I read the annual report link you posted.
In 2007 they dispersed 7 “MILLIONS of dollars”
from the 112 “MILLIONS of dollars” they raised.
While any organization has overheads, 94% overhead is unusually high.
I would rather give my money to a local organization where perhaps 80% might do real good. Versus a fundraising and lobbying behemoth where only 6% goes to actual help.
[QUOTE=vacation1;4071911]
A consumer rights organization? What is this, Life, liberty and the pursuit of low, low prices? I have my issues with HSUS too, largely over where how it spends its money and its tendency to mislead donors, but the hissies people have over it - ooh, the HSUS is coming for your pets! - is silly.[/QUOTE]
This “activist cash” website thing is just spin put out by a lobbying group for the food industry run by a lobbyist. People like to post to this link a lot when the HSUS comes up, but they neglect to mention that “group” has as much of an agenda (at least) as they accuse HSUS of having. I dug around on the web and pulled up the nonprofit tax return for the savory company that runs the lobby group.
I’m not advocating for HSUS here as I am not intimately familiar with their organization, but would like to point out that as good as “animal welfare” goals are, if you really consider the term, what “animal welfare” means is trying to clean up a problem that’s already been created. Kinda like “human welfare”. Plenty of other living beings used to have very little in the way of “rights”. You know, like women and blacks and stuff. Those are extreme examples, but this “activist cash” thing chaps my hide. That group isn’t exactly out for the welfare of the public either, just the welfare of their wallets.
As I included before…If I want to read the truth on an animal rights & terrorist supporting organization, I don’t read their propaganda.
Read: http://activistcash.com/organization...ew.cfm/oid/136
Take a look at some of the other groups on the site.
HSUS aren’t the good guys…they did hire PETA’s old Pres Pacelle to run their group also.
[QUOTE=Trakehner;4072204]
As I included before…If I want to read the truth on an animal rights & terrorist supporting organization, I don’t read their propaganda.
Read: http://activistcash.com/organization...ew.cfm/oid/136
Take a look at some of the other groups on the site.
HSUS aren’t the good guys…they did hire PETA’s old Pres Pacelle to run their group also.[/QUOTE]
Uh, sorry, activistcash is just as much propaganda as anything out there.
ETA Here’s what I posted about what I dug up on activistcash on a previous thread:
In digging around, I learned the website Activistcash.com is run by the Center for Consumer Freedom. The Center for Consumer Freedom is a 501©(3) (somehow) providing “information” on food and beverage issues. Their 990 tax return lists Berman and Company as the Management Company, and Richard Berman as the President, Executive Director, and Director. Only 5 other board members are listed. Several are listed as employees of Berman or otherwise providing services to the Center for CF. Conflict of interest, anyone? Also in the 990, Berman and Co. is listed as the highest paid independent contractor, receiving $1,562,280 in compensation in 2007. Next highest paid was the New York Times, which received only $107,575. The Center “shares office space” with Berman. Berman received over $200K in expense reimbursements from the Center. ETA: There are no paid employees, only paid board members.
Berman and Co. is a PR firm. They have as much or more of an agenda than whatever they accuse HSUS of having. The Center for Consumer Freedom is essentially a lobby group located in Washington DC, in the offices of a PR firm.
[QUOTE=tangledweb;4072176]
I read the annual report link you posted.
In 2007 they dispersed 7 “MILLIONS of dollars”
from the 112 “MILLIONS of dollars” they raised.
While any organization has overheads, 94% overhead is unusually high.
I would rather give my money to a local organization where perhaps 80% might do real good. Versus a fundraising and lobbying behemoth where only 6% goes to actual help.[/QUOTE]
This is rather mis-leading information. Yes, they dispersed 7 million for domestic cruelty , but also another 13 million for disaster response, 27 million for campaigns, etc for a total of 112 million dispersed. The HSUS is about more than just feeding and caring for homeless animals. That’s what local shelters can help with. The HSUS is also about education and new legislation to promote animal welfare. And I support them in that effort.
I like Ellen Degeneres and believe that HSUS’s good outweighs its bad.
The MFHA should keep its nose in its own business. There are plenty of foxhunters who do support animal rights.
Go Celtics!
Do not confuse HSUS with the American Humane Association
http://www.americanhumane.org/
Different agendas and different monetary allocation.
Read completely before you donate.
I know Wayne Purcell quite well. No confusion on my part. There was a great piece on him in the NYTimes several months ago if anyone is confused.
That is not disbursed, that is spent. I personally don’t think buying billboards and 30 second TV adverts helps animals. You are welcome to think otherwise and back that with your money.
My “agenda” is to alert people to a well meaning but misguided fundraising effort.
Don’t think HSUS wants to eliminate pets - oh and “livestock” - that means YOUR horse, too…
Wayne Pacelle has said (emphasis mine):
"We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding …One generation and out. We have no problems with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding."
— Animal People News, May 1993
Not confused…sickened would be the more accurate description.
the original link is to comment on the show or join the show…
where does it say anywhere that ellen is hosting an auction for HSUS? i caouldnt find it anywhere… and no offense but alot of people get blames for stuff in the tabloids that isnt 100% fact…
I agree so not argueing, but show me the link before i write the show telling them its wrong…
Ellen is doing a wonderful thing.
