How sad that PETA would actually kill animals in the guise of saving them! –Kim
Put your donations to work LOCALLY at No-Kill shelters and rescues, where pets have needs! –Kim
There's GOT to be a better way! –Kim
PETA is in the news...again. –Kim
While we're talking numbers, I should mention Shelby's 2011 live release rate for creatures other than dogs and cats (rabbits, etc.): a sterling 99.5%. This is a relatively small category – just a handful of animals – but I'm one of those people who believes that even a single rabbit matters. And in this category, PETA managed a live release rate of 7%. (For the mathematically challenged, that means that in 2011, 93% of these animals did not survive their visit to PETA's headquarters in Norfolk.)
I looked into Allison's Gourmet, by the way, to determine just how much a basket of their vegan delicacies would set you back. This is not to suggest that the company is complicit in this revolting display: They seem like sincere people who genuinely care about animals; I like to think they had no idea that their product was being used as a prize for killing pets.Oh, and Shelby officials have decided to discontinue the shock tactic of threatening that animals will be killed if homes aren't found. This is a welcome decision. Of course the most important thing is to stop killing, but it's also crucial to point out that PETA's vicious practice is not even an option. It is not something you contemplate, much less threaten. The decent citizens of Shelby do not kill dogs and cats for this simple reason: They are not the kind of people who butcher pets.
Here's a great article that I thought I would pass on...hope you find it interesting! –Kim
People who support PETA, even after they learn about their mass killing and embrace of abusive shelters, don't love animals and they know it. They may claim they do. They may have Facebook pages filled with animal images and stickers with animal related messages on their car. But they don't. For such people, a misplaced trust and need to identify with PETA is more important than the professed values that presumably led them to support PETA in the first place. In fact, it is more important than the animals themselves because they are willing to embrace the suffering and death of animals so long as that suffering and death is caused by PETA or the "shelters" PETA defends.After about 10 minutes, desperation fueled by cognitive dissonance kicks in. Because so much of who you are, your identity as "superior" to everyone else is wrapped up in PETA and you've just discovered that PETA kills animals, you start to feel defensive and are desperate for a means to prove that what I am saying isn't true. So after the personal attack, you'll come back with another comment, this time demanding proof. Of course, PETA death statistics are from PETA itself. And PETA has admitted to killing animals who are, in their own words, "healthy, "adoptable," "perfect," and "adorable." And here is a postcard your idol Ingrid Newkirk herself wrote to me admitting that PETA does not support "right to life for animals."
right that matters, but what is right. And PETA's killing and defense of killing is wrong no matter what other forms of animal abuse exist. You are defending PETA's killing and embrace of even abusive shelters because cows and chickens are being killed by someone else. How does that make any sense? Incidentally, I am, in fact, vegan and have been for over 20 years: www.allamericanvegan.com.
Here's a great article that I thought I would pass on...hope you find it inspiring! –Kim
As I drove into the parking lot for the first time as the agency's new chief, I was met at the front door by a truck driver with five kittens he didn't want. Spaying his cat was not a priority.To him, the kittens were no longer "his problem." Whether they lived, died, or anything in between was not his business. By handing them over to us, in his estimation he had done his duty. He had brought them to the Tompkins County SPCA, the animal control authority for the entire county, and they were now our responsibility.
