]

The Katrina accounting you can find right here, which you might find helpful. Beyond Katrina : The Humane Society of the United States

I understand not everyone agrees with us, from a personal perspective, it is frustrating for me to hear people say we don't help pets. I worked at an animal shelter, and there is so much that shelters can't do - while shelters take in the animals from cruelty charges, the HSUS fights to make stronger laws so that the people abusing those animals can be charged.

Anyone visiting our page can see where the money goes, and donate to whichever campaign they would like to donate to. With regards to puppy mills - we are all for responsible breeders and responsible pet ownership. We have resources for new owners, as well as those still looking for the right match from a shelter or want to a responsible breeder.

We have on our new website 9 Things You Should Know About the HSUS

The reptile bill you are referring to does not result in confiscation of existing snakes. It applies to imports and interstate movement, not to the possession of animals within a state. In addition, animals could continue to be imported and moved across state lines for zoological, educational, medical and scientific purposes with a federal permit.

I realize we won't see eye to eye on this, but I did want to atleast give you my two cents :)

[ryanh]

The HSUS does not simply "fight to make stronger laws so that the people abusing those animals can be charged". There is nothing abusive IMO in allowing individuals the freedom to have pets - the banning of which is clearly the defacto mission of the HSUS. There is plenty enough information out there on the net to show what HSUS is really about. Sure, they do some good things, but I do not believe those come close to outweighing the bad, nor will I ever feel comfortable with an entity that fools people into thinking its donations do something other than the stated objectives. I’ve seen enough to understand the organization is PETA-like in its goals and desires.

How someone could represent to be LDS, but then at the same time support an organization that seeks to force it's extreme views on society is beyond me. Reminds me of scriptures warning of those that forbid the use of meat for eating.

Edited November 13, 2009 by ryanh

[boyando]

Let's stir the pot a little more, with this form the Huffington Post (I tried to get the video but wasn't looking in the right places).

Glenn Beck and the organization PETA make strange bedfellows, but they've found a common cause to rally around: criticizing Al Gore for hypocrisy because he is an environmentalist who eats meat.

Ingrid Newkirk, founder and president of PETA, joined a delighted Glenn Beck tonight to rip Gore as a "steakaholic" and a "baby" who is betraying his own movement:

You can give in your SUV. You can trade it away. You can change your lightbulbs, these are the things he suggests. You can shower with a friend, but it's still not enough if you continue to eat meat...

He says it's very hard for him to go vegetarian. He's admitted that, and I think he's basically a steakaholic, and he needs to stop being a baby and just decide.

Beck is quick declare that he does not agree with a single thing that PETA stands for, but he nonetheless respects them because they're one of the only two organizations he finds "consistent, they don't play the Washington game... They just mean what they say and say what they mean." (The other organization he respects in this way is, of course, the NRA.)

[Guest]

The reptile bill you are referring to does not result in confiscation of existing snakes. It applies to imports and interstate movement, not to the possession of animals within a state. In addition, animals could continue to be imported and moved across state lines for zoological, educational, medical and scientific purposes with a federal permit.

I realize we won't see eye to eye on this, but I did want to atleast give you my two cents :)

Sara, this naive statement is the frustration we have with HSUS. You may not realize the impact of such a statement, but HSUS SURELY DOES.

What do you think that means = restriction of interstate trade of certain species of pythons???

You just said it - those who have one can keep theirs... BUT YOU CAN'T GET NEW ONES! So, 20 years from now... say BYE BYE TO PYTHON PETS!

Right now, without the legislation, if you want a burmese python for a pet, you have 3 choices - get one from a local unknown bedroom-breeder, get one from PetSmart/PetCo/and the like, or get one from reputable breeders like BHB Reptiles. Now, without the legislation in play, what do you think is the BEST source for your new pet? Here are the options again:

1.) local unknown bedroom-breeder. You don't know if the pet is well-taken cared of, you don't know if the pet is what it is represented as, etc. etc. They probably won't ask you for your permit to own one. They probably are going to pass it on as a ball python or something! They just might not even care to teach you how to take care of the thing. Reptiles are not like dogs or cats. They're not available everywhere!

2.) Your local reptile stores. If you know anything about reptiles, you will be very careful to buy from these sources. I bought a ball python from my local reptile store, took it home, and ended up with a $200 vet bill the week after. They are not the best caretakers of these pets. Besides, you'll be hard-pressed to find one in your town. And, by the way, their stock comes from big breeders, usually out of state!

3.) BHB Reptiles, etc. - These are the guys who have been breeding reptiles for years and years. They are the experts at them. They are the ones who provide care for their animals beyond the sale transaction. They are the ones who are enthusiasts for the hobby who will fight for the welfare of these reptiles. They are the ones who teach new owners responsible pet ownership. They are the ones who will tell you that a burmese python will get to 18 feet long and tell you exactly what that means for you and what you need to do before you can own one of those!

Now, personally, I would buy from BHB and their counterparts. It's the best thing for pet ownership. But of course, I'm in Florida while BHB is in Michigan! You ban interstate trade you might as well KILL PYTHON PET OWNERSHIP! Because even BHB will not be able to keep their doors open selling pythons to Michigan residents only! These things are not like appliances that make tons of money for each unit!

So, you're left with Joe-Moe down the road with 2 pythons he put together in the same enclosure and came up with new baby snakes he doesn't know what to do with. Pretty soon, pythons get a bad name for getting out of their enclosures without supervision, escaping to the everglades!

Now, where exactly in HR 2811 can you say that HSUS SUPPORTS PET OWNERSHIP?

Please, enlighten me.

And this is the thing, Sara. HSUS starts really small - in pets that not many people care about. Like pregnant pigs in Florida. And just like what HSUS says in that article - they "GET THEIR FOOT IN THE DOOR"... to go on to bigger and bigger things like HR 669. And you, from your statements in this thread, are clueless to the agenda! You just nod and not realize what your post truly means!

Edited November 13, 2009 by anatess