-
Hello!
Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.
Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....
Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.
Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.
HSUS - Follow the money!
- Thread starter kathylove
- Start date
kathylove
Pragmatic & Logical
I have been disgusted with the group for quite a while...
and once they came out with their book "Reptiles as Pets", (ostensibly a book for new reptile keepers, but actually put out to discourage the idea of keeping reptiles in captivity) Bill and I wrote up our take on the group and posted it here, on my site:
http://cornutopia.com/Corn Utopia on the Web/- LURKING ENEMY Cornutopia corn snakes cornsnakes.htm
Years ago, when I first heard about the fact that they didn't support local humane society shelters, I could hardly believe it. So I called my local shelter, and they confirmed it. The national society (HSUS) is only interested in extracting money under false pretenses in order to advance their radical agenda, which includes EVENTUALLY putting an end to ALL pets (and any other use or interaction with animals), and this includes cats and dogs.
If you know of ANY animal lover of ANY kind who sends money to them, please try to set them straight - they are the enemy of anyone who wants to continue to have a pet dog, cat, reptile, or anything else. And they will use your donations against you (if you are a pet owner).
and once they came out with their book "Reptiles as Pets", (ostensibly a book for new reptile keepers, but actually put out to discourage the idea of keeping reptiles in captivity) Bill and I wrote up our take on the group and posted it here, on my site:
http://cornutopia.com/Corn Utopia on the Web/- LURKING ENEMY Cornutopia corn snakes cornsnakes.htm
Years ago, when I first heard about the fact that they didn't support local humane society shelters, I could hardly believe it. So I called my local shelter, and they confirmed it. The national society (HSUS) is only interested in extracting money under false pretenses in order to advance their radical agenda, which includes EVENTUALLY putting an end to ALL pets (and any other use or interaction with animals), and this includes cats and dogs.
If you know of ANY animal lover of ANY kind who sends money to them, please try to set them straight - they are the enemy of anyone who wants to continue to have a pet dog, cat, reptile, or anything else. And they will use your donations against you (if you are a pet owner).
LBoz
Original Curmudgeon
What an awesome quote...I think I'm going to link this to FB. Kathy, it was YOUR response to HSUS that made me realize what a farce the organization is. When you hear HS, you automatically think good things. I had no idea that there was such a dichotomy between the local shelters and the HSUS. Thank you for putting that on your site. It was quite the eye opener.
Michael823
New member
Yes I agree, thanks for the info Kathy. I assumed the HSUS was a larger collection that funded the smaller Humane Societies, but to know that they don't makes me sick. I'm sure everyone that gives them donations feels they're money will in turn support their local HS, and how terrible seeing they actually need the money.
kathylove
Pragmatic & Logical
Although I am totally against their anti pet agenda, I think the worst betrayal is that most of their donations probably come from misguided pet owners who think their money will help cats, dogs, and other pets. Little do they know that most of their hard earned money is going to fund legislation that will try to do away with owning pets! If only they knew, donations would really slow to a trickle, and would come only from those who agree with their extremist views. And that is as it should be.
Caryl
BrightHope
You're so right, Kathy. I was once one of those misguided folks.... I've adopted a number of pets from local shelters over the years, and as a teenager I sent some donations to HSUS. They weren't much, but I regretted every penny when I found out what the organization is REALLY about.
snakemom1961
Spring is here!
While I'm sure my daughters will continue to volunteer at our local shelter. I will make sure they know what HSUS truly is about and start telling all their friends and aquaintances. This disgusts me that an organization could take money from people who truly care for animals and use it to go against those people is hideous!
Is there any campaign we can get going to enlighten people and get the word out?
Is there any campaign we can get going to enlighten people and get the word out?
kathylove
Pragmatic & Logical
I wish that local humane societies across the country would speak up. But I suspect that because HSUS DOES occasionally grant some money to local groups for specific reasons (such as a natural disaster), they are probably afraid to rock the boat, lest they lose even that pittance.
If every local shelter could advertise as to whether they receive any funding from any national humane group, and if so, approx. how much of their operating budget it funds, it would really help. Basically, they should be saying "donate to your LOCAL shelter, because your donation to ANY national humane group does little or nothing to directly help us." If anyone has any influence over their local shelters, and can get them to do that, it would help educate people, and get donations to where they would actually do some good.