For most shelters, this is the point at which the breakdown that leads to killing occurs. The current view is that killing the kittens is, in large part, a fait accompli, and that the fault for the killing belonged to the truck driver at the front door. It was his failure to spay his cat, his failure to make a lifetime commitment to the kittens. But this view, while endemic to the culture of animal control, is not accurate.First, it is because of this irresponsibility that shelters exist in the first place. Second, it is often the practices of the shelter itself that lead to killing. If a shelter does not maintain adequate adoption hours or has poor customer service, refuses to work with volunteers, foster parents, or rescue groups, fails to treat and rehabilitate sick, injured, or traumatized animals, or does not offer TNR as an option, the shelter is not doing much to prevent killing.... These problems plague shelters nationwide, and the Tompkins County SPCA was no exception.Thankfully, on June 11, 2001, the truck driver did not live in a community whose shelter still subscribed to those views. On that day, the Tompkins County SPCA explicitly rejected the policies legitimized and championed by most shelters nationwide. Having been director of operations for the most successful SPCA in the country, I knew what worked and what didn't work. Clearly, killing those kittens was not going to be an option. Not surprisingly, we found all of them homes…Like so many shelters with animal control contracts, the Tompkins County SPCA had relied on the fiction that the only solution to the influx of homeless animals was killing. Staff would shake their heads and continue to blame "irresponsible owners" for the fact that so many animals would go out the door in body bags rather than in the loving arms of families. Like so many other shelters, the team that made up the Tompkins County SPCA upon my arrival never once saw the killing as its own failure to find solutions, meet its real mandate to be an animal welfare organization, or live up to the very real but often ignored shelter credo that "every life is precious."
The Humane Society of the United States' (HSUS) favorite misnomer "euthanasia" has lost its cache. Rescue groups and animal advocates have stopped using it and other HSUS euphemisms such as "putting them to sleep" to describe the abhorrent practice of systematic shelter killing. People are more aware of widespread mistreatment of animals in shelters. And they are less tolerant of the poor care and the killing, the excuses built up over the decades to justify it, and the legitimacy that groups like HSUS give to it. This has put the large national humane groups on the defensive, trying to take credit for the decline in killing nationally even as they opposed and in some cases continue to oppose the programs responsible for it, and by softening their anti-No Kill positions.[The No Kill movement] debunks the myth of pet overpopulation and puts the blame for the killing where it belongs: on the shoulders of the very shelter directors who find killing easier than doing what is necessary to stop it, on the local governments who continue to underfund their shelters or place them under the regressive oversight of health and police departments (and even under sanitation!), and on shelter managers who protect uncaring and even cruel staff members at the expense of the animals.More than all of that, average people are now aware that shelters kill. And they are aware that there are some shelters and communities that do not kill. [...As] one animal lover in Los Angeles, California, told me: "At least now we know what – or more accurately, who – the problem is." We also know how to make them stop. And in more communities nationwide, we have.
All I did was to create the framework in which they could do so – and ensured that staff supported, rather than impeded, those efforts. Volunteers not only helped us care for, adopt out, and place the legions of kittens and puppies who made their way to the shelter every spring and summer, they helped us save blind pets, pets missing limbs, animals hit by cars, and those with behavior problems.The animals who came to us also found homes because we were supported just as passionately by the public: adopters who took home older pets with special impediments because they believed in our lifesaving mission, donors who helped us double the average gift, and the media who told our story 406 times in one year alone.
Here's some important information that I thought I would pass on. –Kim
PETA Kills 86% of Animals in Their Care
By Dr. Andrew Jones
November 24, 2011
The animal rights group PETA is often in the news with flashy billboards, naked celebrities and pretty dramatic claims.
But now there are documented reports that PETA kills most of the animals in their care. A group called, 'PETA Kills Animals' cites figures self-reported by the animal charity showing since 1998 it euthanized more than 25,000 pets; nearly 86% of the animals in their so called 'shelter.'
In 2010, PETA managed to place only 44 of the 2,345 pets which were in their care. By comparison, a close by Virginia Beach SPCA has a tiny budget; yet it adopted MOST of the animals in their care.
PETA's 2010 revenues were more than $35 million – with that you would think they would keep most of the animals in their care alive.
P.S. The basic principle of living with integrity is to 'practice what you preach.' Clearly PETA doesn't abide by that life rule.
My suggestion is to NOT support this organization. Your time and dollars are much better spent on a local (no-kill) animal shelter, which is giving animals a second chance, and placing them in forever, loving homes.
