HSUS Money Machine

Douches. Goddamned douches. The lot of them should be beaten with sticks until it stops hurting.

Although, I have to admit, they have given me a good idea...

*Runs off to register the name "Discovery Institute of the United States"*

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/04/09/

Worthless grifters, just like the PIRGs.

You mean Dumbski? I really don't know why people waste time with Dumbski; time is better spent telling other people what a moron Dumbski is.

I thought these were the good guys compared to PETA; I guess they aren't that great after all. I guess people who want to see local improvement could just donate to local shelters instead, but where should one donate if one wants to see more be done to help animals internationally?

While I think misleading people for donations is bad, and I certainly won't support large salaries and benefits, I'm not sure spending money on lobbying and legislation is a terrible thing in itself. Feel free to educate me, as admittedly I don't really know what I am talking about.

And speaking from complete ignorance, what is wrong with PETA?

Rescued a dog from the humane society one week ago this Saturday. So dogs are heavily on my mind.

Pete-- Humane Society is good. Double plus good! Humane Society shelters are GREAT!

HSUS is really, really bad. They are connected in no way to local Humane Society shelters-- theyve just stolen a trusted name for $$$. They are just a financial front for animal liberation groups-- their 'dog fighting expert' did time for ALF arson. Dont feel bad-- they duped me at first too. Search ERV for 'HSUS' for more :(

I guess people who want to see local improvement could just donate to local shelters instead, but where should one donate if one wants to see more be done to help animals internationally?

Dunno about internationally, but at the national level I'd heartily recommend the ASPCA. (And plenty of other countries have their own SPCAs.) The American Humane Association seems to do good stuff too, though I don't know as much about it.

So the HSUS and the Humane Society aren't the same thing? That's one of the most cunningly insidious things I've heard in a long time. I now finally get Optimus Primate's joke.

Why can't people just do their damn jobs? Could they please worry less about implementing high-falutin' ideals through political maneuvering and implement something real that actually contributes towards their goal of helping animals? If every PETA or Humane Society concentrated on providing for local shelters and spreading awareness of how to better care for your pets, ie not tying them on a short leash or leaving them in your hot car instead of bumping elbows with various politicians over poorly thought out legislation that is impractical, dangerous and doomed, the lot of domestica animals would be a whole lot better.
Same with anti-abortion groups. You care about the unwanted babies? Why don't you start giving some of that lobbying money to orphanages then? Oh, but you don't care about babies or puppies, you care about getting on the news, controlling other people, and running a racket under the guise of public service while not actually doing anything useful. :P /rant

So...there a political organization, who lobbies for animal rights instead of picking up dead puppies by the side of your local freeway? I don't understand how creating more positive legislation in favor of animal rights is a bad thing?

Turielian: Because one thing it's not is "positive legislation". These are radical animal rights types, not anti-cruelty. Wayne Pacelle, head of the HSUS, is on record advocating the extinction of all domesticated animals, particularly farm animals.

Since "animal rights" has developed something of a bad odor, the new phrase is "animal protection". Same soup, different can.

As a zookeeper, who works with more exotic animals, we don't have a big well-funded lobby organization like livestock farmers, and I have spent way too much time and money on legislative battles instead of animal care.

For example, the "Animal Protection Institute", which is another front for the HSUS & PETA crowd, has been pushing an "inherently dangerous animals" law in a variety of state legislatures, which basically tries to ban non-domesticated animals. They try to placate zoos by grandfathering in existing zoos. For example, they exclude any AZA (association of zoos and aquariums)-accredited zoo.

Great, so honest, well-run zoos are excluded, right? Wrong!

What they don't mention to legislators is that, in addition to AZA accreditation standards being deliberately higher than all zoos can meet (just like not everyone who tries can get a PhD), a zoo has to be open to the public for a number of years before it's eligible to apply for AZA accreditation. You can verify both of these facts right off the AZA web site. None of this is the AZA's fault; they never asked to be enshrined in law.

But the effect is that, if this law is passed, no new zoo can ever open in that state. And then it's just a matter of harassing the others one by one until they lose accreditation and have to cease operations. (A bit of targeted vandalism during the scheduled accreditation review will do it very nicely; the reviewers are strict assuming that the zoo "dressed up for court" before they arrived.)

They even manage to get support from some short-sighted zoos who are attracted by the reduction in competition. Divide and conquer is such a useful strategy. That's the reason they go state-by-state, or even county-by-county if they have to.

You can tell when they're working in an area because they have a standard schtick: just before the proposal comes before the legislature, a pair of lion cubs will be found near a busy freeway exit.

Now, they're always a young pair, who will be frightened, stay together, and not wander far. Near an exit is good because people will be going slower and see them. Can't have a lone animal ruin the photo-op by leaving, or an adult do enough damage to get the police seriously interested. But oh! The high-profile news! The danger of irresponsible lion keeping!

(It's not always lions; anything in the general category of "lions and tigers and bears, oh my!" will do nicely.)

Just who would want to abandon a pair of healthy lion cubs worth a few thousand dollars, plus a thick stack of USDA paperwork to obtain legally, is glossed over. The answer, of course, it's that it's better and cheaper publicity than buying advertising space.

As someone who cares deeply about the well-being of animals in the real world, and not some idealized Lion King set that doesn't exist in Africa anymore, I loathe the HSUS with a passion.

Turielian: It's a bad thing when you lie to people. If you imply that the money I give will make sure some sweet dog gets walkies and good food, and then turn around and spend that money buying congress critters fancy dinners, then I'm pissed. And if that sweet dog on the TV has to be euthanized because the shelter didn't have enough money, because I sent my money to HSUS and not the local shelter, then I'm irate.

That's why it's bad.

It's also a bad thing because HSUS is angling for donations from an animal welfare perspective, but it's using the money to push for animal rights legislation.

If you lead me to believe that my donation will go directly to shelter maintenance, and instead you use it for (say) lobbying in favor of legislation to fund shelters, that's bad enough. But if that money goes to a cause to which I may be totally opposed--like lobbying against medical research or vet school surgeries or raising horses for meat--then that's really dishonest.

I wish they would stop their commercials on TV.. the whiney oh-so-phony pleas for $19 a month from the HSUS who EXPLOITS animals for money that is not used to help animals, but to punish animal owners, both good or bad, for daring to keep pets.

I mute their commercials and have been seeking email contacts for networks to complain about the every 10 minute HSUS whines.