The Truth About HSUS from Missourians for Animal Care Coalition
YouTube video
YouTube video 2
Can YOU imagine a life without a pet? The Humane Society of the United States is actively working on laws to make pet ownership a thing of the past. If you support animals, don't support HSUS. Don't be misled by HSUS- they are NOT for animals
Showing posts with label HSUS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label HSUS. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Monday, March 1, 2010
KY: HB 517 seeks to establish an Unconstitutional Forfeiture Bond Bill
Kentucky: HSUS Introduces Unconstitutional Forfeiture Bond Bill
Kentucky House Bill 517 seeks to give "ownership" of animals to third parties PRIOR to finding guilt of the accused. It also seeks to force those accused in crimes relating to animal cruelty to post a bond. It does not matter whether or not someone can afford to post this type of bond, the bottom line is that no one has the right to give "ownership" of YOUR PROPERTY to someone else!
What this bill dose NOT address is what happens to the animal if the original owner is found to be innocent? Do you think the "new owners" will REALLY give the animal BACK?
The very concept of a "forfeiture" or "seizure" bond greatly undermines the idea that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law; depriving someone (or attempting to deprive someone) of their personal property by their ability (or inability) to cough up huge sums of cash flat-out crushes the 14th Amendment.
Our judicial system is not perfect; however, we are afforded certain protections under the U.S. Constitution. More and more, the animal rights industry (namely the Humane Society of the United States) would have us to believe that animal owners are somehow different; that we are not entitled to those same protections against warrantless searches and seizures, the right to due process, the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, the right to a fair and speedy trial, etc.
Kentucky House Bill 517 seeks to give "ownership" of animals to third parties PRIOR to finding guilt of the accused. It also seeks to force those accused in crimes relating to animal cruelty to post a bond. It does not matter whether or not someone can afford to post this type of bond, the bottom line is that no one has the right to give "ownership" of YOUR PROPERTY to someone else!
What this bill dose NOT address is what happens to the animal if the original owner is found to be innocent? Do you think the "new owners" will REALLY give the animal BACK?
The very concept of a "forfeiture" or "seizure" bond greatly undermines the idea that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law; depriving someone (or attempting to deprive someone) of their personal property by their ability (or inability) to cough up huge sums of cash flat-out crushes the 14th Amendment.
Our judicial system is not perfect; however, we are afforded certain protections under the U.S. Constitution. More and more, the animal rights industry (namely the Humane Society of the United States) would have us to believe that animal owners are somehow different; that we are not entitled to those same protections against warrantless searches and seizures, the right to due process, the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, the right to a fair and speedy trial, etc.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Why you should give money to LOCAL shelters- NOT HSUS
Remember- HSUS dose NOT operate a SINGLE shelter. Your local shelter shoulders the burden of care and expenses for the consequences of the legislative actions the HSUS works to pass.
Also take a look at HSUS Federal 990 for 2008.
For those of you looking for a little extra reading to do over the weekend, HSUS' 2008 New York tax return is up on the CharitiesNY.com website. This is a huge file, some 370 pages. It has multiple attachments.
http://tinyurl.com/yjgzpzr
Revenue was down in 2008 vs 2007 only because they lost money on their investments ($7M). They paid out less in grants (about $1.4M less), but increased compensation /benefits by $10M for a loss of almost $14M.
Attachments:
1.) Disclosure of agreements between HSUS and fund raising professionals (i.e., Share Group), fund raising counsel, and commercial co-ventures (i.e, PetPlan, MBNA America Bank, etc). Copies of the letters of agreement with the fund raising professionals/counsel/co-venturers are attached. The co-ventures agreements are at the end of the file.
2.) Copy of the public disclosure copy of the federal 990 for 2008. I'm not sure if this is a complete copy, but it looks like it might be.
A few of their grants:
Californians for Humane Farms (Prop 2 sponsor) $2,250,000 in cash, $44,480 noncash assistance. (Add to that $1,360,000 given per their 2007 tax return).
The Committee to Protect Dogs (MA Greyhound Protection Act) $200,000. (They also list a grant to them in 2007 for $200,000).
PETA $10,000 - I guess Ingrid was short on funds last year
WSPA $35,000
Tufts Univ School of Vet Medicine $22,625
Univ of Florida Foundation $25,000
Alliance Contraception in Dogs & Cats $50,000 (might want to keep tabs on these guys. They have a website).
3.) Copy of their consolidated financial statements
Enjoy.
Also take a look at HSUS Federal 990 for 2008.
For those of you looking for a little extra reading to do over the weekend, HSUS' 2008 New York tax return is up on the CharitiesNY.com website. This is a huge file, some 370 pages. It has multiple attachments.
Revenue was down in 2008 vs 2007 only because they lost money on their investments ($7M). They paid out less in grants (about $1.4M less), but increased compensation /benefits by $10M for a loss of almost $14M.
Attachments:
1.) Disclosure of agreements between HSUS and fund raising professionals (i.e., Share Group), fund raising counsel, and commercial co-ventures (i.e, PetPlan, MBNA America Bank, etc). Copies of the letters of agreement with the fund raising professionals/counsel/co-venturers are attached. The co-ventures agreements are at the end of the file.
2.) Copy of the public disclosure copy of the federal 990 for 2008. I'm not sure if this is a complete copy, but it looks like it might be.
A few of their grants:
Californians for Humane Farms (Prop 2 sponsor) $2,250,000 in cash, $44,480 noncash assistance. (Add to that $1,360,000 given per their 2007 tax return).
The Committee to Protect Dogs (MA Greyhound Protection Act) $200,000. (They also list a grant to them in 2007 for $200,000).
PETA $10,000 - I guess Ingrid was short on funds last year
WSPA $35,000
Tufts Univ School of Vet Medicine $22,625
Univ of Florida Foundation $25,000
Alliance Contraception in Dogs & Cats $50,000 (might want to keep tabs on these guys. They have a website).
3.) Copy of their consolidated financial statements
Enjoy.
Want to give to animal related charities this year? Give locally- not to national animal rights groups
Animal lovers should stop sending money to zealotsRich Landers
The Spokesman-Review
I took a beating in the letters-to-the-editor pages a few weeks ago for pointing out the threat national-scale animal rights groups pose to the sports of hunting and fishing.
Now I’m turning the other cheek.
Readers shouldn’t assume that the published letters were the only reaction.
Nor should they think the threat these groups pose is limited to hunters and anglers.
The published letters came mostly from one group of Spokane-area animal rights activists and Wayne Pacelle, the national figurehead for the Humane Society of the United States.
But many phone calls and e-mails called for more scrutiny of these groups and the moral fascism they are trying to impose on society’s use and enjoyment of animals.
One veterinarian pointed out that these groups are clawing their way through legal and legislative channels toward giving pets individual rights rather than leaving them designated as the property of their owners.
The vet said that, among other problems, this would have huge repercussions in the costs of veterinary care and liability.
“Can you imagine the costs of routine pet procedures if we have to run unnecessary tests and insure ourselves for protection against possible multimillion-dollar lawsuits?” he said.
One e-mail came from a woman who works with a small-town animal welfare organization that does the dirty work of caring for the epidemic of lost, abused or unwanted pets. She thanked me for pointing out that these local nonprofit animal rescue groups – including the local Humane Societies that have no connection with the Humane Society of the United States – are always scrapping for money to do their work.
“I used to donate (to HSUS), years ago, but all the money seemed to go to mailings with another free key chain and a request for more money,” she wrote. “I was never sure that my donation was helping homeless animals.
“I now only donate locally, like to the Spokane Humane Society, or to our organization, where 100 percent of funds are spent on vet care.”
This woman, the veterinarian and others asked not to be identified because they didn’t want to endure the crap animal rights groups like to dish out to dissenters.
Speaking out publicly can start a smear campaign and financial burden for a pet care professional or local animal charity.
A story in Tuesday’s paper detailed how the HSUS, PETA and other animal rights zealots are trying to prevent the use of animals in veterinary training and biomedical research.
Medical and veterinary students cannot learn the complexities of hemorrhage on a computer model. Period.
Scientists who are trying to find cures for diseases and test surgical procedures and devices are having their lives threatened by the moral fascists.
“I’d rather see (animals) euthanized than go to a research facility,” said Minnesota Animal Rights Coalition president Charlotte Cozzetto.
These are the nuts who are draining millions of dollars from the checking accounts of little old ladies and others in the uninformed masses who think they are saving puppies and kittens.
But in most cases, these national groups donate little or nothing back to the actual care and welfare of those unwanted animals that are euthanized by the hundreds of thousands every year.
Pacelle smugly wrote The Spokesman-Review to charge me with misinforming the public about the ramifications of his recent testimony before the Supreme Court. He said the case had nothing to do with possibly making hunters and anglers criminals for being filmed or photographed with their quarry.
What he failed to say was that it was Justices Scalia, Sotomayor and others in the Supreme Court chambers who were making that association, not this lowly scribe in Spokane.
He also failed to acknowledge the numbers I shared with readers from the HSUS tax forms showing that more than half of the $4.8 million the group raised in one year for its feeble facade of creating wildlife sanctuaries goes back into mailing and propaganda.
This is the huge difference between sportsmen-supported wildlife conservation groups and national animal zealot groups.
When you write a check to Ducks Unlimited, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation or The Nature Conservancy, the money goes into preserving habitat for wildlife survival and human quality of life.
A check written to HSUS largely supports moral fascism.
These zealots must constantly squeal about animal atrocities, because to be reasonable and effective would curtail the heavy flow of cash into their pockets.
Contact Rich Landers at 509 459-5508 or richl@spokesman.com.
The Spokesman-Review
I took a beating in the letters-to-the-editor pages a few weeks ago for pointing out the threat national-scale animal rights groups pose to the sports of hunting and fishing.
Now I’m turning the other cheek.
Readers shouldn’t assume that the published letters were the only reaction.
Nor should they think the threat these groups pose is limited to hunters and anglers.
The published letters came mostly from one group of Spokane-area animal rights activists and Wayne Pacelle, the national figurehead for the Humane Society of the United States.
But many phone calls and e-mails called for more scrutiny of these groups and the moral fascism they are trying to impose on society’s use and enjoyment of animals.
One veterinarian pointed out that these groups are clawing their way through legal and legislative channels toward giving pets individual rights rather than leaving them designated as the property of their owners.
The vet said that, among other problems, this would have huge repercussions in the costs of veterinary care and liability.
“Can you imagine the costs of routine pet procedures if we have to run unnecessary tests and insure ourselves for protection against possible multimillion-dollar lawsuits?” he said.
One e-mail came from a woman who works with a small-town animal welfare organization that does the dirty work of caring for the epidemic of lost, abused or unwanted pets. She thanked me for pointing out that these local nonprofit animal rescue groups – including the local Humane Societies that have no connection with the Humane Society of the United States – are always scrapping for money to do their work.
“I used to donate (to HSUS), years ago, but all the money seemed to go to mailings with another free key chain and a request for more money,” she wrote. “I was never sure that my donation was helping homeless animals.
“I now only donate locally, like to the Spokane Humane Society, or to our organization, where 100 percent of funds are spent on vet care.”
This woman, the veterinarian and others asked not to be identified because they didn’t want to endure the crap animal rights groups like to dish out to dissenters.
Speaking out publicly can start a smear campaign and financial burden for a pet care professional or local animal charity.
A story in Tuesday’s paper detailed how the HSUS, PETA and other animal rights zealots are trying to prevent the use of animals in veterinary training and biomedical research.
Medical and veterinary students cannot learn the complexities of hemorrhage on a computer model. Period.
Scientists who are trying to find cures for diseases and test surgical procedures and devices are having their lives threatened by the moral fascists.
“I’d rather see (animals) euthanized than go to a research facility,” said Minnesota Animal Rights Coalition president Charlotte Cozzetto.
These are the nuts who are draining millions of dollars from the checking accounts of little old ladies and others in the uninformed masses who think they are saving puppies and kittens.
But in most cases, these national groups donate little or nothing back to the actual care and welfare of those unwanted animals that are euthanized by the hundreds of thousands every year.
Pacelle smugly wrote The Spokesman-Review to charge me with misinforming the public about the ramifications of his recent testimony before the Supreme Court. He said the case had nothing to do with possibly making hunters and anglers criminals for being filmed or photographed with their quarry.
What he failed to say was that it was Justices Scalia, Sotomayor and others in the Supreme Court chambers who were making that association, not this lowly scribe in Spokane.
He also failed to acknowledge the numbers I shared with readers from the HSUS tax forms showing that more than half of the $4.8 million the group raised in one year for its feeble facade of creating wildlife sanctuaries goes back into mailing and propaganda.
This is the huge difference between sportsmen-supported wildlife conservation groups and national animal zealot groups.
When you write a check to Ducks Unlimited, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation or The Nature Conservancy, the money goes into preserving habitat for wildlife survival and human quality of life.
A check written to HSUS largely supports moral fascism.
These zealots must constantly squeal about animal atrocities, because to be reasonable and effective would curtail the heavy flow of cash into their pockets.
Contact Rich Landers at 509 459-5508 or richl@spokesman.com.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
PA: Animal Welfare Debate Takes Center Stage
Animal Welfare Debate Takes Center Stage
From: Lancaster Farming. Follow this link to the article
Submitted by Editor on Fri, 08/21/2009 - 11:25am.
Charlene M. Shupp
Espenshade
Special Sections Editor
HERSHEY, Pa. — The take-home message from last week’s Animal Welfare Forum was simple. Chad Gregory of the United Egg Producers and Paul Shapiro of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) agreed to disagree.
During the two-hour discussion, farmers, veterinarians and industry professionals heard Gregory and Shapiro discuss the impact of California’s Proposition 2 ballot initiative from 2009. This was the first time both have addressed a group jointly on animal agriculture production. The event was sponsored by PennAg Industries Association and the Pennsylvania Veterinary Medical Association.
Last year, both sides spent millions of dollars to argue their viewpoints on the ballot initiative that would essentially eliminate gestation crates for swine, battery cages for chickens and crates for veal calves.
The question voters had to answer was this: “Should farm animals have the ability to stand up, sit down, turn around, and extend their limbs without touching anything?” Both sides built coalitions before the election to make their case. For Californians, the answer was a resounding “yes,” winning 63 to 37 percent.
Shapiro noted that the ballot garnered more “yes” votes than any other citizen initiative in California history and that it won majorities of all major demographics.
Gregory said the electorate did not understand what they were voting for, and Shapiro countered that the overwhelming support for the measure showed that, for the most part, it was an obvious choice.
The battle over animal welfare has gained momentum in several states in addition to California. In states where the issue was taken through the state legislature, Gregory said his organization has won because they have been able to use science to explain their side of the issue to legislators.
On the other hand, in states where the issue can be decided by a ballot initiative, HSUS has been successful.
