Animal Rights 13 - ThinkingAfield.org

HSUS Vows to Expose Internet Hunting…Even Though It Doesn’t Exist

June 30, 2015 Glen Wunderlich

We recently obtained a fundraising letter from the Humane Society of the United States that really piqued our interest—and not just to mock the low-grade socks that were included. In the letter, the Humane Society of the United States claimed that donations help the organization “investigate and expose brutal industries” including “internet hunting.”

Huh? Come again? We have some familiarity with hunting terminology, but this one mystified us. Since HSUS is asking for money to help “investigate” internet hunting (while only spending 1% of its budget on funding local shelters), we thought we would do some investigating of our own to learn more about this industry. Here’s what we learned about Internet hunting: Read more

Animal Rights

How Does HSUS Use Donations? Cheap Socks, For One.

June 25, 2015 Glen Wunderlich

This from www.HumaneWatch.org…

We frequently point out that the misnamed “Humane Society” of the United States gives a minuscule percentage of the money it raises to local pet shelters. But this begs the question: If HSUS isn’t spending money on shelters, where are its donors’ dollars going? Below is a breakdown of HSUS’s expenditures from its most recent financial statement.

Employee compensation is the group’s single greatest expense. It’s not cheap to pay the salary of the $4 million man as well as HSUS’s army of lawyers and PETA alumni. Also noteworthy is the money HSUS is spending on “education.” Education can be a very misleading term in the charity world.

For instance, we recently received mail from HSUS that came with a free pair of socks (another thing the group squanders donor money on). The socks featured dogs and cats on them, which we thought was ironic since these are the same animals HSUS deprives of funding at local shelters. The socks came with two sheets of paper discussing HSUS’s agenda, and an envelope asking for a financial contribution. Read more

Animal Rights

HSUS Pleads, Lies to Florida Gov. to Stop Bear Hunt

June 13, 2015 Glen Wunderlich

A surprise to nobody, the Humane Society of the United States is protesting the state of Florida’s consideration of managing their ever-increasing black bear population. In a June 10 press conference, HSUS mouthpiece Laura Bevan spread false information and called on the governor to interfere with biologist recommendations and to stop any future bear hunt. As is typical HSUS style, you can bet the press-conference circus was just the first step in perverting state and federal systems to advance their radical agenda.

With human-bear encounters, road kill and other issues increasing throughout many regions of Florida, the state’s Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission has proposed a one-week hunting season in October for the bruins.

And, never missing an opportunity to stop hunting under any and all circumstances, HSUS used emotion and grandstanding to get the media’s attention in hopes of appearing relevant in any science-based discussion of hunting. The words they uttered, however, betray any semblance of knowledge on the subject. Read more

Animal Rights, Hunting

Rhino Hunter Culls Problem Bull in Namibia

May 22, 2015 Glen Wunderlich

DALLAS – Seventeen months after DSC’s controversial black rhino auction, the actual hunt ended in Namibia this week when the hunter killed a bull that scientists had identified as an impediment to the survival of its own species.

The old, aggressive, non-breeding rhino was known to charge and kill breeding bulls, as well as cows and calves, decreasing productivity and increasing mortality of the herd.

Removing this specimen will benefit rhinos both biologically and financially.

The $350,000 paid for the permit will go to Namibia to help fund law enforcement efforts to curtail indiscriminate killing by rhino poachers. (Note: It’s unclear whether the funding could be stopped by a recent lawsuit filed by animal-rights group PETA.) Read more

Animal Rights, Hunting

PETA Lawsuit Imperils Rhino Populations

May 14, 2015 Glen Wunderlich

DALLAS – Animal-rights group PETA is suing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to stop a management hunt that scientists say would benefit endangered rhino populations both biologically and financially.

Against a torrent of death threats, DSC auctioned the hunt in 2014 on behalf of the Namibia Ministry of Environment and Tourism. The auction generated a record $350,000. All proceeds were earmarked for rhino conservation in the African nation, and held in escrow pending U.S. approval of an import permit that would allow the hunter to bring home the taxidermy from his hunt. That permit was recently approved after U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service scientists confirmed the benefits to rhino populations.

Basically, the hunt would be used to remove an older, non-breeding, aggressive black rhino bull known to decrease productivity and increase mortality of its herd, while the $350,000 would fund law enforcement efforts to thwart indiscriminate rhino killing by poachers.

PETA’s lawsuit could postpone the hunt as well as the funding for rhino protection.

“Next time you hear about poachers slaughtering rhinos in Namibia, thank PETA,” said Ben Carter, executive director of DSC. Read more

Animal Rights, Hunting, Wildlife

NSSF Recognizes Sen. Inhofe for Shining Light On Anti-Hunting Group’s Misleading Fundraising Tactics

April 27, 2015 Glen Wunderlich

WASHINGTON, D.C-The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry, this week recognized Sen. James M. (Jim) Inhofe (R-Okla.) for his success in bringing attention to the misleading fundraising tactics of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).

During a recent U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee hearing on the Bipartisan Sportsmen’s Act of 2015, Senator Inhofe questioned HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle about the organization’s fundraising activity, citing the group’s animal-focused advertising. Senator Inhofe pointed out that although HSUS raised $1.7 million from Oklahomans from 2011 to 2013, largely through ads implying the funds raised would be used to help animals displaced by tornadoes, legitimate Oklahoma animal welfare organizations received only $110,000.