P.P.S. Of course there are times when the 'live with integrity' principle can get you into hot water.... I could still be practicing if I had compromised some beliefs. But in the long run, it's always better to do what you believe is true.
Source: http://www.theinternetpetvet.com/peta-killing-86-animals-care/
Copyright © Four Paws Online Ltd. 2011
Dr. Andrew Jones, DVM has been a practicing Veterinarian for almost 20 years. He is a strong advocate of Natural Pet Health Care, and knows that the most important way to heal our pets and prevent disease is through proper nutrition. He developed Ultimate Canine to give our dogs that extra advantage – something that will provide them with everything they need to develop stronger immune systems to fight disease, heal sore or stiff joints, and help them live longer, happier lives. Dr. Andrew Jones' main focus is on alternative, non-traditional remedies for pets. His interest in alternative pet medicine culminated in the writing of his book, Veterinary Secrets Revealed.
Here's a revealing article that I thought I would pass on...hope you find it informative! –Kim
Still the Same Old Hidden Agenda
April 20, 2010
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is a "humane society" in name only. It isn't affiliated with any hands-on "humane society" organizations, and it doesn't operate a single pet shelter or pet adoption facility anywhere. During 2008, HSUS contributed barely $450,000 – less than one-half of one percent of its budget – in grants to dog and cat shelters. In 2009, HSUS took in $100 million but made only six grants to Missouri pet shelters, totaling less than $43,000, according to its filings with the IRS. By comparison, that same year it gave $2.25 million to a political campaign committee behind an anti-meat ballot initiative in California, and put $2.5 million into HSUS's executive pension plan. HSUS is the wealthiest animal-rights lobbying organization on earth. It agitates for the same goals as PETA and other radical groups, but uses fewer naked interns.HSUS raised $34 million in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, supposedly to help reunite lost pets with their owners. But comparatively little of that money was spent for its intended purpose. Louisiana's Attorney General shuttered his 18-month-long investigation into where most of these millions went, shortly after HSUS announced its plan to contribute $600,000 toward the construction of an animal shelter on the grounds of a state prison. In 2009, Atlanta ABC affiliate WSB-TV reported that public disclosures of the disposition of the $34 million in Katrina-related donations added up to less than $7 million.
Here's a great article that I thought I would pass on...hope you find it interesting! –Kim
The Myth of the Humane Society of the United States
Feb. 4, 2010
By: John Dillard University of Richmond Law School
I recently viewed a commercial for the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). It contained footage of pets suffering from abuse. The footage of dirty cats with split ears to dogs visibly suffering from neglect and malnourishment was intended to tug at the heartstrings of anyone with half a heart. In addition to the animal footage, the commercial featured the lady from Just Shoot Me asking the viewers to commit to a $19 monthly pledge to help save these animals from abuse and neglect. The funds raised by the ad campaign would ostensibly be used to fund animal rescue efforts and animal adoption services.
For less than a dollar a day, it seems like a common sense move for a pet lover with disposable income to contribute to the HSUS. Who doesn't like the idea of an organization dedicated to rescuing animals from neglect?
There is one minor detail left out of these commercials. The Humane Society of the United States is not a large network of animal shelters, as it would have you to believe. In fact, the HSUS does not own, operate, or lease a single animal shelter in our country. Instead, it is primarily a special interest lobby that is clever and shrewd enough to capitalize on the good name of local "humane societies" which actually do the good work of taking in strays and finding suitable adoptive homes for unwanted pets.
While most local animal shelters scrimp and scrape to collect enough funds to cover overhead, the HSUS has a healthy budget of well over $100 million. According to their most recent annual report (2008), $6.7 million, or 5.4% of their $125 million budget was spent on animal shelters. The bulk of the balance was spent on fundraising, campaigns, lawsuits, propaganda, and those people that stand outside the D.C. Metro who stop you and ask "Do you have a minute to talk about saving animals?"