Gregory asked this rhetorical question: If all the HSUS wanted to do was ban battery cages, why did they not simplify the language to reflect that? He believes it is so HSUS can expand the meaning of the law as it is implemented.
“We cannot feed these (additional) people without concentrated, commercial-sized farms,” said Gregory. “It’s impossible.” He noted that 95 percent of all egg production is in caged egg production facilities.
In trying to separate the differences between the two groups, Gregory said organizations like his represent “farmers who get dirt under their fingernails.”
Shapiro said that the strength of the HSUS comes from its membership, and that in a recent survey HSUS placed in the top 10 in brand recognition — the only group that did not represent a human welfare topic with that distinction. He also said 1 in 28 Americans support HSUS.
Consumers, Gregory believes, should be allowed to decide how their eggs are produced — caged, cage-free, or organic — at the grocery checkout line.
The egg industry saw welfare-driven production changes happening in Europe and decided to take a proactive approach to the issue. United Egg Producers (UEP) developed an animal welfare committee to craft a scientifically-based set of guidelines for the industry.
“We did not want the guidelines to be driven by government mandates and activist organizations,” said Gregory. “We wanted guidelines to prevent disruption in the industry.”
The program has requirements for space per bird, and also addresses molting, beak trimming and lighting. Participating farms must have 100 percent of their farm audited and file compliance reports.
“This program has incredible teeth, it has been very credible,” Gregory said, noting that 80 percent of farms are participating. Additionally, cage-free programs certified by UEP are also accredited by the American Humane Association.
Gregory challenged Shapiro, saying if HSUS and PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) were “really interested in improving the welfare of chickens, they would go after the remaining 20 percent to get them into the program.”
Proposition 2, according to Shapiro, was grassroots driven with countless volunteers reaching out to their neighbors to share their concerns with the welfare of farm animals. Most states do not have laws on the books regarding animal welfare for livestock.
Both Gregory and Shapiro used science and research for their sides of the argument, in some cases using the same study to make their points.
According to Gregory, if cages were banned, the ramifications would include an increase of 15 million hens to produce the same number of eggs, a doubling of chicken mortality, and greater feed needs — to the tune of an additional one million acres of cropland for grain.
Both pointed to the economic study that says it costs one cent more per egg to move from caged to cage free production. Shapiro said that the costs to producers and consumers would not be much. Gregory said the study does not include the upfront investments that will be needed by farmers. He also noted the differences in store costs of more than a $1 dollar per dozen for eggs from cage-free hens and nearly $3 for organic compared to eggs from caged hens.
Both argued food safety points. Gregory used studies demonstrating that eggs produced in a cages system were safer. Shapiro pointed to studies showing the food safety benefits of cage-free.
Shapiro said that the egg industry only has to look to the broiler industry.
Broilers are raised on floors. He said the object of HSUS’s work is not to take farmers out of business.
“We’re not talking about making ideal living conditions for animals,” he said. “We are talking about raising the bar for animal welfare.”
Gregory concluded that Americans need to be careful in their choices because of the long-term effects. Looking to Europe, he said that consumers need to move forward with caution. Since many changes have come to regulations in the European Union, animal food production has been unable to keep pace with demand and those countries are on the verge of an egg shortage. To make up the difference, they will have to import eggs from countries that do not follow animal welfare standards.
Charlene Shupp Espenshade can be reached at cshupp.eph@lnpnews.com.
From: Lancaster Farming. Follow this link to the article
Submitted by Editor on Fri, 08/21/2009 - 11:25am.
Charlene M. Shupp
Espenshade
Special Sections Editor
HERSHEY, Pa. — The take-home message from last week’s Animal Welfare Forum was simple. Chad Gregory of the United Egg Producers and Paul Shapiro of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) agreed to disagree.
During the two-hour discussion, farmers, veterinarians and industry professionals heard Gregory and Shapiro discuss the impact of California’s Proposition 2 ballot initiative from 2009. This was the first time both have addressed a group jointly on animal agriculture production. The event was sponsored by PennAg Industries Association and the Pennsylvania Veterinary Medical Association.
Last year, both sides spent millions of dollars to argue their viewpoints on the ballot initiative that would essentially eliminate gestation crates for swine, battery cages for chickens and crates for veal calves.
The question voters had to answer was this: “Should farm animals have the ability to stand up, sit down, turn around, and extend their limbs without touching anything?” Both sides built coalitions before the election to make their case. For Californians, the answer was a resounding “yes,” winning 63 to 37 percent.
Shapiro noted that the ballot garnered more “yes” votes than any other citizen initiative in California history and that it won majorities of all major demographics.
Gregory said the electorate did not understand what they were voting for, and Shapiro countered that the overwhelming support for the measure showed that, for the most part, it was an obvious choice.
The battle over animal welfare has gained momentum in several states in addition to California. In states where the issue was taken through the state legislature, Gregory said his organization has won because they have been able to use science to explain their side of the issue to legislators.
On the other hand, in states where the issue can be decided by a ballot initiative, HSUS has been successful.
Gregory asked this rhetorical question: If all the HSUS wanted to do was ban battery cages, why did they not simplify the language to reflect that? He believes it is so HSUS can expand the meaning of the law as it is implemented.
“We cannot feed these (additional) people without concentrated, commercial-sized farms,” said Gregory. “It’s impossible.” He noted that 95 percent of all egg production is in caged egg production facilities.
In trying to separate the differences between the two groups, Gregory said organizations like his represent “farmers who get dirt under their fingernails.”
Shapiro said that the strength of the HSUS comes from its membership, and that in a recent survey HSUS placed in the top 10 in brand recognition — the only group that did not represent a human welfare topic with that distinction. He also said 1 in 28 Americans support HSUS.
Consumers, Gregory believes, should be allowed to decide how their eggs are produced — caged, cage-free, or organic — at the grocery checkout line.
The egg industry saw welfare-driven production changes happening in Europe and decided to take a proactive approach to the issue. United Egg Producers (UEP) developed an animal welfare committee to craft a scientifically-based set of guidelines for the industry.
“We did not want the guidelines to be driven by government mandates and activist organizations,” said Gregory. “We wanted guidelines to prevent disruption in the industry.”
The program has requirements for space per bird, and also addresses molting, beak trimming and lighting. Participating farms must have 100 percent of their farm audited and file compliance reports.
“This program has incredible teeth, it has been very credible,” Gregory said, noting that 80 percent of farms are participating. Additionally, cage-free programs certified by UEP are also accredited by the American Humane Association.
Gregory challenged Shapiro, saying if HSUS and PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) were “really interested in improving the welfare of chickens, they would go after the remaining 20 percent to get them into the program.”
Proposition 2, according to Shapiro, was grassroots driven with countless volunteers reaching out to their neighbors to share their concerns with the welfare of farm animals. Most states do not have laws on the books regarding animal welfare for livestock.
Both Gregory and Shapiro used science and research for their sides of the argument, in some cases using the same study to make their points.
According to Gregory, if cages were banned, the ramifications would include an increase of 15 million hens to produce the same number of eggs, a doubling of chicken mortality, and greater feed needs — to the tune of an additional one million acres of cropland for grain.
Both pointed to the economic study that says it costs one cent more per egg to move from caged to cage free production. Shapiro said that the costs to producers and consumers would not be much. Gregory said the study does not include the upfront investments that will be needed by farmers. He also noted the differences in store costs of more than a $1 dollar per dozen for eggs from cage-free hens and nearly $3 for organic compared to eggs from caged hens.
Both argued food safety points. Gregory used studies demonstrating that eggs produced in a cages system were safer. Shapiro pointed to studies showing the food safety benefits of cage-free.
Shapiro said that the egg industry only has to look to the broiler industry.
Broilers are raised on floors. He said the object of HSUS’s work is not to take farmers out of business.
“We’re not talking about making ideal living conditions for animals,” he said. “We are talking about raising the bar for animal welfare.”
Gregory concluded that Americans need to be careful in their choices because of the long-term effects. Looking to Europe, he said that consumers need to move forward with caution. Since many changes have come to regulations in the European Union, animal food production has been unable to keep pace with demand and those countries are on the verge of an egg shortage. To make up the difference, they will have to import eggs from countries that do not follow animal welfare standards.
Charlene Shupp Espenshade can be reached at cshupp.eph@lnpnews.com.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
HSUS is successfully blocking the Atlanta TV report that Critized where it spends its money
From PetPac's website
An ABC-TV affiliate in Atlanta aired an Investigative Report on where the Humane Society of the United States spends its money. Twenty four hours later, the story was pulled from the air. I wasn’t able to locate it in their archives either, even though there were older investigative stories still there. I spoke with Mark Winne of Channel 2 and was told that it is routine to take down this type of news report, however he was less specific when asked why it wasn’t saved in their archives. A copy of the video played on YouTube for one day then mysteriously disappeared from that site as well.
PetPAC posted, on our site, the written transcript you see below, sent to us by several of our supporters.
Friday morning PetPAC received an email from an attorney representing WSB-TV ordering us to remove the written word from public view. I have to conclude, as others have already, that this demand has been triggered by some powerful action to squelch the story.
Since HSUS has not come out publicly to protest the facts contained in this story, nor has WSB-TV issued any form of retraction I think it logical to assume the story has to be substantially true and accurate.
So much for freedom of the press and the First Amendment to the Constitution. Since those of us in PetPAC do not want to upset TV broadcasters, we have not made any further attempts to get copies of the video story. However, the transcript sent to us from others, not taken from the station website, unsubstantiated as it is reprinted below.
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.
Critics tell Channel 2 Action News reporter Amanda Rosseter that
this isn´t just consumers misunderstanding who they are giving in 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 say 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 it then ended it when HSUS offered to build the
state a new shelter.
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 the other
states. McAuliffe said all money is controlled from headquarters in
Washington, D.C.
An ABC-TV affiliate in Atlanta aired an Investigative Report on where the Humane Society of the United States spends its money. Twenty four hours later, the story was pulled from the air. I wasn’t able to locate it in their archives either, even though there were older investigative stories still there. I spoke with Mark Winne of Channel 2 and was told that it is routine to take down this type of news report, however he was less specific when asked why it wasn’t saved in their archives. A copy of the video played on YouTube for one day then mysteriously disappeared from that site as well.
PetPAC posted, on our site, the written transcript you see below, sent to us by several of our supporters.
Friday morning PetPAC received an email from an attorney representing WSB-TV ordering us to remove the written word from public view. I have to conclude, as others have already, that this demand has been triggered by some powerful action to squelch the story.
Since HSUS has not come out publicly to protest the facts contained in this story, nor has WSB-TV issued any form of retraction I think it logical to assume the story has to be substantially true and accurate.
So much for freedom of the press and the First Amendment to the Constitution. Since those of us in PetPAC do not want to upset TV broadcasters, we have not made any further attempts to get copies of the video story. However, the transcript sent to us from others, not taken from the station website, unsubstantiated as it is reprinted below.
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.
Critics tell Channel 2 Action News reporter Amanda Rosseter that
this isn´t just consumers misunderstanding who they are giving in 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 say 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 it then ended it when HSUS offered to build the
state a new shelter.
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 the other
states. McAuliffe said all money is controlled from headquarters in
Washington, D.C.
Another organization to take away your rights-
Animal Rescue.
The majority of people who live with animals love them and feel an emotional bond with their animal. The topic of "animal rescue" is also an emotional one. Who wants to see another being suffer? Not many. Advertisements showing those sad, brown eyes staring out of the bars of a cage evoke emotions that lead us to open our wallets and give money to end the "suffering"- but beware! It may not be the animals that are getting your money, but some lawyer or politician! Is that what you intended?
If you really want to help animals, give directly to a local shelter. Giving actual food, towels, bedding, bowels, leashes, collars, flea treatments, shampoo- you get the idea. That is the most helpful of all. If you give money, you may just be paying to limit your rights.
By now we know that HSUS is not who they have claimed to be- the national care-givers- they are just the "voice"- in CONGRESS to LIMIT your rights. It seems that another organization, The Animal Rescue Site, is also nothing more than a political lobbing machine to limit the rights of American citizens and determine where you can get your next pet, how you will care for it, and what activities with that pet will be legal or not.
This is from the website (under the Charitable Partners link):
"In January 2005, with the combination of The Fund for Animals and The
Humane Society of the United States, the groups were able to launch a new
Animal Protection Litigation Section which conducts even more precedent-setting
legal campaigns on behalf of animals in state and federal courts around
the country. With a staff of eight full-time lawyers, as well as numerous law
clerks, administrative staff, outside counsel, and pro-bono attorneys, the
section is the largest in-house animal protection litigation department in
the country."
Be careful who gets your money. The best way to Rescue Animals is to give needed items to the shelters who are actually caring for the animals.
The majority of people who live with animals love them and feel an emotional bond with their animal. The topic of "animal rescue" is also an emotional one. Who wants to see another being suffer? Not many. Advertisements showing those sad, brown eyes staring out of the bars of a cage evoke emotions that lead us to open our wallets and give money to end the "suffering"- but beware! It may not be the animals that are getting your money, but some lawyer or politician! Is that what you intended?
If you really want to help animals, give directly to a local shelter. Giving actual food, towels, bedding, bowels, leashes, collars, flea treatments, shampoo- you get the idea. That is the most helpful of all. If you give money, you may just be paying to limit your rights.
By now we know that HSUS is not who they have claimed to be- the national care-givers- they are just the "voice"- in CONGRESS to LIMIT your rights. It seems that another organization, The Animal Rescue Site, is also nothing more than a political lobbing machine to limit the rights of American citizens and determine where you can get your next pet, how you will care for it, and what activities with that pet will be legal or not.
This is from the website (under the Charitable Partners link):
"In January 2005, with the combination of The Fund for Animals and The
Humane Society of the United States, the groups were able to launch a new
Animal Protection Litigation Section which conducts even more precedent-setting
legal campaigns on behalf of animals in state and federal courts around
the country. With a staff of eight full-time lawyers, as well as numerous law
clerks, administrative staff, outside counsel, and pro-bono attorneys, the
section is the largest in-house animal protection litigation department in
the country."
Be careful who gets your money. The best way to Rescue Animals is to give needed items to the shelters who are actually caring for the animals.
Monday, May 25, 2009
Possible Investigation into HSUS over whether HSUS imprperly spent the funds collected to benefit pets displaced by Hurricane Katrina
Attention dog lovers!
PLEASE CROSS-POST
The nonprofit Center for Consumer Freedom has learned that the office of Louisiana Attorney General James "Buddy" Caldwell is considering whether to re-open an investigation into the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). The investigation concerns whether HSUS improperly spent some of the $34 million it raised for the benefit of pets displace d by Hurricane Katrina.