If anyone here goes to other animal forums (cats, dogs, whatever), or has friends and relatives who go to other forums, or belong to other animal clubs, try to get the word out as much as possible. Every donation we can divert from these extremist groups is one less dollar they can use against us.
If every local shelter could advertise as to whether they receive any funding from any national humane group, and if so, approx. how much of their operating budget it funds, it would really help. Basically, they should be saying "donate to your LOCAL shelter, because your donation to ANY national humane group does little or nothing to directly help us." If anyone has any influence over their local shelters, and can get them to do that, it would help educate people, and get donations to where they would actually do some good.
If anyone here goes to other animal forums (cats, dogs, whatever), or has friends and relatives who go to other forums, or belong to other animal clubs, try to get the word out as much as possible. Every donation we can divert from these extremist groups is one less dollar they can use against us.
It's a con certainly, but it's not terrorism. That's the game they would play, saying it's 'slavery' to keep a dog for a pet.
Didn't someone from these boards get fired or sort of 'pushed out' by the small local HS for criticizing HSUS? I can't remember who it was..
kathylove
Pragmatic & Logical
These groups are our true enemies...
I was really disappointed that the Nature Conservancy is among them. The others did not surprise me at all. (Yes, this was released prior to the temporary knock down of HR 669 - but I understand it is being rewritten and will be resurrected soon!)
Do whatever you can to dry up their money source of donations and support:
Joint Statement of Defenders of Wildlife, Great Lakes United, Humane Society International, The Humane Society of the United States, International Fund for Animal Welfare, National Audubon Society, National Environmental Coalition on Invasive Species, Natural Areas Association, National Wildlife Refuge Association,
The Nature Conservancy, and Union of Concerned Scientists For the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife House Natural Resources Committee
April 23, 2009 on H.R. 669
In Support of H.R. 669, the Nonnative Wildlife Invasion Prevention Act our organizations, representing millions of constituents across the country, come together in support of H.R. 669, the Nonnative Wildlife Invasion Prevention Act. We applaud Congresswoman Madeleine Bordallo for her leadership in introducing this bill, and express our appreciation to the 25 current cosponsors.
H.R. 669 is urgently needed because hundreds of millions of nonnative wild animals are imported and traded in the United States every year, with little oversight, despite potential harm to the economy, the environment, public health and safety, and animal welfare. Under the current Lacey Act process, a species can be declared “injurious,” which prohibits imports and interstate commerce, but this process typically takes years and occurs after substantial damage has been done. Once a nonnative species has become
established, removing the animals is extremely costly and may be impossible, and the methods used may be inhumane.
H.R. 669 takes a proactive approach to address these concerns. It will establish a process for evaluating nonnative wildlife species based on scientific information, with public input, to determine if they should be approved or not approved for importation and interstate commerce. This process would take several years to implement, during which time there would be no restrictions on trade, and all stakeholders would have the opportunity to participate in the process.
The legislation addresses the trade in wildlife. Domesticated animals, such as cats, dogs, rabbits, goldfish, horses, and other species added by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would be exempt from the evaluation process. As a result of these exceptions, much of the pet trade will be unaffected by the bill.
For clarity, we recommend adding domesticated hamsters, gerbils, guinea pigs, ferrets, and other domesticated species common in the pet trade to the list of exempt species in the bill to remove any doubt about whether they would be added later. We emphasize that the list of exempted species does not mean that all non-exempt species will be prohibited under H.R. 669. The non-exempt species will be assessed for risk, and species that are found not to be risky based on the Fish and Wildlife Service’s evaluation will be approved for importation.
H.R. 669 also includes a grandfather provision so that people will know that they can keep their pets, even if the species later gets classified as not approved for importation.
While there will be costs to implement H.R. 669, the costs of not acting would be substantially greater, as cash-strapped communities and natural area managers would have to spend millions of dollars to attempt to control introduced species. If the United States had H.R. 669 in place previously, damaging and costly invasions such as Burmese pythons, red lionfish, northern snakehead fish, and the Gambian rats that caused the 2003 multistate monkeypox outbreak could have been prevented.