“Sen. Inhofe deserves great credit for taking the opportunity afforded by the hearing on the Bipartisan Sportsmen’s Act to point out that HSUS clearly has a different agenda than they want the public to understand,” said Larry, Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel. “While HSUS masquerades as an animal welfare organization, the group has as its ultimate goal the ending of all hunting nationwide. HSUS opposition to the Bipartisan Sportsmen’s Act is only one example. This radical group takes any opportunity it can find at the federal and state levels to diminish Americans’ opportunities to exercise their hunting traditions. We thank Sen. Inhofe for working to expose the ongoing duplicity of the Humane Society of the United States.”

Animal Rights, Hunting, Wildlife

New Poll: HSUS Continues to Dupe Donors

April 16, 2015 Glen Wunderlich

GW: A corrected version of a previous post is here from humanewatch.org

Evidence continues to mount that the Humane Society of the United States is betraying its donors’ trust. Last week we reported that HSUS internal polls showed the vast majority of HSUS donors believe their contributions to HSUS are used to fund local animal shelters. Now this week, new polling data reinforces our assertion that HSUS is knowingly misleading its donors.

We recently asked 1,051 HSUS donors why they support the Humane Society of the United States, and the results of the survey are very revealing. Over 80% of the HSUS donors said that the primary reason they support HSUS is “to help HSUS care for homeless dogs and cats in animal shelters” and to “reduce the number of animals put down in shelters each year.” We then asked the logical follow up question—“were you aware that HSUS gives just 1 percent of its budget to local pet shelters?” Over 87% of HSUS donors answered “No.” Also, HSUS does not run a single pet shelter of its own and is not affiliated with similarly named local humane societies.

Download the survey in PDF format here.

And that’s not all. After learning that HSUS only gives 1% of its budget to local animal shelters, 75% of HSUS donors are less likely to support HSUS. Lastly, 95% of HSUS donors agreed that HSUS should be required to disclose the fact that is not affiliated with local humane societies in its advertising.

Animal Rights

New Poll: HSUS Continues to Dupe Donors

April 15, 2015 Glen Wunderlich

Download the survey in PDF format here.

The results of our survey are disappointing, but not surprising. Based on the fact that 75% of our survey respondents are now less likely to support HSUS, it is clear that HSUS’s financial support is almost entirely dependent on its ability to continue this hoax. HSUS is in no rush to clear up the widespread confusion it has with its donors. That’s why we’re here.

Survey Results Below:

Animal Rights

Discover Dumps HSUS

April 10, 2015 Glen Wunderlich

HumaneWatchers have a history of activism when it comes to asking companies not to partner with the deceptive Humane Society of the United States. Readers have helped score wins by getting corporations such as YellowTail Wines and Pilot Travel Centers to stop supporting HSUS. As you may know our most recent campaign encouraged Americans to “Discover the Scam,” for their support of HSUS through an affinity credit card. Now, after two calls from Discover’s corporate offices to us and their decision to discontinue their partnership with HSUS, we are calling off our campaign.

This development is great news. As a result of Discover cancelling the affinity card program, HSUS stands to lose over $450,000 in expected revenue—and that’s a conservative estimate. It’s likely over $2 million.

Animal Rights

Dismissed: HSUS Lawsuit to Silence Maine’s Wildlife Professionals

April 3, 2015 Glen Wunderlich

On Friday, April 3, 2015 Maine Superior Court Justice Joyce Wheeler issued a final judgment in the question of the state’s ability to comment on wildlife issues. In her ruling, Wheeler sided with the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance and fully dismissed a lawsuit aimed at silencing Maine’s wildlife professionals.

The case started in the closing weeks of the Maine bear campaign over Question 1 on last November’s ballot. The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), through their front group Mainers for Fair Bear Hunting, sued the state of Maine alleging an improper level of engagement in the. The “state,” in this case, was the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, whose vocal and public opposition to Question 1 didn’t mesh with HSUS’ wish to stop bear hunting in the state.

The original lawsuit sought an injunction that would remove the TV advertisements being aired by the Maine Wildlife Conservation Council that featured department personnel talking about the dangers of Question 1.

“Political campaigns are won and lost on TV, especially in the case of ballot issue campaigns,” said Evan Heusinkveld, USSA Foundation’s vice president of government affairs. “There is no doubt that our opponents saw the wildlife management professionals at the department as a distinct threat to their campaign. In response, they attempted to silence the only true experts—the professional staff at the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife.”

On Oct. 22, 2014, Maine Superior Court Justice Joyce Wheeler denied the request for a temporary restraining order by Mainers for Fair Bear Hunting, which sought to remove television commercials opposed to Question 1. In her ruling, Justice Wheeler sided with the right of the state to provide comment. This ruling ensured the TV commercials remained on the air, and just a few days later sportsmen were victorious at the ballot box, defeating Question 1 by a 53-46 margin. Despite the victory on the temporary restraining order and at the ballot box on Nov. 4, the lawsuit remained active.

In light of judge’s decision and with the election over, on Feb. 24 the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife moved to have the case dismissed because of mootness—a move wholeheartedly supported by Maine Wildlife Conservation Council. However, HSUS lawyer Rachel Wertheime countered that the lawsuit was still valid because the organization would be filing paperwork to once again put a bear-hunting ban initiative on the state’s 2016 ballot.

In her ruling today, Justice Wheeler responded to that motion by fully and finally dismissing the case at the Superior Court level, leaving HSUS, and their front group Mainers for Fair Bear Hunting, with few options outside of appeal to the state’s Law (Superior) Court.

“The Superior court already ruled that the state was well within its right to speak out on this issue, and now they have now decided that since the election is over, the case is moot,” said Heusinkveld. “This ruling just reaffirms our position and is a clear victory for sportsmen and women. There should be no doubt left, the people of Maine deserve to hear from the experts when it comes to these issues.” Read more

Animal Rights, Hunting, Wildlife

« 1 … 11 12 13 14 15 … 58 »