Apparently, Caldwell's office received a deluge of phone calls last week, beginning the day after Atlanta ABC affiliate WSB-TV aired an exposé of HSUS's fundraising activities. In that report, WSB called HSUS "an organization actively misleading donors to get money." The TV station also explored just how little of HSUS's "Katrina" fundraising appears to have been spent on genuine Katrina-related disaster relief.
This was a fabulous piece of journalism on a subject many news outlets have been too intimidated or too biased to cover. (WSB-TV is working on a follow-up story, but we'll all just have to wait patiently for that.)
An anonymous animal lover has made the video of the May 14 report available at http://is.gd/ BQGu -- Note that there's no way to know if HSUS will be successful at continually censoring this video. (At least one previous version was pulled from YouTube this week after being viewed more than 50,000 times.)
Here's what you can do to help:
(1) CALL the Consumer Protection Section of the Louisiana Attorney General's Office during regular business hours. The toll-free number is 800-351-4889. If you live in Louisiana, please call the local number at 225-326-6465, or the general office number at 225-326-6200.
Tell whoever answers that you would like the Attorney General to re-open his investigation of the Humane Society of the United States. Remind him/her that there's no official accounting of how HSUS spent most of the $34 million it raised after Hurricane Katrina.
Before you hang up, ask to be transferred to Assistant Attorney General Mimi Hunley. If you get through to Ms. Hunley, please be polite and make the same request of her or her staff.
(2) P lease follow-up with a polite e-mail to ConsumerInfo@ag.state.la.us, and let the A.G.'s office read your request in your own words. Drop me an e-mail at Martosko@ConsumerFreedom.com and let me know how everything went. (Or just "BCC" me on your follow-up e-mail.)
(3) Share the video of WSB-TV's exposé with your friends, colleagues, family, and neighbors. It remains available (for now) at http://is.gd/ BQGu -- If this video should disappear, feel free to e-mail me and ask if another version has popped up anywhere.
(4) If you are able, please consider making a donation to the Center for Consumer Freedom so we can keep putting pressure on the Humane Society of the United States. We've got some exciting plans for the months ahead, but we need additional resources to make it all work. For every dollar we raise, HSUS typically raises about $30.
Donations can be made at http://www.consumer freedom.com/donations.cfm and they are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law. The Center for Consumer Freedom is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.
Thanks for all you do to provide for animals. Remember: You are the real animal advocates. And we're on your side.
David Martosko
Director of Research
martosko@ConsumerFreedom.com
www.Twitter.com/DMartosko
The Center for Consumer Freedom
www.ConsumerFreedom.com
www.PETAkillsAnimals.com
www.HumaneWatch.org
PLEASE CROSS-POST
The nonprofit Center for Consumer Freedom has learned that the office of Louisiana Attorney General James "Buddy" Caldwell is considering whether to re-open an investigation into the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). The investigation concerns whether HSUS improperly spent some of the $34 million it raised for the benefit of pets displace d by Hurricane Katrina.
Apparently, Caldwell's office received a deluge of phone calls last week, beginning the day after Atlanta ABC affiliate WSB-TV aired an exposé of HSUS's fundraising activities. In that report, WSB called HSUS "an organization actively misleading donors to get money." The TV station also explored just how little of HSUS's "Katrina" fundraising appears to have been spent on genuine Katrina-related disaster relief.
This was a fabulous piece of journalism on a subject many news outlets have been too intimidated or too biased to cover. (WSB-TV is working on a follow-up story, but we'll all just have to wait patiently for that.)
An anonymous animal lover has made the video of the May 14 report available at http://is.gd/ BQGu -- Note that there's no way to know if HSUS will be successful at continually censoring this video. (At least one previous version was pulled from YouTube this week after being viewed more than 50,000 times.)
Here's what you can do to help:
(1) CALL the Consumer Protection Section of the Louisiana Attorney General's Office during regular business hours. The toll-free number is 800-351-4889. If you live in Louisiana, please call the local number at 225-326-6465, or the general office number at 225-326-6200.
Tell whoever answers that you would like the Attorney General to re-open his investigation of the Humane Society of the United States. Remind him/her that there's no official accounting of how HSUS spent most of the $34 million it raised after Hurricane Katrina.
Before you hang up, ask to be transferred to Assistant Attorney General Mimi Hunley. If you get through to Ms. Hunley, please be polite and make the same request of her or her staff.
(2) P lease follow-up with a polite e-mail to ConsumerInfo@ag.state.la.us, and let the A.G.'s office read your request in your own words. Drop me an e-mail at Martosko@ConsumerFreedom.com and let me know how everything went. (Or just "BCC" me on your follow-up e-mail.)
(3) Share the video of WSB-TV's exposé with your friends, colleagues, family, and neighbors. It remains available (for now) at http://is.gd/ BQGu -- If this video should disappear, feel free to e-mail me and ask if another version has popped up anywhere.
(4) If you are able, please consider making a donation to the Center for Consumer Freedom so we can keep putting pressure on the Humane Society of the United States. We've got some exciting plans for the months ahead, but we need additional resources to make it all work. For every dollar we raise, HSUS typically raises about $30.
Donations can be made at http://www.consumer freedom.com/donations.cfm and they are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law. The Center for Consumer Freedom is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.
Thanks for all you do to provide for animals. Remember: You are the real animal advocates. And we're on your side.
David Martosko
Director of Research
martosko@ConsumerFreedom.com
www.Twitter.com/DMartosko
The Center for Consumer Freedom
www.ConsumerFreedom.com
www.PETAkillsAnimals.com
www.HumaneWatch.org
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Keep The animal rights out of your Church
http://kysoy.blogspot.com/2009/05/keep-animal-rights-industry-out-of-your.html
Martin Luther King Jr. once said, "I have so much to do today that I
should spend the first three hours in prayer."
I've been thinking about that quote a lot lately. I was raised in a
Christian family, and I don't know how I'd get through a day without
prayer. Blessed with good health, wonderful friends, a loving family,
and fabulous dogs - I spend a lot of time giving thanks. I also ask
for the usual things - strength, inspiration, guidance. Lately I've
had to ask the Lord for something new and unexpected - help in keeping
the animal rights industry out of His church.
A friend contacted me last week because her Daily Devotional had a
segment which seemed like a good thing, but was a hook for a very bad
thing. My friend, a devout Christian, knew what she was looking at
because she knows the subversive nature and destructive agenda of the
animal rights (AR) industry. Therefore, she was alarmed to see a link
to the deceptively named "Humane" Society of the United States (HSUS)
in her Daily Devotional. She showed it to me, and asked my opinion on
the other groups with website links on the same page.
My investigation led to a mixture of good news and bad news. Here's
the verdict. Christians need to be more vigilant in guarding the gate.
The animal rights industry, whose hypocrisy knows no bounds, is coming
soon to a church near you. (Check your Daily Devotional, they may have
already infiltrated your place of worship.)
HSUS President/CEO Wayne Pacelle does his homework. He sees that
American farmers are coming together to stand shoulder-to-shoulder
against the animal rights industry. Farmers, now I'm speaking directly
to you. Pacelle knows that you're ten times tougher and more savvy
than the emotional AR cult members that he moves around like pawns on
a chess board. He sees you speaking out against the animal rights
movement. He knows that you are feeling a growing resolve to protect
your families and your future from the destructive rampage of
HSUS-driven laws.
So how does he fight you? How does he undermine you? Wayne Pacelle is
a master of Machiavellian manipulation. There's nothing random about
the fact that HSUS recently conned Rush Limbaugh into recording a
Public Service Announcement endorsing the “Humane” Society of the
United States "outreach to the faith-based community." (Random, no.
Bizarre, yes. There are so many things wrong with that sentence it's
enough to make your head spin.) Rush Limbaugh a spokesman for an
organization that epitomizes overreaching government and destruction
of individual freedoms? Black is white. Up is down. The sun is cold.
But you can bet your bottom dollar there's a method to the madness.
Limbaugh's PSA's for HSUS exploded in his face. Rush has infuriated
and alienated farmers, hunters, fishermen, gun owners, responsible pet
owners and breeders, scientists, doctors, and pretty much anybody who
loves someone battling a dreaded disease (See "The Irreconcilable
Differences of Rush Limbaugh and HSUS" on this Blog.)
Leaving Rush's credibility in smashed and scattered pieces all over
the left side of the road, Wayne Pacelle didn’t even glance in the
rearview mirror. He had what he wanted. And he was in a hurry. There
was a church up ahead with a side door that Rush Limbaugh had opened.
My dear Christian friends, I say this with love and a protective
instinct. When HSUS is reaching out to you, it isn’t because they want
to trade favorite Scripture verses. Picture yourself loaded with
cash, on election day, in a room full of pickpockets and Washington DC
lobbyists. HSUS wants your vote and they want your money (not
necessarily in that order.) Wayne Pacelle knows that Christians,
compassionate by nature, give generously - and in these tough economic
times, he's getting creative.
After all, HSUS is still a little bit shy of $204 million in assets,
and Pacelle has to earn his six-figure salary. Earn it how? Excellent
question. Less than 4% of HSUS income goes to hands-on care of
animals.
When I checked out the "Web Sites for Animal Lovers" in my friend's
recent Daily Devotional, three were O.K. But one (as previously
mentioned) was the-worst-of-the-worst of the AR groups - HSUS. The
other was a seemingly harmless website called "MyDogIsCool.com" -
which is a "front" page because it contains a link which takes you to
"Born Free USA" and the "Animal Protection Institute." These are both
radical animal rights industry groups which support HSUS - and
demonize farmers. The websites of these two organizations reveal
clearly the true agenda of the animal rights movement - with
inflammatory language listing the supposed cruelty of even organic and
free-range farms.
And yes, of course, all of the websites of these radical AR groups
relentlessly ask for donations, and encourage viewers to join their
mailing lists - so they can inundate the reader daily with their
propaganda/requests for money.
How do you keep the animal rights industry out of your church? Be
proactive. When I spoke to someone on the editorial staff of my
friend’s Daily Devotional, she had no clue about the true agenda of
the AR industry, until I explained it to her. It was an innocent
mistake.
(See "Got 50?" on this Blog.) Put the the editor of your Daily
Devotional at the top of your "Get 50” List. Educate this person. It's
important to them to ensure that Daily Devotional content is
appropriate. Be a good shepherd. Help them out by teaching them the
truth about the AR industry - before they inadvertently make the flock
vulnerable to circling wolves.
It’s wonderful to have messages reinforcing and affirming our love of
animals, in faith-based materials. But website links can be fraught
with peril. The safe recommendation any Daily Devotional can make is
to volunteer or donate money directly to your local animal shelter.
Your Friend in the Fight,
Tina M. Perriguey
P.S. After several days of phone calls, I finally spoke to an editor
who is a decision-maker at the parent publishing company of the Daily
Devotional discussed in my article. He was attentive, thoughtful, and
thanked me for an "enlightening conversation." I sent him several
website links, so that he could further educate himself as to the
truth about the animal rights industry. He promised to get back to me
after he had done some reading. I will send an update after I hear
back from him. --TMP
Martin Luther King Jr. once said, "I have so much to do today that I
should spend the first three hours in prayer."
I've been thinking about that quote a lot lately. I was raised in a
Christian family, and I don't know how I'd get through a day without
prayer. Blessed with good health, wonderful friends, a loving family,
and fabulous dogs - I spend a lot of time giving thanks. I also ask
for the usual things - strength, inspiration, guidance. Lately I've
had to ask the Lord for something new and unexpected - help in keeping
the animal rights industry out of His church.
A friend contacted me last week because her Daily Devotional had a
segment which seemed like a good thing, but was a hook for a very bad
thing. My friend, a devout Christian, knew what she was looking at
because she knows the subversive nature and destructive agenda of the
animal rights (AR) industry. Therefore, she was alarmed to see a link
to the deceptively named "Humane" Society of the United States (HSUS)
in her Daily Devotional. She showed it to me, and asked my opinion on
the other groups with website links on the same page.
My investigation led to a mixture of good news and bad news. Here's
the verdict. Christians need to be more vigilant in guarding the gate.
The animal rights industry, whose hypocrisy knows no bounds, is coming
soon to a church near you. (Check your Daily Devotional, they may have
already infiltrated your place of worship.)
HSUS President/CEO Wayne Pacelle does his homework. He sees that
American farmers are coming together to stand shoulder-to-shoulder
against the animal rights industry. Farmers, now I'm speaking directly
to you. Pacelle knows that you're ten times tougher and more savvy
than the emotional AR cult members that he moves around like pawns on
a chess board. He sees you speaking out against the animal rights
movement. He knows that you are feeling a growing resolve to protect
your families and your future from the destructive rampage of
HSUS-driven laws.
So how does he fight you? How does he undermine you? Wayne Pacelle is
a master of Machiavellian manipulation. There's nothing random about
the fact that HSUS recently conned Rush Limbaugh into recording a
Public Service Announcement endorsing the “Humane” Society of the
United States "outreach to the faith-based community." (Random, no.
Bizarre, yes. There are so many things wrong with that sentence it's
enough to make your head spin.) Rush Limbaugh a spokesman for an
organization that epitomizes overreaching government and destruction
of individual freedoms? Black is white. Up is down. The sun is cold.
But you can bet your bottom dollar there's a method to the madness.
Limbaugh's PSA's for HSUS exploded in his face. Rush has infuriated
and alienated farmers, hunters, fishermen, gun owners, responsible pet
owners and breeders, scientists, doctors, and pretty much anybody who
loves someone battling a dreaded disease (See "The Irreconcilable
Differences of Rush Limbaugh and HSUS" on this Blog.)
Leaving Rush's credibility in smashed and scattered pieces all over
the left side of the road, Wayne Pacelle didn’t even glance in the
rearview mirror. He had what he wanted. And he was in a hurry. There
was a church up ahead with a side door that Rush Limbaugh had opened.
My dear Christian friends, I say this with love and a protective
instinct. When HSUS is reaching out to you, it isn’t because they want
to trade favorite Scripture verses. Picture yourself loaded with
cash, on election day, in a room full of pickpockets and Washington DC
lobbyists. HSUS wants your vote and they want your money (not
necessarily in that order.) Wayne Pacelle knows that Christians,
compassionate by nature, give generously - and in these tough economic
times, he's getting creative.
After all, HSUS is still a little bit shy of $204 million in assets,
and Pacelle has to earn his six-figure salary. Earn it how? Excellent
question. Less than 4% of HSUS income goes to hands-on care of
animals.
When I checked out the "Web Sites for Animal Lovers" in my friend's
recent Daily Devotional, three were O.K. But one (as previously
mentioned) was the-worst-of-the-worst of the AR groups - HSUS. The
other was a seemingly harmless website called "MyDogIsCool.com" -
which is a "front" page because it contains a link which takes you to
"Born Free USA" and the "Animal Protection Institute." These are both
radical animal rights industry groups which support HSUS - and
demonize farmers. The websites of these two organizations reveal
clearly the true agenda of the animal rights movement - with
inflammatory language listing the supposed cruelty of even organic and
free-range farms.