Our respective organizations may offer further comments and suggestions. We welcome the opportunity to work with the Subcommittee to improve the bill and move it to passage.
For more information, please contact: Peter T. Jenkins, Director of International Conservation, Defenders of Wildlife, 202-682-9400 or pjenkins@[url ban]
I was really disappointed that the Nature Conservancy is among them. The others did not surprise me at all. (Yes, this was released prior to the temporary knock down of HR 669 - but I understand it is being rewritten and will be resurrected soon!)
Do whatever you can to dry up their money source of donations and support:
Joint Statement of Defenders of Wildlife, Great Lakes United, Humane Society International, The Humane Society of the United States, International Fund for Animal Welfare, National Audubon Society, National Environmental Coalition on Invasive Species, Natural Areas Association, National Wildlife Refuge Association,
The Nature Conservancy, and Union of Concerned Scientists For the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife House Natural Resources Committee
April 23, 2009 on H.R. 669
In Support of H.R. 669, the Nonnative Wildlife Invasion Prevention Act our organizations, representing millions of constituents across the country, come together in support of H.R. 669, the Nonnative Wildlife Invasion Prevention Act. We applaud Congresswoman Madeleine Bordallo for her leadership in introducing this bill, and express our appreciation to the 25 current cosponsors.
H.R. 669 is urgently needed because hundreds of millions of nonnative wild animals are imported and traded in the United States every year, with little oversight, despite potential harm to the economy, the environment, public health and safety, and animal welfare. Under the current Lacey Act process, a species can be declared “injurious,” which prohibits imports and interstate commerce, but this process typically takes years and occurs after substantial damage has been done. Once a nonnative species has become
established, removing the animals is extremely costly and may be impossible, and the methods used may be inhumane.
H.R. 669 takes a proactive approach to address these concerns. It will establish a process for evaluating nonnative wildlife species based on scientific information, with public input, to determine if they should be approved or not approved for importation and interstate commerce. This process would take several years to implement, during which time there would be no restrictions on trade, and all stakeholders would have the opportunity to participate in the process.
The legislation addresses the trade in wildlife. Domesticated animals, such as cats, dogs, rabbits, goldfish, horses, and other species added by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would be exempt from the evaluation process. As a result of these exceptions, much of the pet trade will be unaffected by the bill.
For clarity, we recommend adding domesticated hamsters, gerbils, guinea pigs, ferrets, and other domesticated species common in the pet trade to the list of exempt species in the bill to remove any doubt about whether they would be added later. We emphasize that the list of exempted species does not mean that all non-exempt species will be prohibited under H.R. 669. The non-exempt species will be assessed for risk, and species that are found not to be risky based on the Fish and Wildlife Service’s evaluation will be approved for importation.
H.R. 669 also includes a grandfather provision so that people will know that they can keep their pets, even if the species later gets classified as not approved for importation.
While there will be costs to implement H.R. 669, the costs of not acting would be substantially greater, as cash-strapped communities and natural area managers would have to spend millions of dollars to attempt to control introduced species. If the United States had H.R. 669 in place previously, damaging and costly invasions such as Burmese pythons, red lionfish, northern snakehead fish, and the Gambian rats that caused the 2003 multistate monkeypox outbreak could have been prevented.
Our respective organizations may offer further comments and suggestions. We welcome the opportunity to work with the Subcommittee to improve the bill and move it to passage.
For more information, please contact: Peter T. Jenkins, Director of International Conservation, Defenders of Wildlife, 202-682-9400 or pjenkins@[url ban]
ForkedTung
Serpent Mound Monk
Hmmmm. I wonder why they left the most coveted and widespread non-domestic ( geographically) animals out of this bill?
I have a cat ( indoor) but had outdoor cats for years until I found out how much damage they can inflict on the living environment...not to mention everyday dog attacks...I have one of those too...
Thanks for the info. and update Kathy!
Hypancistrus
New member
And if you are at all educated in fisheries science, you know that GOLDFISH are among the most widespread invasives... I distinctly remember going through a former trout stream with a backpack shocker and getting only goldfish-- they had been introduced and churned up the water, ruining it for trout... so why again are they on the "okay" list?? Oh, yeah... because this is step 1... if it passes, you can bet your bottom dollar they will eventually go after the throat.....