2008 HSUS Expenditures Deception notwithstanding, the HSUS has cornered the market on the animal rights movement. It has wrestled the lead in the animal rights world from PETA and does not appear likely to give it back. PETA is highly visible, yet it is destined for the fringe due to its radical approach. Throwing red paint on fur coats or having B-list bombshells pose nude save a few leaves of lettuce is sure to garner attention, but it is not enough to open the hearts and wallets of middle America. To be sure, HSUS shares the same goals as PETA, namely the eradication of animal agriculture in the United States. However, HSUS learned valuable lessons from PETA's radical approach, thus we have the lady from Just Shoot Me pleading for donations.
The HSUS' calculated approach is largely successful. Unable to gain traction in state legislatures and Congress, it has taken to ballot measures and referendums. This method of legislation suits their mass-appeal approach much better than lobbying legislators who must analyze facts and balance the interests of their constituents. HSUS can frame the issue and develop a campaign that gives the casual voter an impression that voting "Yes" on a ballot initiative is the right thing to do. This was the case with California 2008's Proposition 2.
Proposition 2, widely overshadowed by Proposition 8, was a ballot initiative that would impact animal husbandry practices for swine, poultry and dairy farms, with most of the burden resting on egg layers and pork producers. HSUS poured millions into PR for the ballot initiative and attracted the support of all manners of celebrity, including a special on Ellen. The measure passed with 63% of the vote and will take effect in 2015. HSUS declared it a resounding victory and vows to move on to the next battle.
Herein lies the problem with the HSUS. As a national lobbying organization with a large war chest, they are able to successfully lobby for mandated changes in animal rearing practices from afar. After their victory, they can pop the champagne and move on to the next adventure. Meanwhile, their targets are left to deal with the consequences. The majority of California egg and pork producers will not change how they raise their animals as a result of Prop 2. Instead, they will cease to raise animals as a result of Prop. 2. California farmers will have to scramble to pay down the millions in debt they owe on expensive, sophisticated and safe housing for animals they will not be able to raise after 2015. California consumers will pay more to have pork and eggs hauled in, increasing the food miles of their breakfast and moving their food dollars further away from their community.
Perhaps, if the Humane Society of the United States used its resources towards the animal shelters it would like you to believe it operates in the communities it seeks to regulate by fiat, there would be a more collaborative and productive dialogue on issues of animal welfare.
Source: http://petpac.net/news/headlines/the_myth_of_the_humane_society_of_the_united_states/
© 2010 PetPAC
Here's a tragic story that I thought I would pass on in hopes that you'll help make a difference! –Kim
"It is time for all of us to lift our voices for those who cannot speak for themselves."
–Gail Longstaff, No More Homeless Pets KC
In New York City, a one-year old dog named Oreo was intentionally thrown off a sixth floor Brooklyn roof top by her abuser. Oreo sustained two broken legs and a fractured rib. Oreo also appears to have been beaten in the past – several of the neighbors in the building where Oreo lived reported hearing the sounds of the dog being hit. The ASPCA nursed her back to health and arrested the perpetrator. They also dubbed her the "miracle dog."