And yes, of course, all of the websites of these radical AR groups
relentlessly ask for donations, and encourage viewers to join their
mailing lists - so they can inundate the reader daily with their
propaganda/requests for money.
How do you keep the animal rights industry out of your church? Be
proactive. When I spoke to someone on the editorial staff of my
friend’s Daily Devotional, she had no clue about the true agenda of
the AR industry, until I explained it to her. It was an innocent
mistake.
(See "Got 50?" on this Blog.) Put the the editor of your Daily
Devotional at the top of your "Get 50” List. Educate this person. It's
important to them to ensure that Daily Devotional content is
appropriate. Be a good shepherd. Help them out by teaching them the
truth about the AR industry - before they inadvertently make the flock
vulnerable to circling wolves.
It’s wonderful to have messages reinforcing and affirming our love of
animals, in faith-based materials. But website links can be fraught
with peril. The safe recommendation any Daily Devotional can make is
to volunteer or donate money directly to your local animal shelter.
Your Friend in the Fight,
Tina M. Perriguey
P.S. After several days of phone calls, I finally spoke to an editor
who is a decision-maker at the parent publishing company of the Daily
Devotional discussed in my article. He was attentive, thoughtful, and
thanked me for an "enlightening conversation." I sent him several
website links, so that he could further educate himself as to the
truth about the animal rights industry. He promised to get back to me
after he had done some reading. I will send an update after I hear
back from him. --TMP
HSUS is not giving money to dogs- they give money to Politicians
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ta8GdABQPHA
WSB-TV Aftermath: The Knives Are Out At HSUS
By ESaunders AR-HR.com
It has been an interesting weekend since the May 14th release of the WSB-TV investigation of the Humane Society of the United States' fundraising practises and the use of those funds. The reaction of the Humane Society of the United States executive team and employees has been dramatic, if not over the top.
Apparently the HSUS executive has not been content to stop with the rumored unleashing the HSUS legal team on WSB-TV. This is a rumor supported by the swift removal of both the text, viewer comments and video from the WSB-TV website by the afternoon of Friday, May 15th and the subsequent removal of the text article from Google's cache system by Saturday, May 16th. The speed of this has been startling considering that images in Google's cache can linger for days, weeks and even years in some cases. This process can be accelerated by website owner request.
Since May 14th, the number of personal attacks by both the HSUS executive and employees has been escalating and even some of their own supporters have not been safe from the spatter. Consider the following:
a.. The article posted on "Civil Eats" by the Senior Director of the HSUS factory farming campaign, Paul Shapiro. Aptly titled, "Lose Pretty or Win Ugly", Mr. Shapiro proceeds to launch a series of attacks that could as easily describe HSUS tactics as the opponents named in the article. The comment, "When it comes to campaigning, CCF isn't exactly known for its fidelity to the truth." is particularly ironic after the admissions of HSUS Georgia Director Cheryl McAuliffe that most of her job entails activist planning and lobbying. With her further admission that all finances are controlled from Washington headquarters, it seems unlikely that Georgia is the only state with this proportion of political activity. It is even more ironic considering the HSUS ran an online fundraising campaign using the following soliciting statement beside the donation check box
a.. Yes! I want to make a special gift to help The Humane Society of the United States care for the dogs seized in the Michael Vick case and to support other vital animal protection programs. (Click here to see the image) As I have written before, HSUS was not the agency caring for the dogs but instead it was the organization Bad Rap in association with the ASPCA, while HSUS was recommending the Michael Vick dogs be euthanized.
a.. HSUS Chief Operating Officer Michael Markarian and HSUS Internet Brand Manager Carie Lewis were actively forwarding the article "CCF Continues to Decieve Journalists, Public" from the blog, Digging Through The Dirt through the social networks via Twitter (pdf of image available in case Twitter post disappears) yet never acknowledge that the CCF statistics are independently confirmed through this website. This raises the question, if the CCF data is accurate (which it is) then why does HSUS continue to claim deception? The "Digging Through the Dirt" Blog even accused CCF of attacking HSUS with Craigslist postings. However, there is one problem with this accusation. Its not CCF, which I know for a fact. No, it isn't me either but I'm going to leave it at that for now.
b.. HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle has attacked the Center for Consumer Freedom's status as a 501(c) 3 tax-exempt charity despite the evidence provided by WSB-TV which throws the HSUS' own 501(c) 3 tax-exempt staus into doubt.
c.. Andy Vance and I were called the "Limbaugh and Coulter of the meat industry" by HSUS employee Barbara Henderson. This was by far the mildest and most entertaining of the attacks to date for a couple of reasons. (1) I'm not certain that the meat industry really knows or cares much about either AR-HR.com or myself. (2) Didn't Rush Limbaugh just do a couple of public service announcements for the Humane Society of the United States that he has taken ALOT of heat for? It probably isn't good policy to use a celebrity supporter's name as an insult attempt, even in jest.
WSB-TV may have pulled their very brave report from public viewing, but the awareness this story has raised has certainly struck a nerve up to the highest levels of the Humane Society of the United States. If there was nothing to the story or the questions it has raised, why are they waging a war of personal attacks instead of simply laying out the numbers and the data? Equally interesting is the question, "Why are the HSUS executive leveling accusations that match the HSUS as closely, if not more closely, than those they are attacking?"
Copyright 2009 by Erica Saunders http://AR-HR.com
All rights reserved
WSB-TV Aftermath: The Knives Are Out At HSUS
By ESaunders AR-HR.com
It has been an interesting weekend since the May 14th release of the WSB-TV investigation of the Humane Society of the United States' fundraising practises and the use of those funds. The reaction of the Humane Society of the United States executive team and employees has been dramatic, if not over the top.
Apparently the HSUS executive has not been content to stop with the rumored unleashing the HSUS legal team on WSB-TV. This is a rumor supported by the swift removal of both the text, viewer comments and video from the WSB-TV website by the afternoon of Friday, May 15th and the subsequent removal of the text article from Google's cache system by Saturday, May 16th. The speed of this has been startling considering that images in Google's cache can linger for days, weeks and even years in some cases. This process can be accelerated by website owner request.
Since May 14th, the number of personal attacks by both the HSUS executive and employees has been escalating and even some of their own supporters have not been safe from the spatter. Consider the following:
a.. The article posted on "Civil Eats" by the Senior Director of the HSUS factory farming campaign, Paul Shapiro. Aptly titled, "Lose Pretty or Win Ugly", Mr. Shapiro proceeds to launch a series of attacks that could as easily describe HSUS tactics as the opponents named in the article. The comment, "When it comes to campaigning, CCF isn't exactly known for its fidelity to the truth." is particularly ironic after the admissions of HSUS Georgia Director Cheryl McAuliffe that most of her job entails activist planning and lobbying. With her further admission that all finances are controlled from Washington headquarters, it seems unlikely that Georgia is the only state with this proportion of political activity. It is even more ironic considering the HSUS ran an online fundraising campaign using the following soliciting statement beside the donation check box
a.. Yes! I want to make a special gift to help The Humane Society of the United States care for the dogs seized in the Michael Vick case and to support other vital animal protection programs. (Click here to see the image) As I have written before, HSUS was not the agency caring for the dogs but instead it was the organization Bad Rap in association with the ASPCA, while HSUS was recommending the Michael Vick dogs be euthanized.
a.. HSUS Chief Operating Officer Michael Markarian and HSUS Internet Brand Manager Carie Lewis were actively forwarding the article "CCF Continues to Decieve Journalists, Public" from the blog, Digging Through The Dirt through the social networks via Twitter (pdf of image available in case Twitter post disappears) yet never acknowledge that the CCF statistics are independently confirmed through this website. This raises the question, if the CCF data is accurate (which it is) then why does HSUS continue to claim deception? The "Digging Through the Dirt" Blog even accused CCF of attacking HSUS with Craigslist postings. However, there is one problem with this accusation. Its not CCF, which I know for a fact. No, it isn't me either but I'm going to leave it at that for now.
b.. HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle has attacked the Center for Consumer Freedom's status as a 501(c) 3 tax-exempt charity despite the evidence provided by WSB-TV which throws the HSUS' own 501(c) 3 tax-exempt staus into doubt.
c.. Andy Vance and I were called the "Limbaugh and Coulter of the meat industry" by HSUS employee Barbara Henderson. This was by far the mildest and most entertaining of the attacks to date for a couple of reasons. (1) I'm not certain that the meat industry really knows or cares much about either AR-HR.com or myself. (2) Didn't Rush Limbaugh just do a couple of public service announcements for the Humane Society of the United States that he has taken ALOT of heat for? It probably isn't good policy to use a celebrity supporter's name as an insult attempt, even in jest.
WSB-TV may have pulled their very brave report from public viewing, but the awareness this story has raised has certainly struck a nerve up to the highest levels of the Humane Society of the United States. If there was nothing to the story or the questions it has raised, why are they waging a war of personal attacks instead of simply laying out the numbers and the data? Equally interesting is the question, "Why are the HSUS executive leveling accusations that match the HSUS as closely, if not more closely, than those they are attacking?"
Copyright 2009 by Erica Saunders http://AR-HR.com
All rights reserved
Friday, April 3, 2009
Letter to IRS regarding HSUS
Just one comment: My letter mentions a specific bill and hearing I attended in Maryland. If anyone wants to write a similar letter, they should be careful about straight cut/copy paste. Actually, if people can find other examples, that's even better!
The key thing with writing a letter like this is to address the TAX issue - nothing about whether the lobbying is good or bad. I wanted to make the public point that if other lobbying groups can't get contributions that are tax deductible, why should HSUS? In other words - the American taxpayer (merely as a taxpayer) shouldn't pay for any lobbying, not just HSUS, if it isn't legal!
Caroline
I have complained to the IRS about a 501(c)(3) organization
expending much of its resources in lobbying efforts. Perhaps if
others do the same, the IRS will investigate. Yes, there is a
"Humane Society Legislative Fund" that is authorized to conduct
lobbying. I don't know if tecnically that group is doing the
lobbying, but I doubt it. Here is my letter. Feel free to use
anything that might be useful, and you can cross-post if it would
help. It would probably be good if there were individual,
specific examples - such as my Maryland example - to show how
wide-spread their lobbying efforts are. Douglas Shulman is the
Commissioner of the IRS, and I copied him.
IRS EO Classification
Mail Code 4910
1100 Commerce Street
Dallas, TX 75242
Dear Sir or Madam:
I am very upset that the American taxpayers are being denied tens
of millions of dollars in taxes that should be paid. As I
understand it, IRC Section 501(c)(3) charities are not allowed to
conduct more than a minimal amount of lobbying. Yet, one of the
largest "charities" in the country is constantly lobbying and
helping to draft and pass legislation.
In 2007, the Humane Society of The United States (EIN 53-0225390)
received over $150 million, yet paid no taxes. During that time,
they vigorously lobbied to enact many laws. According to their
own annual report
(http://www.hsus.org/web-files/PDF/annual_report_2007_p1.pdf)
they lobbied for many new laws. Some of the more blatant
examples: page 6 - "We lobbied for the successful passage
of legislation in Illinois"; page 12 "In Congress, we secured language in the Senate Interior
Appropriations bill to"; page 12 "We persuaded the New Jersey Legislature to allocate
$850,000"; page 15 "We
also won passage of two precedent-setting bills in the New
York State legislature" and "helped pass a resolution
in the U.S. House of Representatives"; and page 17
"Following our successful state ballot initiative
campaigns in Arizona and Florida" Your own web
site states, "An organization will be regarded as
attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the
public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for
the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or
if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of
legislation." It's pretty clear that the HSUS
is "attempted to influence legislation."
This is not an isolated year. In fact, their current web site
indicates that they are going to increase their lobbying efforts!
See http://www.hsus.org/legislation_laws/.
"On the heels of
these advances, the HSUS is better positioned than ever to make
new gains for animals in 2009. We intend to pass federal
legislation to crack down on abusive puppy mills."
http://www.hsus.org/about_us/accomplishments/advances_in_2008.htm
This, despite the fact that a 501(c)(3) organization can
only conduct minimal lobbying. Their web site encourages the
public to contact the members of the legislature to adopt the
laws proposed by HSUS. I was at a recent hearing of a proposed
state bill (Maryland HB 495), and representatives of HSUS were
there to advocate their position. It is my understanding that
this is occurring across the country. Their agenda clearly
includes influencing legislation.
Even if HSUS were properly approved as a non-profit lobbying
organization, the American taxpayers have lost millions of
dollars in taxes that weren't paid because money
contributed to this non-charity was deducted from taxable income.
In 2007 alone, the public donated over $85 million to HSUS. Even
using an extremely conservative tax rate of 10%, taxpayers were
cheated out of $8.5 million“ and that's only in
2007!
Not only does the HSUS engage in extensive lobbying, but they are
also involved in campaigning for the politicians who support
their agenda!!!
"Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3)
organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or
indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political
campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for
elective public office.[V]oter education or registration
activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one
candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or
(c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of
candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or
intervention."
During a recent seminar, the HSUS distributed a "voting
record" of all candidates.
According to their 2007 Form 990, the HSUS paid only $6 million
out of their $150 million in receipts for services that actually
helped animals (line 22b). The rest of their "program
services" expenditures went essentially to salaries and
"educational" literature. Yet, much of this
material ($15 million in expenses) references their lobbying
efforts. In fact, one publication details their legislative
efforts! How much of the salaries, travel, and other expenses
went to lobby for legislation that they helped write? How much
did they spend in lobbying efforts in Proposition 2 in California
alone? Their 990 indicates over $1.5 million (out of the $6
million supposedly used for program causes), but this does not
include the salaries and travel of staff, publicizing their
viewpoint in an effort to convince the general public to vote for
their own law, and other "hidden" expenses.
If the HSUS wants to be a lobbying organization, they should be
upfront about it. Please do not allow them to benefit from
millions of dollars in tax exemptions that should be paid as
income tax, or allow charitable deductions for money paid to a
lobbying group.
I hope that as a government agency not directly connected with
the goals of the HSUS (other than allowing them to retain
millions of dollars that should rightly be paid as taxes), you
will take appropriate action to rescind their charitable
organization status and collect the taxes that could be, and
should be, used to pay for taxpayer services.
Caroline Sullivan
The key thing with writing a letter like this is to address the TAX issue - nothing about whether the lobbying is good or bad. I wanted to make the public point that if other lobbying groups can't get contributions that are tax deductible, why should HSUS? In other words - the American taxpayer (merely as a taxpayer) shouldn't pay for any lobbying, not just HSUS, if it isn't legal!