Is HR 669 back on the table or is this an old blurb?
And I'm with you Kathy, the HSUS is a lying sack of dung unworthy of any time or attention. It's amazing how many people are naieve enough to believe their propaganda.
Is HR 669 back on the table or is this an old blurb?
And I'm with you Kathy, the HSUS is a lying sack of dung unworthy of any time or attention. It's amazing how many people are naieve enough to believe their propaganda.
kathylove
Pragmatic & Logical
Yes, from what I understand, feral cats, hogs, and goldfish are among the worst offenders as being invasive. That they are on the "clean" list is pure politics and has nothing to do with science.
It is an old release, but I just found it on another forum. HR 669 is not back YET (AFAIK), but was supposedly going to be rewritten this month and introduced again. The reason that I posted this NOW is not so much to inform about HR 669, but to inform as to which organizations supported it, and are therefore our enemies. We need to try to do anything we can to discourage friends, relatives, and anyone else we can to avoid supporting these groups in any way.
I don't have MONEY to fight these groups, but I will use any influence I have with ANYONE to dry up their sources of revenue and any other support possible.
It is an old release, but I just found it on another forum. HR 669 is not back YET (AFAIK), but was supposedly going to be rewritten this month and introduced again. The reason that I posted this NOW is not so much to inform about HR 669, but to inform as to which organizations supported it, and are therefore our enemies. We need to try to do anything we can to discourage friends, relatives, and anyone else we can to avoid supporting these groups in any way.
I don't have MONEY to fight these groups, but I will use any influence I have with ANYONE to dry up their sources of revenue and any other support possible.
carol
Down with the sickness
Article Not Available
The story you are trying to view is no longer available through this Web site.
Yep.
You know last August when we went to the Humane Society to adopt Abby they almost didn't let us adopt her. We had one other cat that was already an outside stray when we adopted her. We tried letting her in the house but she sprayed even though she was fixed and a girl. So we gave up on trying to make her a house cat. When they heard about this they told us we were terrible people and didn't want us adopting a kitten only to throw it out if it peed in the house.
They grilled us on what we would do if she started spraying and I said I'd probably buy a pen to put her in when I couldn't watch her. They proceed to tell me that was cruel even though they had dozens of cats right behind them in pens. Abbys was only a 3x3x3 cube. So somehow putting a cat in a pen just when it's not supervised is worse than a cat living it's whole life in a pen, or being put down? :nope:
kathylove
Pragmatic & Logical
There was a video...
but there was also a summary, along with it. Here is the summary:
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/19463509/detail.html (no longer available)
Where Humane Society Donations Really Go
Posted: 4:03 pm EDT May 14, 2009Updated: 4:20 pm EDT May 14, 2009
ATLANTA -- A Channel 2 investigation is looking into millions of dollars in donations given to the Humane Society of the United States.
A national consumer organization says the society solicits pet-lovers for money, but little to none of that money ever goes to help local shelters.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
WEB EXTRA: Humane Society Statement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critics tell Channel 2 Action News reporter Amanda Rosseter that this isn't just consumers misunderstanding who they are giving to -- but an organization actively misleading donors to get money.
“They do their marketing very well, that's for sure,” said Trey Burley of PAWS Atlanta.
Critics say the national organization takes advantage of people who think they are giving to local shelters. DeKalb's "PAWS" shelter says there is no regular funding help from the $100 million HSUS budget.
“I think that some of the folks who donate to the national organization may be under the false pretense that that money is going to a local cause,” said Burley.
While the HSUS does work to stop puppy mills, it also gets media coverage and donations doing it. But the puppies then go to local shelters who have to pay and care for them.
“They may initialize the resources for a rescue, but again the animals go to a shelter somewhere in the country,” said Richard Rice, VP of the Atlanta Humane Society.
Critics said HSUS also takes advantage of high-profile events. After hurricane Katrina, HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle promised on national TV to reunite pets with their owners -- and raised $34 million for the cause. But public disclosures of where that money went add up to less than $7 million.
The Louisiana attorney general launched an 18-month-long investigation, and then ended it, when HSUS offered to build the state a new shelter.