As a HUGE animal activist and a true lover of animals, she would not be wasting time and publicity, let alone the ridiculous amounts of cash being raised on an organization that would have nothing but the interests of the aminals suffering right NOW at the forefront. Posting links to websites blindly talking badly about animal welfare and rights organizations isn’t going to change that.
[QUOTE=LarryBird;4072372]
I know Wayne Purcell quite well. No confusion on my part. There was a great piece on him in the NYTimes several months ago if anyone is confused.[/QUOTE]
My friends that know me “quite well” can spell my name.
I have no problem with HSUS.
The HSUS does not want to eliminate people owning horses. That’s an absurd claim.
As an animal owner I have more of a problem with Ellen: she took in a rescue just to break a legal contract and dump the dog on someone else a short time later. Then when caught, she fought with the shelter rather than admit maybe she was wrong. Poo on her.
My two cents
HSUS will never see a nickel of my money. They do VERY LITTLE on the ground, real world assistance to improve the welfare of animals. They just show up for the photo ops. Katrina is one of many examples. I have too many friends doing real animal assistance who have been in too many places doing the work, only to see HSUS grab the headlines and the dollars.
One need only visit HSUS’ web site to see that they are opposed to hunting, rodeo, and other use of animals that is, in one word, humane. As for Wayne Pacelle, he certainly does remain true to his PETA roots, he’s just clever enough to work in the mainstream. Much more profitable. The facts remain, for those who do real research, that in the first place HSUS is not well run as a charitable organization, and in the second place, they just flat do not spend the money that comes in on the causes they claim they are raising money for- and again, Hurricane Katrina is a classic example. They use that money to lobby at the state and federal level for laws that, any way you look at them, advance an ultimate cause of making it more difficult for you to own a dog or horse or cat or chicken.
To those who think HSUS is just fine, and doing good animal welfare work- I have no doubt that the majority of the contributors think that way. Likewise, the majority of the PETA contributors are in no way radical, they are just people who want to help animals. But if you think that their leadership is for animals as pets, you are sadly mistaken. It’s harder to find the radical rhetoric that used to be on the HSUS pages, but I bet computer geeks can still find it.
That said- I DO grow weary of the nonstop strident rhetoric from MFHA, USSA and others. Hunters, and horse owners, are a really, really small minority in this country these days, and it is way past time we started focusing our efforts on protecting minority rights- as Lord Acton said, the true test of a functioning democracy (or in our case constitutional republic). In fact, after a recent flurry of emails regarding MFHA and HSUS, I’m getting ready to write a really long letter, as soon as I find a few consecutive hours to devote to the task. Since this is the hunting forum, I’ll just focus on the fact that MFHA and USSA have seemingly forgotten our major and most important emphasis- namely, that hunters do far more to protect wildlife habitat and wildlife populations than non-hunters. As a trail advocate, over the years I’ve been involved with groups that made themselves so invaluable in terms of preserving trails that barring horse access from those trails was absolutely unthinkinable on the part of the land managing agency. Hunters need to do the same thing- though small in number, they need to make themselves indispensable.
Two quick examples of beefs regarding USSA in a recent newsletter: one was, fight the Park Service’s proposal to ban lead shot in a certain park (sorry, newsletter is upstairs and I’m not going to get it to refresh my memories on the details). Hello- I went duck hunting in the mid 70s in North Carolina and folks were griping because we had to use steel shot. This is not a new issue. And inasmuch as I now have responsibility for pollution problems on some federal lands, including some shooting ranges, I’m all too aware that lead shot is a legitimate concern in some places. We need to be a little smarter about picking our fights. Second issue- same newsletter urged opposition to a proposed Endangered Species Act listing (lynx) because it might affect trapping for a few people. Hello again. If you are a trapper, and there is an endangered species in your trapping area, you just go get a take permit from the Fish and Wildlife Service- yes, red tape and all that, but doable. No question that the ESA has huge flaws and problems and controversy- but I work with a fair number of FWS biologists, and I can tell you that they are ARDENT advocates and practitioners of hunting and fishing, in other words, they are us, let’s stay on their good side.
Okay, that was maybe more than two cents worth, I’ll shut up now.
[QUOTE=Jealoushe;4072120]
Yepp. She’s a tool.[/QUOTE]
What does “she’s a tool” mean? I am utterly unhip to the term.
[QUOTE=Beverley;4073518]
Okay, that was maybe more than two cents worth, I’ll shut up now.[/QUOTE]
Please don’t shut up. Good post filled with common sense and some simple truths.
[QUOTE=LarryBird;4072275]
I like Ellen Degeneres and believe that HSUS’s good outweighs its bad.
The MFHA should keep its nose in its own business. There are plenty of foxhunters who do support animal rights.
Go Celtics![/QUOTE]
Ummmm…wha? Please tell me who, because I don’t want to hunt with them! If they are supporters of animal rights why in the world would they hunt?
The HSUS waste during Katrina is enough evidence for me of their agenda. If some of their puppy mill legislation went through people like Caesar Milan couldn’t keep his pack in a compound together.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