Caroline
I have complained to the IRS about a 501(c)(3) organization
expending much of its resources in lobbying efforts. Perhaps if
others do the same, the IRS will investigate. Yes, there is a
"Humane Society Legislative Fund" that is authorized to conduct
lobbying. I don't know if tecnically that group is doing the
lobbying, but I doubt it. Here is my letter. Feel free to use
anything that might be useful, and you can cross-post if it would
help. It would probably be good if there were individual,
specific examples - such as my Maryland example - to show how
wide-spread their lobbying efforts are. Douglas Shulman is the
Commissioner of the IRS, and I copied him.
IRS EO Classification
Mail Code 4910
1100 Commerce Street
Dallas, TX 75242
Dear Sir or Madam:
I am very upset that the American taxpayers are being denied tens
of millions of dollars in taxes that should be paid. As I
understand it, IRC Section 501(c)(3) charities are not allowed to
conduct more than a minimal amount of lobbying. Yet, one of the
largest "charities" in the country is constantly lobbying and
helping to draft and pass legislation.
In 2007, the Humane Society of The United States (EIN 53-0225390)
received over $150 million, yet paid no taxes. During that time,
they vigorously lobbied to enact many laws. According to their
own annual report
(http://www.hsus.org/web-files/PDF/annual_report_2007_p1.pdf)
they lobbied for many new laws. Some of the more blatant
examples: page 6 - "We lobbied for the successful passage
of legislation in Illinois"; page 12 "In Congress, we secured language in the Senate Interior
Appropriations bill to"; page 12 "We persuaded the New Jersey Legislature to allocate
$850,000"; page 15 "We
also won passage of two precedent-setting bills in the New
York State legislature" and "helped pass a resolution
in the U.S. House of Representatives"; and page 17
"Following our successful state ballot initiative
campaigns in Arizona and Florida" Your own web
site states, "An organization will be regarded as
attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the
public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for
the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or
if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of
legislation." It's pretty clear that the HSUS
is "attempted to influence legislation."
This is not an isolated year. In fact, their current web site
indicates that they are going to increase their lobbying efforts!
See http://www.hsus.org/legislation_laws/.
"On the heels of
these advances, the HSUS is better positioned than ever to make
new gains for animals in 2009. We intend to pass federal
legislation to crack down on abusive puppy mills."
http://www.hsus.org/about_us/accomplishments/advances_in_2008.htm
This, despite the fact that a 501(c)(3) organization can
only conduct minimal lobbying. Their web site encourages the
public to contact the members of the legislature to adopt the
laws proposed by HSUS. I was at a recent hearing of a proposed
state bill (Maryland HB 495), and representatives of HSUS were
there to advocate their position. It is my understanding that
this is occurring across the country. Their agenda clearly
includes influencing legislation.
Even if HSUS were properly approved as a non-profit lobbying
organization, the American taxpayers have lost millions of
dollars in taxes that weren't paid because money
contributed to this non-charity was deducted from taxable income.
In 2007 alone, the public donated over $85 million to HSUS. Even
using an extremely conservative tax rate of 10%, taxpayers were
cheated out of $8.5 million“ and that's only in
2007!
Not only does the HSUS engage in extensive lobbying, but they are
also involved in campaigning for the politicians who support
their agenda!!!
"Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3)
organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or
indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political
campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for
elective public office.[V]oter education or registration
activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one
candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or
(c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of
candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or
intervention."
During a recent seminar, the HSUS distributed a "voting
record" of all candidates.
According to their 2007 Form 990, the HSUS paid only $6 million
out of their $150 million in receipts for services that actually
helped animals (line 22b). The rest of their "program
services" expenditures went essentially to salaries and
"educational" literature. Yet, much of this
material ($15 million in expenses) references their lobbying
efforts. In fact, one publication details their legislative
efforts! How much of the salaries, travel, and other expenses
went to lobby for legislation that they helped write? How much
did they spend in lobbying efforts in Proposition 2 in California
alone? Their 990 indicates over $1.5 million (out of the $6
million supposedly used for program causes), but this does not
include the salaries and travel of staff, publicizing their
viewpoint in an effort to convince the general public to vote for
their own law, and other "hidden" expenses.
If the HSUS wants to be a lobbying organization, they should be
upfront about it. Please do not allow them to benefit from
millions of dollars in tax exemptions that should be paid as
income tax, or allow charitable deductions for money paid to a
lobbying group.
I hope that as a government agency not directly connected with
the goals of the HSUS (other than allowing them to retain
millions of dollars that should rightly be paid as taxes), you
will take appropriate action to rescind their charitable
organization status and collect the taxes that could be, and
should be, used to pay for taxpayer services.
Caroline Sullivan
Friday, February 27, 2009
NC- HSUS is removing dogs from breeders
Here is a story written by an employee of HSUS. There are no pictures and the "public" who reads this story will just assume it is true. Here are the "Buzz Words" that HSUS uses to gain public support:
How they descibe breeders:
"mass breeding facility"
"overcrowded breeding facilities"
"living in substandard conditions"
"overwhelmed property owner"
How they describe themselves (HSUS):
"introduce legislation that will help to put an end to the cruel puppy mill industry in our state"
"extremely rewarding to see these animals begin a new, happy chapter of their lives"
"soon be living as cherished family pets"
"make the journey to their new temporary homes in The HSUS’ specially equipped animal transport vehicle"
Note: 1. the source of the complaint was Anonymous
2. There are no mention of any charges being brought up against the owner
3. There is no evidence of "intentional" abuse- but they were not very clear if there was even evidence of abuse at all. Since no charges are mentioned, one has to assume that there was no evidence of abuse at all
4. This was not the second time at THIS facility- it was the SECOND "takings" of people's property (their dogs)
5. Many people, when faced with law enforcement at their door, don't know what to do at the time, and then only afterwards to they attempt to get help. That attempt will not be reported by HSUS- and maybe not even by the local paper- as this story is carried by the local paper.
Dogs Rescued from Overcrowed Facility
Jordan Crump
The Humane Society of the United States
Published: February 26, 2009
KINSTON, N.C. (Feb. 26, 2009) – Fifty dogs have been removed from a Lenoir County breeding facility thanks to the efforts of The Humane Society of the United States, the Lenoir County Health Department, the Lenoir County SPCA and Wayne County Animal Control. Rescuers were able to remove the 50 small-breed dogs after local officials convinced the property owner to voluntarily shut down his facility.
“This is the second time in a month that The Humane Society of the United States has rescued dogs from a mass breeding facility in North Carolina. These cases represent just a fraction of the overcrowded breeding facilities throughout the state,” said Amanda Arrington, North Carolina state director for The HSUS. “We will soon introduce legislation that will help to put an end to the cruel puppy mill industry in our state.”
The dogs were found living in substandard conditions in outdoor pens throughout the property. Local officials inspected the property after receiving an anonymous complaint and found no evidence of intentional abuse, but the overwhelmed property owner voluntarily surrendered the animals. The property owner then signed a contract with local officials barring him from breeding any dogs in the future. The Lenoir County Health Department then called in The HSUS for assistance in removing the dogs from the property, finding them placement in regional rescue groups and transporting them to their new temporary homes at shelters.
“It is extremely rewarding to see these animals begin a new, happy chapter of their lives. I am hopeful that they will soon be living as cherished family pets,” said Joey Huff, director of the Lenoir County Health Department.
These dogs will make the journey to their new temporary homes in The HSUS’ specially equipped animal transport vehicle. They will be taken in by the Richmond SPCA and the Washington Animal Rescue League where they will be evaluated and placed for adoption.
How they descibe breeders:
"mass breeding facility"
"overcrowded breeding facilities"
"living in substandard conditions"
"overwhelmed property owner"
How they describe themselves (HSUS):
"introduce legislation that will help to put an end to the cruel puppy mill industry in our state"
"extremely rewarding to see these animals begin a new, happy chapter of their lives"
"soon be living as cherished family pets"
"make the journey to their new temporary homes in The HSUS’ specially equipped animal transport vehicle"
Note: 1. the source of the complaint was Anonymous
2. There are no mention of any charges being brought up against the owner
3. There is no evidence of "intentional" abuse- but they were not very clear if there was even evidence of abuse at all. Since no charges are mentioned, one has to assume that there was no evidence of abuse at all
4. This was not the second time at THIS facility- it was the SECOND "takings" of people's property (their dogs)
5. Many people, when faced with law enforcement at their door, don't know what to do at the time, and then only afterwards to they attempt to get help. That attempt will not be reported by HSUS- and maybe not even by the local paper- as this story is carried by the local paper.
Dogs Rescued from Overcrowed Facility
Jordan Crump
The Humane Society of the United States
Published: February 26, 2009
KINSTON, N.C. (Feb. 26, 2009) – Fifty dogs have been removed from a Lenoir County breeding facility thanks to the efforts of The Humane Society of the United States, the Lenoir County Health Department, the Lenoir County SPCA and Wayne County Animal Control. Rescuers were able to remove the 50 small-breed dogs after local officials convinced the property owner to voluntarily shut down his facility.
“This is the second time in a month that The Humane Society of the United States has rescued dogs from a mass breeding facility in North Carolina. These cases represent just a fraction of the overcrowded breeding facilities throughout the state,” said Amanda Arrington, North Carolina state director for The HSUS. “We will soon introduce legislation that will help to put an end to the cruel puppy mill industry in our state.”
The dogs were found living in substandard conditions in outdoor pens throughout the property. Local officials inspected the property after receiving an anonymous complaint and found no evidence of intentional abuse, but the overwhelmed property owner voluntarily surrendered the animals. The property owner then signed a contract with local officials barring him from breeding any dogs in the future. The Lenoir County Health Department then called in The HSUS for assistance in removing the dogs from the property, finding them placement in regional rescue groups and transporting them to their new temporary homes at shelters.
“It is extremely rewarding to see these animals begin a new, happy chapter of their lives. I am hopeful that they will soon be living as cherished family pets,” said Joey Huff, director of the Lenoir County Health Department.
These dogs will make the journey to their new temporary homes in The HSUS’ specially equipped animal transport vehicle. They will be taken in by the Richmond SPCA and the Washington Animal Rescue League where they will be evaluated and placed for adoption.
Friday, February 20, 2009
HSUS Gushes Over New "Creature Caucus" in Congress
HSUS Gushes Over New “Creature Caucus” in Congress
Group of Congressmen to Advocate Animal Rights Agenda
2/19/09
US Sportsmen's Alliance
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) couldn’t be happier with
the formation of a new group of Congressmen that will promote its agenda.
On February 18, U.S. Representatives Jim Moran (D- VA) and Elton Gallegy
(R- CA) announced the formation of a new Congressional Animal Protection
Caucus. The goal of the group is to get like-minded members of Congress
together and promote animal rights policy in Washington, D.C. through
forums and briefings.
According to the Humane Society Legislative Fund (HSLF), the legislative
wing of the HSUS, the new caucus will “take lawmaking for the animals to
the next level.” HSLF went on to gush in its blog, “we could not be more
excited about their leadership of this new organization of humane
lawmakers.”
HSUS President and CEO, Wayne Pacelle was also prominently quoted in
Rep. Moran’s press release announcing the caucus’ formation.
Pacelle stated, “The newly constituted Congressional Animal Protection
Caucus will help better align our federal policies with public opinion,
and we are excited to work closely with its leaders and with the entire
Congress to combat cruelty and abuse."
As of press time, a full list of other U.S. Representatives joining the
caucus was not available. However, the USSA will let sportsmen know as
the names become available. Each member of the caucus should be
contacted by constituents in their districts.
Representatives should be made aware of HSUS’ radical anti-hunting
agenda. They also need to be aware that sportsmen expect their
representatives not to cow tow to that agenda.
Group of Congressmen to Advocate Animal Rights Agenda
2/19/09
US Sportsmen's Alliance
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) couldn’t be happier with
the formation of a new group of Congressmen that will promote its agenda.
On February 18, U.S. Representatives Jim Moran (D- VA) and Elton Gallegy
(R- CA) announced the formation of a new Congressional Animal Protection
Caucus. The goal of the group is to get like-minded members of Congress
together and promote animal rights policy in Washington, D.C. through
forums and briefings.
According to the Humane Society Legislative Fund (HSLF), the legislative
wing of the HSUS, the new caucus will “take lawmaking for the animals to
the next level.” HSLF went on to gush in its blog, “we could not be more
excited about their leadership of this new organization of humane
lawmakers.”
HSUS President and CEO, Wayne Pacelle was also prominently quoted in
Rep. Moran’s press release announcing the caucus’ formation.
Pacelle stated, “The newly constituted Congressional Animal Protection
Caucus will help better align our federal policies with public opinion,
and we are excited to work closely with its leaders and with the entire
Congress to combat cruelty and abuse."
As of press time, a full list of other U.S. Representatives joining the
caucus was not available. However, the USSA will let sportsmen know as
the names become available. Each member of the caucus should be
contacted by constituents in their districts.
Representatives should be made aware of HSUS’ radical anti-hunting
agenda. They also need to be aware that sportsmen expect their
representatives not to cow tow to that agenda.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
When was HSUS elected to represent Illinois District 11?
Representative John Fritchey (D, 11) recently introduced House Bill 198, Licensing - Dog Breeder (aka Chloe’s Bill), an overzealous, animal rightist anti-breeder piece of legislation. Every breeder in the state who owns 3 or more intact female dogs would be classified as a commercial entity, subjected to licensing, impossible kennel regulations, invasive inspections inside their homes, and excessive record keeping and reporting. Completing the assault on dog breeders is the proposed bill’s requirement for fingerprinting and criminal background checks.
A constituent emailed the following to Rep. Fritchey: “Under your proposed legislation I would be subject to a criminal background check and fingerprinting, an untrained investigator would have access to my home and could at any time inspect my "facilities" and demand that I build a kennel that meets their idea of what is appropriate as well as exceeding USDA standards.” She continues, “I certainly think that you need to go back and look at what you are proposing recognizing that there are honest, decent people who you will hurt if this is passed.”
Unbelievably, her email was answered by Jordan Matyas, the HSUS Illinois State Director!
When did HSUS take charge of answering correspondence for legislators? Was HSUS elected to represent Illinois constituents in the 11th District? Has Matyas been hired as a staff member or consultant?
In his reply Matyas does not even give direct answers, rather repeats the standard HSUS rhetoric about the need to regulate bad breeders then placates the writer with a pretended interest in hearing her concerns.
The audacity of Rep. Fritchey deferring correspondence to HSUS is nothing short of breath-taking. The gauntlet has been thrown down and dog breeding in the state of Illinois is being criminalized. All breeders, hobbyists and sportsmen need to begin a concerted effort to oppose this legislation.
HB 198 has been referred to the Rules Committee. Talking points and contact information to oppose HB 198 are now posted on the SAOVA website We will provide further updates as information becomes available.
SAOVA commends Rep. Michael P. McAuliffe (R, 20) and Rep. JoAnn D. Osmond (R, 61) for removing themselves as cosponsors.