The HSUS annual report for 2007 showed $120 million in revenue, including $5.4 million just from online donors.
Then there's $112 million in expenses -- most of which appears to have gone to legislation for animal rights bills. The list includes raccoons, mice, wild horses, burros and primates.
The center for consumer freedom says all worthy causes, but HSUS shouldn't mislead to get money.
So where does all the money go?
“It goes to lobbying, it goes to political contributions, it doesn’t go to pay huge staff salaries and benefits," said David Marposko with Center for Consumer Freedom.
Channel 2 Action News went to a local HSUS meeting to find out. The two hour discussion was about activist plans and lobbying. The Georgia director for the HSUS agrees that's mostly what she does.
“I think that in all of our literature, it is very explicit as to what our campaigns are and what we are doing,” said Cheryl McAuliffe, Georgia Director for HSUS. “We help where we can and focus on our programs, which are national and international.”
McAuliffe said there are just too many local shelters to help.
“I always tell people, contribute to your local shelter first,” said McAuliffe.
When asked how much her budget is for the state of Georgia, McAuliffe said she didn't have a budget and neither did other states. McAuliffe said all money is controlled from headquarters in Washington, D.C.
(NOTE: it does say this is a HSUS statement, and it does seem a little milder than the actual video was).
but there was also a summary, along with it. Here is the summary:
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/19463509/detail.html (no longer available)
Where Humane Society Donations Really Go
Posted: 4:03 pm EDT May 14, 2009Updated: 4:20 pm EDT May 14, 2009
ATLANTA -- A Channel 2 investigation is looking into millions of dollars in donations given to the Humane Society of the United States.
A national consumer organization says the society solicits pet-lovers for money, but little to none of that money ever goes to help local shelters.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
WEB EXTRA: Humane Society Statement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critics tell Channel 2 Action News reporter Amanda Rosseter that this isn't just consumers misunderstanding who they are giving to -- but an organization actively misleading donors to get money.
“They do their marketing very well, that's for sure,” said Trey Burley of PAWS Atlanta.
Critics say the national organization takes advantage of people who think they are giving to local shelters. DeKalb's "PAWS" shelter says there is no regular funding help from the $100 million HSUS budget.
“I think that some of the folks who donate to the national organization may be under the false pretense that that money is going to a local cause,” said Burley.
While the HSUS does work to stop puppy mills, it also gets media coverage and donations doing it. But the puppies then go to local shelters who have to pay and care for them.
“They may initialize the resources for a rescue, but again the animals go to a shelter somewhere in the country,” said Richard Rice, VP of the Atlanta Humane Society.
Critics said HSUS also takes advantage of high-profile events. After hurricane Katrina, HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle promised on national TV to reunite pets with their owners -- and raised $34 million for the cause. But public disclosures of where that money went add up to less than $7 million.
The Louisiana attorney general launched an 18-month-long investigation, and then ended it, when HSUS offered to build the state a new shelter.
The HSUS annual report for 2007 showed $120 million in revenue, including $5.4 million just from online donors.
Then there's $112 million in expenses -- most of which appears to have gone to legislation for animal rights bills. The list includes raccoons, mice, wild horses, burros and primates.
The center for consumer freedom says all worthy causes, but HSUS shouldn't mislead to get money.
So where does all the money go?
“It goes to lobbying, it goes to political contributions, it doesn’t go to pay huge staff salaries and benefits," said David Marposko with Center for Consumer Freedom.
Channel 2 Action News went to a local HSUS meeting to find out. The two hour discussion was about activist plans and lobbying. The Georgia director for the HSUS agrees that's mostly what she does.
“I think that in all of our literature, it is very explicit as to what our campaigns are and what we are doing,” said Cheryl McAuliffe, Georgia Director for HSUS. “We help where we can and focus on our programs, which are national and international.”
McAuliffe said there are just too many local shelters to help.
“I always tell people, contribute to your local shelter first,” said McAuliffe.
When asked how much her budget is for the state of Georgia, McAuliffe said she didn't have a budget and neither did other states. McAuliffe said all money is controlled from headquarters in Washington, D.C.
(NOTE: it does say this is a HSUS statement, and it does seem a little milder than the actual video was).