Oreo and Max are not isolated incidents. Nor is Oreo's Law about pit bulls. It is about saving all animals. In fact, NYS shelters routinely turn away rescue groups and then turn around and kill the kittens and cats, puppies, dog, rabbits and other animals those rescue groups are willing to save.For far too long, those running our animal shelters – agencies funded by the philanthropic donations and tax dollars of an animal loving American public – have refused to mirror our values. For far too long, they have assumed a power and authority to act independent of public opinion, and the will of the people who have entrusted them to do their jobs with compassion, dedication and integrity. In betraying this trust, they have proven that they can't be trusted, and that we must regulate them in the same way we regulate other agencies which hold the power of life and death: by removing the discretion which has for too long allowed them to thwart the public's will and to kill animals who should be saved. Oreo's Law, thankfully, seeks to do just that. Sadly, we cannot bring Oreo back and give her the second chance the ASPCA denied her. And we will forever remember her killing at the hands of those who were supposed to protect her from further harm as many things: tragic and heartbreaking, chief among them. Nothing can alter that calculus. But we can lessen the futility of Oreo’s death if we learn from it, and alter our society in such a way as to prevent such a betrayal from ever happening again. |
Here's an informative article that I thought I would pass on...hope you find it interesting! –Kim
More and More Americans Know: HSUS Isn't a Pet Shelter Group
May 18, 2010
Unless you've been living under a rock, you're probably aware of our 3-month-old, revitalized HumaneWatch campaign that's exposing the deceptive "Humane Society" of the United States (HSUS) as the PETA-esque animal rights group that it is. Judging from the reaction of HSUS (and its head honcho "Humane Wayne" Pacelle) to our new efforts to keep the group honest, we're having a serious, nationwide impact that threatens HSUS's attempts to continue to masquerade as a pet-shelter umbrella group. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, after all.
Yesterday, we upped the ante with full-page ads in The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal to make sure our message reached millions of Americans. And today we're targeting Hollywood celebrities who lend their star power to this faux humane society with a full-page ad in Tinseltown's must-read magazine, Variety.
You may not know it, but more than 100 celebrities, from Carrie Underwood to Harrison Ford, have aligned themselves in serious ways with HSUS. These stars (and their agents) may not know that HSUS is simply PETA in a suit-and-tie, so we're happy to set the record straight:
You can see all of our HumaneWatch ads here.
PETA (Still) Kills Animals. Lots of 'Em.
March 12, 2010
In 2009 People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) put a few more notches on its belt – 2,301, to be exact. That's how many cats and dogs met their demise at the hands of this radical animal rights group last year, according to PETA's own "Animal Record" filings with the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. That's 97% of the pets that were in PETA's care, the vast majority of which would have been happier as someone's in-home companion than as the latest dog-sicle in PETA's freezer. PETA's kill count is now 23,640 since 1998. As we told the media about PETA's status as a doggy and kitty Grim Reaper:
PETA hasn't slowed down its hypocritical killing machine one bit, but it keeps browbeating the rest of society with a phony 'animal rights' message. PETA is more concerned about funding its advertising and media antics than finding suitable homes for needy cats and dogs.
Since killing pets is A-OK with PETA, why should anyone listen to their demands about eating meat, using lab mice for medical research, or taking children to the circus? Virginia regulators should reclassify PETA's headquarters as a slaughterhouse. This is shockingly unethical behavior.
On Wednesday, CNN host Jack Cafferty asked his blog readers if they agreed that PETA's death squad is indeed hypocrisy. Here's some of what they wrote:
Chris: Perhaps, if PETA spent some of the money they currently throw at celebrities posing nude, on the actual health and well-being (read: placement) of the animals they're allegedly "rescuing," this would not be an issue.
Reynard: PETA is so critical of anyone one [sic] accused of unethical treatment of animals even before due process is granted. For them to have euthanasia rates that are so out-of-sync with other agencies makes me question their ethics.... They should protest outside of their own headquarters.
Jim: Local animal shelters struggle to raise money to provide a valuable service to people and animals. Does PETA? No, they would rather kill adoptable pets and toss them in a dumpster.
Rich: PETA cares more about cutting into their advertising budget than finding homes for the six pets they kill on average, every single day. "Hypocritical" is way too [sic] kind a word for these money-hungry people.
Diane: This is the reason I left PETA 25 years ago. They seem to think dogs and cats have no right to even live. They don't like that we 'use them' as pets.... They would rather kill cats and dogs than allow people to have them as pets.
http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm/h/4126-peta-still-kills-animals-lots-of-em
Copyright © 2010 Center for Consumer Freedom
Unusual Pet Gifts –
Use Coupon Code FREESHIP or SAVE3
Puppy Calendars
with Free Shipping
Homeopathy
Ask a Vet Online