Please share this message widely.
Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - http://saova.org
Issue lobbying and working to identify and elect supportive legislators
A constituent emailed the following to Rep. Fritchey: “Under your proposed legislation I would be subject to a criminal background check and fingerprinting, an untrained investigator would have access to my home and could at any time inspect my "facilities" and demand that I build a kennel that meets their idea of what is appropriate as well as exceeding USDA standards.” She continues, “I certainly think that you need to go back and look at what you are proposing recognizing that there are honest, decent people who you will hurt if this is passed.”
Unbelievably, her email was answered by Jordan Matyas, the HSUS Illinois State Director!
When did HSUS take charge of answering correspondence for legislators? Was HSUS elected to represent Illinois constituents in the 11th District? Has Matyas been hired as a staff member or consultant?
In his reply Matyas does not even give direct answers, rather repeats the standard HSUS rhetoric about the need to regulate bad breeders then placates the writer with a pretended interest in hearing her concerns.
The audacity of Rep. Fritchey deferring correspondence to HSUS is nothing short of breath-taking. The gauntlet has been thrown down and dog breeding in the state of Illinois is being criminalized. All breeders, hobbyists and sportsmen need to begin a concerted effort to oppose this legislation.
HB 198 has been referred to the Rules Committee. Talking points and contact information to oppose HB 198 are now posted on the SAOVA website We will provide further updates as information becomes available.
SAOVA commends Rep. Michael P. McAuliffe (R, 20) and Rep. JoAnn D. Osmond (R, 61) for removing themselves as cosponsors.
Please share this message widely.
Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - http://saova.org
Issue lobbying and working to identify and elect supportive legislators
HSUS Maps Agenda For President Obama
HSUS Maps Agenda For President
Asks President And Congress To Federally Regulate
Dog Hobbyists, Name Animal Rights Legal Advocates
by JOHN YATES
American Sporting Dog Alliance
This article is archived
WASHINGTON The Humane Society of the United
States is asking President Barack Obama and
Congress to require everyone who raises dogs and
cats to be regulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, documents show.
HSUS also is asking for the creation of an animal
protection division within the U.S. Department of
Justice that is “similar to the Civil Rights
Division, to ensure strong enforcement of federal
animal protection laws,” thus granting animals
rights similar to humans. HSUS also calls for a
new position of animal protection liaison in the White House.
A fourth provision calls for a ban on hunting on new public lands.
Those are only three of the 100 recommendations
that HSUS has sent to Obama in what is called a
“change agenda for animals.” The American
Sporting Dog Alliance has obtained access to this
document, which has been sent to animal
protection organizations asking for their support.
HSUS is a radical animal rights group. Despite
its name, it does not operate a single animal
shelter, but exists only as a political
organization. The long-range goal of HSUS is to
gradually eliminate all animal ownership and use,
including their use as companion and food animals, and to ban hunting.
The 100 goals sent to Obama reflect many issues,
but this report will concentrate on the issues
that most directly affect dog owners, with added
emphasis on the sporting breeds.
However, we urge our readers to read the full
HSUS document, which includes a crackdown on
alleged farm pollution, tough animal and poultry
husbandry and slaughter rules, and many
environmental and wildlife management measure.
Here is a link the actual document:
http://www.hsus. org/web-files/ PDF/change- agenda-for- animals-1- 14-09.pdf.
Please read this document.
In a letter to a New York horse owners’
association that was made available to the
American Sporting Dog Alliance, HSUS President
Wayne Pacelle asks for support of the 100-point agenda.
“With the changing of the guard at the White
House comes the prospect of new possibilities for
moving our goals forward, and to mark this latest
transfer of power, the HSUS and the Humane
Society Legislative Fund (HSLF) are advancing a
100-point ‘Change Agenda for Animals,’” Pacelle
wrote. “ Never before has the animal protection
movement so carefully articulated a vast array of
critical animal protection reforms in the domains
of so many federal agencies—Agriculture ,
Interior, Commerce, Defense, Health and Human Services, State, and others.”
Dog Breeding Regulation
A top priority of HSUS for several years has been
to require federal regulation of everyone who
raises dogs and cats. Under current law, only
commercial breeders who sell puppies and kittens
on a wholesale basis are federally regulated.
Hobby breeders who sell puppies or kittens
directly to the public are not required to be federally licensed or inspected.
HSUS wants everyone who raises and sells puppies
to be licensed and inspected by the USDA, and
also wants to see much tougher regulations and standards for animal care.
About four years ago, the HSUS-sanctioned Pet
Animal Welfare Act (PAWS) was defeated in
Congress by a narrow margin. PAWS would have
imposed federal licensing and inspection on all hobby breeders.
Last year, U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, who
has very close personal and political ties to
President Obama, introduced a bill he called PAWS
2, which echoed many of the provisions of its
predecessor. When PAWS 2 stalled, Sen. Durbin
attempted to attach it as an amendment to the
2008 Farm Bill, but failed to get enough support.
Durbin came back with a similar bill in late
2008, dubbed “PUPS” or “Baby’s Bill,” which is
formally called the Puppy Uniform Protection Act,
but Congress adjourned without taking action.
These bills all originated from HSUS, and all of
them clearly were aimed at hobby breeders.
The 100-point agenda says HSUS wants to “require
all dog and cat breeders to comply with AWA
(federal Animal Welfare Act) requirements,
including those who sell directly to the public….”
It is PAWS all over again.
Now, however, HSUS has a much stronger hand in
Washington. In the November election, HSUS
strongly endorsed President Obama and had a
95-percent success rate in re-electing the
congressional candidates it endorsed. A
questionnaire obtained by the American Sporting
Dog Alliance showed that the President aggressively sought HSUS endorsement.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance continues to
believe that President Obama and many members of
Congress will listen to the concerns of dog
owners, but only if we stand up in large numbers
to defend ourselves and our rights, and take an
active role in the political process.
If we do not stand up and be counted in large
numbers, we expect HSUS will get its way on most
of the measures in the 100-point agenda. Dog
owners will have no one to blame but themselves
for being relegated to the legal status of
second-class citizens. The Bill of Rights and
personal freedom always are the first victims of HSUS policy.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance will be
working hard to defeat these HSUS legislative
proposals, but we need your help if we are to
succeed in turning back these challenges. We urge
all dog owners to join and support the
organization of their choice, and also to support
farmers, hunters and other allies in the fight
against the HSUS version of a “brave new world.”
The Rest Of The Story
Here are some other parts of the 100-point agenda
that pertain to dog owners in general, and also
owners of the sporting breeds in particular. HSUS
is calling on President Obama and Congress to:
Create an animal protection division in the
Justice Department to act on behalf of animals by
aggressive prosecution of people who violate laws
about animals. In essence, this gives animals
legal status, and the federal government will act
as their advocate. HSUS likened it to the Civil
Rights Division, which advocates for aggressive
protection of human rights. Animals thus would be
given the same legal status as people in the Department of Justice.
Create an animal protection liaison in the White
House, which would mean that HSUS will have
direct access to President Obama and his top
advisors to advocate for animal rights groups on
policy, regulatory and legislative issues.
Immediately strengthen enforcement of
USDA-regulated commercial kennels and other
animal owners covered by the Animal Welfare Act.
(AWA). Increase USDA budget and staffing for this
purpose, and make fines and penalties more
severe. Include all vertebrate species under the AWA.
Completely implement the ban on importing dogs
from other countries that HSUS succeeded in attaching to the 2008 Farm Bill.
Focus on non-lethal methods to control wildlife
populations, which means lessening the use of hunting as a management tool.
Mandate the use of microchips for companion
animals, and all other animals covered by the AWA.
Do not open any new public land or national wildlife refuges to hunting.
Transfer all wildlife programs away from the
USDA, and put them under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior.
Ban hunting on shooting preserves, which HSUS
labels “canned hunts” and calls “cruel.” Also ban so-called Internet hunting.
Make it a crime to show anything that HSUS calls
animal cruelty in films, on television, in books
and magazine, or on the Internet. Require the
Department of Justice to collect and analyze data
on animal cruelty cases and create a separate
crime database for this information.
Require the U.S. Census Bureau and the Center for
Disease Control to include questions about the
animals people own when surveying the public, in
order “to assess impacts on human health and
well-being, develop more effective approaches to
community animal control, and ensure appropriate disaster preparation.”
Allow foreign animal rights groups to have an
official advisory role in the United States.
Ban the mail shipment of any kind of birds or
animals through the U.S. Postal Service,
including for “agriculture and sport.” Baby
chicks were specifically mentioned, and this also
would apply to gamebird chicks, adults and eggs
that are used by sporting dog trainers and in field trials.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance represents
owners, breeders and professionals who work with
breeds of dogs that are used for hunting. We also
welcome people who work with other breeds, as
legislative issues affect all of us. We are a
grassroots movement working to protect the rights
of dog owners, and to assure that the traditional
relationships between dogs and humans maintains
its rightful place in American society and life.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance also needs
your help so that we can continue to work to
protect the rights of dog owners. Your
membership, participation and support are truly
essential to the success of our mission. We are
funded solely by your donations in order to maintain strict independence.
Please visit us on the web at
http://www.american sportingdogallia nce.org. Our email is asda@csonline. net.
PLEASE CROSS-POST AND FORWARD THIS REPORT TO YOUR FRIENDS
The American Sporting Dog Alliance
http://www.american sportingdogallia nce.org
Please Join Us
Asks President And Congress To Federally Regulate
Dog Hobbyists, Name Animal Rights Legal Advocates
by JOHN YATES
American Sporting Dog Alliance
This article is archived
WASHINGTON The Humane Society of the United
States is asking President Barack Obama and
Congress to require everyone who raises dogs and
cats to be regulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, documents show.
HSUS also is asking for the creation of an animal
protection division within the U.S. Department of
Justice that is “similar to the Civil Rights
Division, to ensure strong enforcement of federal
animal protection laws,” thus granting animals
rights similar to humans. HSUS also calls for a
new position of animal protection liaison in the White House.
A fourth provision calls for a ban on hunting on new public lands.
Those are only three of the 100 recommendations
that HSUS has sent to Obama in what is called a
“change agenda for animals.” The American
Sporting Dog Alliance has obtained access to this
document, which has been sent to animal
protection organizations asking for their support.
HSUS is a radical animal rights group. Despite
its name, it does not operate a single animal
shelter, but exists only as a political
organization. The long-range goal of HSUS is to
gradually eliminate all animal ownership and use,
including their use as companion and food animals, and to ban hunting.
The 100 goals sent to Obama reflect many issues,
but this report will concentrate on the issues
that most directly affect dog owners, with added
emphasis on the sporting breeds.
However, we urge our readers to read the full
HSUS document, which includes a crackdown on
alleged farm pollution, tough animal and poultry
husbandry and slaughter rules, and many
environmental and wildlife management measure.
Here is a link the actual document:
http://www.hsus. org/web-files/ PDF/change- agenda-for- animals-1- 14-09.pdf.
Please read this document.
In a letter to a New York horse owners’
association that was made available to the
American Sporting Dog Alliance, HSUS President
Wayne Pacelle asks for support of the 100-point agenda.
“With the changing of the guard at the White
House comes the prospect of new possibilities for
moving our goals forward, and to mark this latest
transfer of power, the HSUS and the Humane
Society Legislative Fund (HSLF) are advancing a
100-point ‘Change Agenda for Animals,’” Pacelle
wrote. “ Never before has the animal protection
movement so carefully articulated a vast array of
critical animal protection reforms in the domains
of so many federal agencies—Agriculture ,
Interior, Commerce, Defense, Health and Human Services, State, and others.”
Dog Breeding Regulation
A top priority of HSUS for several years has been
to require federal regulation of everyone who
raises dogs and cats. Under current law, only
commercial breeders who sell puppies and kittens
on a wholesale basis are federally regulated.
Hobby breeders who sell puppies or kittens
directly to the public are not required to be federally licensed or inspected.
HSUS wants everyone who raises and sells puppies
to be licensed and inspected by the USDA, and
also wants to see much tougher regulations and standards for animal care.
About four years ago, the HSUS-sanctioned Pet
Animal Welfare Act (PAWS) was defeated in
Congress by a narrow margin. PAWS would have
imposed federal licensing and inspection on all hobby breeders.
Last year, U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, who
has very close personal and political ties to
President Obama, introduced a bill he called PAWS
2, which echoed many of the provisions of its
predecessor. When PAWS 2 stalled, Sen. Durbin
attempted to attach it as an amendment to the
2008 Farm Bill, but failed to get enough support.
Durbin came back with a similar bill in late
2008, dubbed “PUPS” or “Baby’s Bill,” which is
formally called the Puppy Uniform Protection Act,
but Congress adjourned without taking action.
These bills all originated from HSUS, and all of
them clearly were aimed at hobby breeders.
The 100-point agenda says HSUS wants to “require
all dog and cat breeders to comply with AWA
(federal Animal Welfare Act) requirements,
including those who sell directly to the public….”
It is PAWS all over again.
Now, however, HSUS has a much stronger hand in
Washington. In the November election, HSUS
strongly endorsed President Obama and had a
95-percent success rate in re-electing the
congressional candidates it endorsed. A
questionnaire obtained by the American Sporting
Dog Alliance showed that the President aggressively sought HSUS endorsement.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance continues to
believe that President Obama and many members of
Congress will listen to the concerns of dog
owners, but only if we stand up in large numbers
to defend ourselves and our rights, and take an
active role in the political process.
If we do not stand up and be counted in large
numbers, we expect HSUS will get its way on most
of the measures in the 100-point agenda. Dog
owners will have no one to blame but themselves
for being relegated to the legal status of
second-class citizens. The Bill of Rights and
personal freedom always are the first victims of HSUS policy.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance will be
working hard to defeat these HSUS legislative
proposals, but we need your help if we are to
succeed in turning back these challenges. We urge
all dog owners to join and support the
organization of their choice, and also to support
farmers, hunters and other allies in the fight
against the HSUS version of a “brave new world.”
The Rest Of The Story
Here are some other parts of the 100-point agenda
that pertain to dog owners in general, and also
owners of the sporting breeds in particular. HSUS
is calling on President Obama and Congress to:
Create an animal protection division in the
Justice Department to act on behalf of animals by
aggressive prosecution of people who violate laws
about animals. In essence, this gives animals
legal status, and the federal government will act
as their advocate. HSUS likened it to the Civil
Rights Division, which advocates for aggressive
protection of human rights. Animals thus would be
given the same legal status as people in the Department of Justice.
Create an animal protection liaison in the White
House, which would mean that HSUS will have
direct access to President Obama and his top
advisors to advocate for animal rights groups on
policy, regulatory and legislative issues.
Immediately strengthen enforcement of
USDA-regulated commercial kennels and other
animal owners covered by the Animal Welfare Act.
(AWA). Increase USDA budget and staffing for this
purpose, and make fines and penalties more
severe. Include all vertebrate species under the AWA.
Completely implement the ban on importing dogs
from other countries that HSUS succeeded in attaching to the 2008 Farm Bill.
Focus on non-lethal methods to control wildlife
populations, which means lessening the use of hunting as a management tool.
Mandate the use of microchips for companion
animals, and all other animals covered by the AWA.
Do not open any new public land or national wildlife refuges to hunting.
Transfer all wildlife programs away from the
USDA, and put them under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior.
Ban hunting on shooting preserves, which HSUS
labels “canned hunts” and calls “cruel.” Also ban so-called Internet hunting.
Make it a crime to show anything that HSUS calls
animal cruelty in films, on television, in books
and magazine, or on the Internet. Require the
Department of Justice to collect and analyze data
on animal cruelty cases and create a separate
crime database for this information.
Require the U.S. Census Bureau and the Center for
Disease Control to include questions about the
animals people own when surveying the public, in
order “to assess impacts on human health and
well-being, develop more effective approaches to
community animal control, and ensure appropriate disaster preparation.”
Allow foreign animal rights groups to have an
official advisory role in the United States.
Ban the mail shipment of any kind of birds or
animals through the U.S. Postal Service,
including for “agriculture and sport.” Baby
chicks were specifically mentioned, and this also
would apply to gamebird chicks, adults and eggs
that are used by sporting dog trainers and in field trials.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance represents
owners, breeders and professionals who work with
breeds of dogs that are used for hunting. We also
welcome people who work with other breeds, as
legislative issues affect all of us. We are a
grassroots movement working to protect the rights
of dog owners, and to assure that the traditional
relationships between dogs and humans maintains
its rightful place in American society and life.
The American Sporting Dog Alliance also needs
your help so that we can continue to work to
protect the rights of dog owners. Your
membership, participation and support are truly
essential to the success of our mission. We are
funded solely by your donations in order to maintain strict independence.
Please visit us on the web at
http://www.american sportingdogallia nce.org. Our email is asda@csonline. net.
PLEASE CROSS-POST AND FORWARD THIS REPORT TO YOUR FRIENDS
The American Sporting Dog Alliance
http://www.american sportingdogallia nce.org
Please Join Us
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
What is HSUS?
By Christopher Aust
August 2004
I was rather amazed at the number of people who wrote to me about my
opinions regarding the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)
when I did my last few articles. Then again, maybe I shouldn't be.
Before about two weeks ago, I myself was rather ignorant as to the real
goals of HSUS, and where their, (actually your) money goes. As I always
do though, I decided to edumacate myself about them.
I also conducted a poll of 100 average people. Just the average Joe in
the street. 94% of the people thought HSUS ran the local shelters in
their community. 4% knew about their other programs and the remaining
2% had no idea who they were. Of the 94% all said they would donate to
HSUS based on what they knew about them. I'm betting HSUS is banking,
literally, on these types of individuals.
I also went online and found some rather interesting, at times quite
scary, information on several web sites. I would have interviewed a
HSUS representative, but after last week's newsletter, I got an email
from one that was little more than hate mail and very offensive!
Founders
Coleman Burke, then president of the American Bible Society, Cleveland
Amory and Helen Jones, founded HSUS in 1954. As far as I have been
able to tell, Mr. Burke served as their President until 1970 when John
Hoyt, a Presbyterian minister, took over as President and CEO until
1996.
Until just a few months ago, the President and CEO was Paul Irwin, a
Methodist minister. The current CEO and President is Wayne Pacelle who
admittedly has had ties with some radical (and I mean radical) animal
rights groups in the past.
Now, is it important I mention the religious background? Maybe and
maybe not. What I noticed though is the organization, at least to me,
has an evangelical feel. Is this a bad thing? No. I don't see why
unless you are running the finances in a manner similar to Jim and
Tammie Faye Baker! That sure is the way it looks to me.
Officers and Directors
HSUS is an organization with their primary focus being animals. As I
reviewed the names and titles of the Board Officers and Directors, I
found it curious they had no DVM's (vets) on either. They have three
MDs', three PhDs' and six attorneys. Am I the only one that finds this
odd? Plenty of lawyers, but no vet. Hmmm…Maybe it's just a typo.
Comparative Financial Operations Report
When I conducted my interview with Kathy Bauch a few weeks ago, she
refused to answer any questions regarding HSUS' finances for a
"newsletter." She did offer to send me their 2003 financials though.
This is what they send whenever some one has questions about their
finances. As I mentioned last week, if it was similar to what they have
online, it would be vague and difficult to decipher. What I got was
much more.
What I received is their 2003 Annual Report. It is a twenty-one page
"report" that wasobviously very expensive to print. Tucked way in the
back is exactly what I expected. A vague and difficult to read one page
financial report. The rest appears to me to be a very expensive sales
letter and nothing more, complete with a postage paid envelope to send
in your donation.
Now you might say, "So what? They have to promote themselves." I
agree. However, this publication has six pages of calendar quality
photos of nothing but animals. Two and a half pages of self-glorifying
articles from HSUS staff, none of which was necessary. How much donor
money could have been saved by deleting this junk from the thousands
and thousands of these reports they printed?
According to the Comparative Financial Operations Report for 2003, the
HSUS has $116,205,882.00 in total liability and net assets. Over
$5,000,000 of that is in cash and cash equivalents, and another nearly
five and a half million in receivables. They also have nearly
$93,000,000 in market value investments. Not too bad.
In 2003, in revenue, additions and transfers, HSUS made $76,923,670.
Of that amount, sheltering programs received $10,551,527 and it was
shared with animal habitat and wildlife programs. Now, assuming it was
an even split, sheltering programs received $3,517,175.66
Now that's a lot of money, but not when you consider a good sized
shelter can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to run, three
million is really a drop in the bucket. They spent $21,145,769.00 in
fundraising and membership development. Six times what they put into
their shelter programs, which is what most people I talked to think
HSUS does with the money donated to them.
Providing Help or Selling It
I'm not sure what they spent the money on for their shelter programs,
but I will assure you they didn't fund any shelters. In fact, they
charge shelters and Animal Control offices for their assistance and
instructional material. I have been able to find little and or nothing
HSUS doesn't charge for when it comes to helping a shelter and their
educational programs.
For instance, lets say you or your town runs an animal shelter that is
struggling for one reason or another, which most are, HSUS is ready to
come in and help. For between $4000.00 and $20,000.00 they will send
their experts to your shelter through their Animal Services
Consultation Program. The fee depends on the size of the agency and the
complexity of its programs, charged on a sliding scale based on your
agency's resources. In other words, the more you have, the more they'll
take.
Youth Programs
Now, lets go back to our youth. You're in middle or high school and
want to start a club to promote rescue and do things to help companion
animals. HSUS can help you with that, too. Just go to humaneteen.org.
There you can buy a package full of all kinds of propaganda and learn
to be a full-fledged animal activist. They will sell your child a club
starter kit for $22.00 and then give activity suggestions like their
"Fight Fur" program.
Here they encourage kids to make flyers and hand them out in front of
businesses to protest against shoppers buying fur. HSUS will also give
your child cards to distribute at such events. They'll show your child
pictures of dead animals in traps and direct them to other sites where
they can see pictures of hunters beating seals over the head.
They will also promote vegen/vegetarian lifestyles to your child. Just
go to the message board for kids and you can read how many of the kids
are distressed, after reading the material HSUS SOLD them, because
their parents will not let them go vegen. You will also see posts
promoting PETA!
Now I want to be fair here. They do have some decent material that is
age appropriate and educational in nature. I think it's overpriced; for
instance, your child can rent a video to show their class for $25.00,
but some of it is good material. However, there is little promoting
appropriate training, grooming or responsible ownership of companion
animals. It seems to me the whole focus is turning our children into
activists, vegens and extremists.
Now if I want my child to be a vegen, or an activist, I will make that
decision and not HSUS. Our kids have enough on their plate without
having to be weighed down with this information or agenda.
Additionally, kids are kids and don't always make appropriate
decisions. When dealing with complex issues like activism and
protesting, it would be easy for them to get into trouble or hurt.
Doesn't PETA target children too?
Ethical Financial Practices
Let's get back to the money: Former President John Hoyt once instructed
his members on becoming more humane: "We begin, I suggest, by living
more simply, more sparingly." Let's see how he did. He made around
$200,000.00 in the late 1980's running HSUS. In 1986, HSUS bought his
house in Maryland for $310,000 and allowed him and his family to live
there, free of rent, until 1992. When he retired as CEO, HSUS gave him
a $1,000,000.00 bonus.Paul Irwin, another former President, while
making $300,000.00 from HSUS, was given an $85,000.00 interest free
loan to renovate his cabin in Maine. The cabin was held in trust by
HSUS, however his family continued to use it until he died. This is
just the tip of the iceberg. Makes me wonder.
Guilty by Association
Let's look at some of HSUS' associations: In April of 2000 HSUS sent
J.P. Goodwin as its emissary on an anti-fur mission to China. Goodwin
is not just any animal rights zealot, he was an avowed member of Animal
Liberation Front (ALF), a group once called one of the biggest domestic
terrorist organizations by the FBI. He had been convicted for vandalism
of several fur retailers and their property. Less than a year later, he
was formerly identified as a HSUS legislative staff member.
If you don't know about ALF you should check them out. They truly scare
the heck out of me. They are, in my opinion, every bit as much a threat
to people as Al Quiada. I cannot believe HSUS would hire such a person.
When asked questions about an arson fire at a slaughter house in
Petaluma, California, and a Utah feed co-op that nearly killed a
family, Goodwin stated, "We're ecstatic!"
Then, there is the PETA connection ...
HSUS has repeatedly hired PETA employees in their organization. Their
head of investigations, several investigators, a computer programmer,
just to name a few. Sorry folks, my opinion is, once a terrorist,
always a terrorist. When HSUS hires these people, they appear to
support the crimes these individuals may have been involved in.
In 2003, HSUS VP Martin Stephens was asked to recommend three
people to serve on an EPA "pollution prevention and toxics" panel. Two
of his three choices were PETA employees.
All Talk and No Action
While HSUS will admit they don't run or fund any shelters, you usually
find it at the bottom of the page or tucked away somewhere near the end
of a statement. As I mentioned before, they don't put their money where
their mouth is. Get this …
In 1995, when the Washington DC animal shelter was going to have to
close due to a budget shortfall, HSUS (based in DC) offered to build
and operate a DC shelter at its own expense to serve as a national
model. There were, of course, conditions.
HSUS wanted the city to give it 3-5 acres of land and tax exempt status
for all of its real estate holdings in the District of Columbia.
(Remember, they buy some executives homes to live in among other
property holdings.) The DC government offered a long-term lease but
HSUS refused to proceed unless it would "own absolutely" the land. The
district declined, and the only HSUS funded animal shelter never
materialized.
HSUS, who makes and has enough money to fund a shelter in every state,
as well as subsidize spay/neuter programs, declined to help the dogs in
its own back yard. Why? Money is all I can think of. Perhaps they were
afraid they would soil their Armani suits by actually working with a
dog.
The New CEO
Rather than go on a tirade about the new President and CEO of HSUS, I
have put some quotes from him below. Read them, and you decide.
"I think they wanted the aggressive approach," he says. "They wanted
someone who was going to think things up. And they got him." June
2004, Washington Post when asked about his selection as CEO.
"We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are
creations of human selective breeding." Quoted in Animal People, May,
1993
Overview
I could go on for days about HSUS, but I will stop here. In my opinion,
they are little more than an organization whose main agenda is filling
the coffers and pushing an extremist agenda through misinformation and
exploitation. Again, my opinion, they have done nothing but profit from
the contributions of people who don't know any better. I have tried to
see it otherwise, I simply can't.
I highly recommend you go to activistcash.com and see what they have
there about HSUS and their connection with PETA. There are several
other sites I found interesting, as well as many stories about HSUS in
the archive of the Washington Post.
Would I give anything to the Humane Society of the United States? Yes I
would. A pooper-scooper, they can use to go clean my yard. At least
then we would know they actually have done something for a dog this
year.
This article may be republished using the following attribution box:
------------
Copyright ©2004 Christopher Aust, Master Dog Trainer & Creator:
The Natural Cooperative Training System (NCTS) for Dogs
The Instinctual Development System (IDS) for Puppies
Subscribe to the BARK 'n' SCRATCH Newsletter: subscribe@Master-Dog-
Training.com
VISIT NOW: http://www.Master-Dog-Training.com
August 2004
I was rather amazed at the number of people who wrote to me about my
opinions regarding the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)
when I did my last few articles. Then again, maybe I shouldn't be.
Before about two weeks ago, I myself was rather ignorant as to the real
goals of HSUS, and where their, (actually your) money goes. As I always
do though, I decided to edumacate myself about them.
I also conducted a poll of 100 average people. Just the average Joe in
the street. 94% of the people thought HSUS ran the local shelters in
their community. 4% knew about their other programs and the remaining
2% had no idea who they were. Of the 94% all said they would donate to
HSUS based on what they knew about them. I'm betting HSUS is banking,
literally, on these types of individuals.
I also went online and found some rather interesting, at times quite
scary, information on several web sites. I would have interviewed a
HSUS representative, but after last week's newsletter, I got an email
from one that was little more than hate mail and very offensive!
Founders
Coleman Burke, then president of the American Bible Society, Cleveland
Amory and Helen Jones, founded HSUS in 1954. As far as I have been
able to tell, Mr. Burke served as their President until 1970 when John
Hoyt, a Presbyterian minister, took over as President and CEO until
1996.
Until just a few months ago, the President and CEO was Paul Irwin, a
Methodist minister. The current CEO and President is Wayne Pacelle who
admittedly has had ties with some radical (and I mean radical) animal
rights groups in the past.
Now, is it important I mention the religious background? Maybe and
maybe not. What I noticed though is the organization, at least to me,
has an evangelical feel. Is this a bad thing? No. I don't see why
unless you are running the finances in a manner similar to Jim and
Tammie Faye Baker! That sure is the way it looks to me.
Officers and Directors
HSUS is an organization with their primary focus being animals. As I
reviewed the names and titles of the Board Officers and Directors, I
found it curious they had no DVM's (vets) on either. They have three
MDs', three PhDs' and six attorneys. Am I the only one that finds this
odd? Plenty of lawyers, but no vet. Hmmm…Maybe it's just a typo.
Comparative Financial Operations Report
When I conducted my interview with Kathy Bauch a few weeks ago, she
refused to answer any questions regarding HSUS' finances for a
"newsletter." She did offer to send me their 2003 financials though.
This is what they send whenever some one has questions about their
finances. As I mentioned last week, if it was similar to what they have
online, it would be vague and difficult to decipher. What I got was
much more.
What I received is their 2003 Annual Report. It is a twenty-one page
"report" that wasobviously very expensive to print. Tucked way in the
back is exactly what I expected. A vague and difficult to read one page
financial report. The rest appears to me to be a very expensive sales
letter and nothing more, complete with a postage paid envelope to send
in your donation.
Now you might say, "So what? They have to promote themselves." I
agree. However, this publication has six pages of calendar quality
photos of nothing but animals. Two and a half pages of self-glorifying
articles from HSUS staff, none of which was necessary. How much donor
money could have been saved by deleting this junk from the thousands
and thousands of these reports they printed?
According to the Comparative Financial Operations Report for 2003, the
HSUS has $116,205,882.00 in total liability and net assets. Over
$5,000,000 of that is in cash and cash equivalents, and another nearly
five and a half million in receivables. They also have nearly
$93,000,000 in market value investments. Not too bad.
In 2003, in revenue, additions and transfers, HSUS made $76,923,670.
Of that amount, sheltering programs received $10,551,527 and it was
shared with animal habitat and wildlife programs. Now, assuming it was
an even split, sheltering programs received $3,517,175.66
Now that's a lot of money, but not when you consider a good sized
shelter can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to run, three
million is really a drop in the bucket. They spent $21,145,769.00 in
fundraising and membership development. Six times what they put into
their shelter programs, which is what most people I talked to think
HSUS does with the money donated to them.
Providing Help or Selling It
I'm not sure what they spent the money on for their shelter programs,
but I will assure you they didn't fund any shelters. In fact, they
charge shelters and Animal Control offices for their assistance and
instructional material. I have been able to find little and or nothing
HSUS doesn't charge for when it comes to helping a shelter and their
educational programs.
For instance, lets say you or your town runs an animal shelter that is
struggling for one reason or another, which most are, HSUS is ready to
come in and help. For between $4000.00 and $20,000.00 they will send
their experts to your shelter through their Animal Services
Consultation Program. The fee depends on the size of the agency and the
complexity of its programs, charged on a sliding scale based on your
agency's resources. In other words, the more you have, the more they'll
take.
Youth Programs
Now, lets go back to our youth. You're in middle or high school and
want to start a club to promote rescue and do things to help companion
animals. HSUS can help you with that, too. Just go to humaneteen.org.
There you can buy a package full of all kinds of propaganda and learn
to be a full-fledged animal activist. They will sell your child a club
starter kit for $22.00 and then give activity suggestions like their
"Fight Fur" program.
Here they encourage kids to make flyers and hand them out in front of
businesses to protest against shoppers buying fur. HSUS will also give
your child cards to distribute at such events. They'll show your child
pictures of dead animals in traps and direct them to other sites where
they can see pictures of hunters beating seals over the head.
They will also promote vegen/vegetarian lifestyles to your child. Just
go to the message board for kids and you can read how many of the kids
are distressed, after reading the material HSUS SOLD them, because
their parents will not let them go vegen. You will also see posts
promoting PETA!
Now I want to be fair here. They do have some decent material that is
age appropriate and educational in nature. I think it's overpriced; for
instance, your child can rent a video to show their class for $25.00,
but some of it is good material. However, there is little promoting
appropriate training, grooming or responsible ownership of companion
animals. It seems to me the whole focus is turning our children into
activists, vegens and extremists.
Now if I want my child to be a vegen, or an activist, I will make that
decision and not HSUS. Our kids have enough on their plate without
having to be weighed down with this information or agenda.
Additionally, kids are kids and don't always make appropriate
decisions. When dealing with complex issues like activism and
protesting, it would be easy for them to get into trouble or hurt.
Doesn't PETA target children too?
Ethical Financial Practices
Let's get back to the money: Former President John Hoyt once instructed
his members on becoming more humane: "We begin, I suggest, by living
more simply, more sparingly." Let's see how he did. He made around
$200,000.00 in the late 1980's running HSUS. In 1986, HSUS bought his
house in Maryland for $310,000 and allowed him and his family to live
there, free of rent, until 1992. When he retired as CEO, HSUS gave him
a $1,000,000.00 bonus.Paul Irwin, another former President, while
making $300,000.00 from HSUS, was given an $85,000.00 interest free
loan to renovate his cabin in Maine. The cabin was held in trust by
HSUS, however his family continued to use it until he died. This is
just the tip of the iceberg. Makes me wonder.
Guilty by Association
Let's look at some of HSUS' associations: In April of 2000 HSUS sent
J.P. Goodwin as its emissary on an anti-fur mission to China. Goodwin
is not just any animal rights zealot, he was an avowed member of Animal
Liberation Front (ALF), a group once called one of the biggest domestic
terrorist organizations by the FBI. He had been convicted for vandalism
of several fur retailers and their property. Less than a year later, he
was formerly identified as a HSUS legislative staff member.
If you don't know about ALF you should check them out. They truly scare
the heck out of me. They are, in my opinion, every bit as much a threat
to people as Al Quiada. I cannot believe HSUS would hire such a person.
When asked questions about an arson fire at a slaughter house in
Petaluma, California, and a Utah feed co-op that nearly killed a
family, Goodwin stated, "We're ecstatic!"
Then, there is the PETA connection ...
HSUS has repeatedly hired PETA employees in their organization. Their
head of investigations, several investigators, a computer programmer,
just to name a few. Sorry folks, my opinion is, once a terrorist,
always a terrorist. When HSUS hires these people, they appear to
support the crimes these individuals may have been involved in.
In 2003, HSUS VP Martin Stephens was asked to recommend three
people to serve on an EPA "pollution prevention and toxics" panel. Two
of his three choices were PETA employees.
All Talk and No Action
While HSUS will admit they don't run or fund any shelters, you usually
find it at the bottom of the page or tucked away somewhere near the end
of a statement. As I mentioned before, they don't put their money where
their mouth is. Get this …
In 1995, when the Washington DC animal shelter was going to have to
close due to a budget shortfall, HSUS (based in DC) offered to build
and operate a DC shelter at its own expense to serve as a national
model. There were, of course, conditions.
HSUS wanted the city to give it 3-5 acres of land and tax exempt status
for all of its real estate holdings in the District of Columbia.
(Remember, they buy some executives homes to live in among other
property holdings.) The DC government offered a long-term lease but
HSUS refused to proceed unless it would "own absolutely" the land. The
district declined, and the only HSUS funded animal shelter never
materialized.
HSUS, who makes and has enough money to fund a shelter in every state,
as well as subsidize spay/neuter programs, declined to help the dogs in
its own back yard. Why? Money is all I can think of. Perhaps they were
afraid they would soil their Armani suits by actually working with a
dog.
The New CEO
Rather than go on a tirade about the new President and CEO of HSUS, I
have put some quotes from him below. Read them, and you decide.
"I think they wanted the aggressive approach," he says. "They wanted
someone who was going to think things up. And they got him." June
2004, Washington Post when asked about his selection as CEO.
"We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are
creations of human selective breeding." Quoted in Animal People, May,
1993
Overview
I could go on for days about HSUS, but I will stop here. In my opinion,
they are little more than an organization whose main agenda is filling
the coffers and pushing an extremist agenda through misinformation and
exploitation. Again, my opinion, they have done nothing but profit from
the contributions of people who don't know any better. I have tried to
see it otherwise, I simply can't.
I highly recommend you go to activistcash.com and see what they have
there about HSUS and their connection with PETA. There are several
other sites I found interesting, as well as many stories about HSUS in
the archive of the Washington Post.
Would I give anything to the Humane Society of the United States? Yes I
would. A pooper-scooper, they can use to go clean my yard. At least
then we would know they actually have done something for a dog this
year.
This article may be republished using the following attribution box:
------------
Copyright ©2004 Christopher Aust, Master Dog Trainer & Creator:
The Natural Cooperative Training System (NCTS) for Dogs
The Instinctual Development System (IDS) for Puppies
Subscribe to the BARK 'n' SCRATCH Newsletter: subscribe@Master-Dog-
Training.com
VISIT NOW: http://www.Master-Dog-Training.com
Monday, January 14, 2008
Animal Rights- Domestic Terrorism
These postings came through one of my lists. In addition to the upcoming fight next Wednesday morning with the Columbia County Commissioners over the new breeding ban kennel law they are now trying to institute, this came upon a national level. A friend of mine informs me she is even fighting a province wide breeding ban they are trying to install in the middle of the interior of British Columbia, Canada, in order to get rid of dog mushers. It is now a worldwide problem. If you send money to the Humane Society Of The United States, which is the funding arm of PETA, ALF and ELF, you are contributing to Animal Rights domestic terrorism and the destruction of your own Constitutional Rights. Go to the websites of any of these organizations if you do not believe me.
Their sole goal is to do away with ALL animal ownership, or as they call it, exploitation and slavery, and turn the entire world into Vegans through incremental legislation. Their aim is to give all animals the same legal rights as human beings. You will never be allowed to own a pet of any kind,and never to use any animal products such as steak, milk, eggs, or leather. They have also opened the first ever Vegan mall in SE Portland. It guarantees all goods and services you can obtain in any of the stores in this mall use no animal products what soever. Their plan is to open thousands of these malls across the USA.
I don't know about you, but I severely object to anyone trying to legislate their cult religion onto me. I call that fascism. These are not warm and fuzzy people, these are terrorists. Get a clue. And don't support them,and DON'T go to, buy, or support this movie for starters.
This is war, folks. It is your inalienable rights versus their cult power over your life. If you think they have some good points, think on this: in 2006 PETA destroyed 97% of the animals turned over to its "rescue"operations. We in the dog community work to support animal welfare, educate the public, and end animal cruelty, but detest these extreme animal rightists.
Cheryl Anderson Cherden Shelties since 1966
Their sole goal is to do away with ALL animal ownership, or as they call it, exploitation and slavery, and turn the entire world into Vegans through incremental legislation. Their aim is to give all animals the same legal rights as human beings. You will never be allowed to own a pet of any kind,and never to use any animal products such as steak, milk, eggs, or leather. They have also opened the first ever Vegan mall in SE Portland. It guarantees all goods and services you can obtain in any of the stores in this mall use no animal products what soever. Their plan is to open thousands of these malls across the USA.
I don't know about you, but I severely object to anyone trying to legislate their cult religion onto me. I call that fascism. These are not warm and fuzzy people, these are terrorists. Get a clue. And don't support them,and DON'T go to, buy, or support this movie for starters.
This is war, folks. It is your inalienable rights versus their cult power over your life. If you think they have some good points, think on this: in 2006 PETA destroyed 97% of the animals turned over to its "rescue"operations. We in the dog community work to support animal welfare, educate the public, and end animal cruelty, but detest these extreme animal rightists.
Cheryl Anderson Cherden Shelties since 1966
Monday, August 6, 2007
HSUS' Wayne Pacelle no longer speaking at Cat Writers Association Annual Conference
http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2007/08/03/hsus-speaker-out/
HSUS speaker outAugust 3, 2007
As Gina blogged last week, the board of the Dog Writers Association of America voted to back out of its participation in the Cat Writers Association annual conference because CWA had lined up the HSUS' Wayne Pacelle as its keynote speaker — and quite a folks in CWA weren't too happy about it, either. Many of the members of both organizations are responsible breeders or exhibitors of dogs and cats. Given that the event is being held in California and HSUS had recently spearheaded the campaign for AB 1634, a California mandatory spay/neuter law that many felt targeted responsible breeders while doing nothing to reduce puppy mills, unethical breeders, or shelter death rates, this was probably not the best year for Pacelle to be on the podium. Today, CWA president Nancy Peterson announced that Pacelle would no longer be addressing the members, and that there would be, this year, no speaker at the annual banquet. I had planned on being there either way. Despite the fact that I don't agree with HSUS on this issue and, in fact, quite a few others, I don't think a speaker being controversial is a reason not to attend their speech. I've been known to enjoy a good catfight. Still, I hope it's a chance for the dogs and cats to kiss and make up, and that DWAA will vote to restore its support of the event, which is in November.
HSUS speaker outAugust 3, 2007
As Gina blogged last week, the board of the Dog Writers Association of America voted to back out of its participation in the Cat Writers Association annual conference because CWA had lined up the HSUS' Wayne Pacelle as its keynote speaker — and quite a folks in CWA weren't too happy about it, either. Many of the members of both organizations are responsible breeders or exhibitors of dogs and cats. Given that the event is being held in California and HSUS had recently spearheaded the campaign for AB 1634, a California mandatory spay/neuter law that many felt targeted responsible breeders while doing nothing to reduce puppy mills, unethical breeders, or shelter death rates, this was probably not the best year for Pacelle to be on the podium. Today, CWA president Nancy Peterson announced that Pacelle would no longer be addressing the members, and that there would be, this year, no speaker at the annual banquet. I had planned on being there either way. Despite the fact that I don't agree with HSUS on this issue and, in fact, quite a few others, I don't think a speaker being controversial is a reason not to attend their speech. I've been known to enjoy a good catfight. Still, I hope it's a chance for the dogs and cats to kiss and make up, and that DWAA will vote to restore its support of the event, which is in November.
Friday, July 27, 2007
HSUS wants to take control of FEMA's National Disaster Canine Response Teams
HSUS has made big strides in it's efforts to take control of FEMA's National Disaster Canine Response Teams. Now they're soliciting those of us who do/ have done/ want to do SAR, and making available an HSUS sponsorship to cover the costs of training, equipment and deployment travel. HSUS is offering handlers thou$and$ that we ordinarily have to spend out of our own pockets with our search dogs. I'm sure that will attract a lot of people interested in various tracking hobbies.A handler can only apply the training techniques developed by HSUS. (Excuse me, I'm gagging on this...brb.. .) My name must have been pulled from 10-year old county records, as it's been that long since I was active in SAR. HSUS has slyly insinuated itself into FEMA, with the objective of becoming the decision-makers about the deployment of search and rescue dogs, K9 cops, and service dogs in any disaster. Don't ask me what credentials they bring to the table because I haven't seen any document that would qualify them to manage responders, communication, or sites, much less any experience with handling SAR dogs.In addition, HSUS organizers in all states are successfully seducing already-overwhelmed govt agencies into trusting them (HSUS) to determine whether pets can be salvaged following disasters. It's doubtful they'd believe that any animal would pass muster and be worthy of rescuing, wouldn't you agree? I've spoken with the AZ rep several times without letting him know that I'm on to him. Agencies are willing to hand over large chucks of control just to get out from under it themselves. And the reps have palms of honey and lips of gold.These three strategies aren't the only ones in play. Two others that give me chills are 1) statements that they have a very comprehensive agreement with FEMA regarding animals and their ownership during and after disasters; and 2) when you read the fine print about their sponsorship of training, gear, and travel, you discover that you'll be under THEIR command from now on - not the federal, regional, state or local affiliations you presently work with.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)