Discover Dumps HSUS

British wartime leader Winston Churchill with his famous V for victory sign. Image from the archives of Press Portrait Service (formerly Press Portait Bureau) 1946 image. Image shot 1946. Exact date unknown.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.

Read more

Dismissed: HSUS Lawsuit to Silence Maine’s Wildlife Professionals

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

Congressional Investigation Targets HSUS Ally, Lobbyist

capitol

This from www.humanewatch.org

It’s been a bad fortnight for the Humane Society of the United States on Capitol Hill. First, HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle got caught with his pants on fire in front of a U.S. Senate subcommittee. And on Wednesday, the House of Representatives Committee on Ethics voted unanimously to investigate whether Representative Whitfield (R-KY) violated the law by improperly giving his wife Connie Harriman-Whitfield, a registered HSUS lobbyist, privileged access to contacts on Capitol Hill. The committee will also determine whether “special favors” were dispensed to HSUS or the Humane Society Legislative Fund, HSUS’s official lobbying arm. Read more

HSUS Still Puts Pensions Ahead of Pets

This from humanewatch.org…

PensionPuppyWhen people find out that Humane Society of the United States isn’t affiliated with local humane societies and doesn’t run any shelters of its own, they usually ask where the $130 million HSUS receives in contributions goes. The answer: Not to local pet shelters. Instead, it funds HSUS’s fat cat CEO, pays for lobbyists and lawyers, or gets socked away at Caribbean hedge funds ($50 million in 2012 and 2013 alone). It also paid millions to settle a federal racketeering lawsuit.

Here’s a metric of just how rotten HSUS is: In each of the past four years, HSUS has funneled more money to its own pension fund than it has contributed to help local pet shelters care for pets – you know, the shelters that actually provide care for the animals HSUS claims to love so much in their commercials. Since 2010, HSUS has dumped nearly $10.7 million into pensions – 3.7 times more than the $2.9 million it has given to local pet shelters. Here’s the most recently available data:

Year Pension contributions Shelter Donations
2010  $2,693,201  $528,676
2011  $2,493,898  $307,708
2012  $2,978,586  $1,028,586
2013  $2,520,588  $1,012,142
Total  $10,686,273  $2,877,112

  It doesn’t take long to see that HSUS is really all about one thing: Helping itself. Read more

HSUS: Pennies for Pets

PennyShavingsThis from humanewatch.org…

After years of examining how the deceptively named Humane Society of the United States spends the more than $100 million it receives from hardworking Americans ever year, very little surprises us anymore. However, a recently-released “Pennies for Charity” report of telemarketing by professional fundraisers made us do a double take. HSUS actually lost $169,922 annoying Americans with telemarketing calls.

The annual report, which is issued by the New York Attorney General, shows that HSUS spent more than it received in three out of five (60%) of its telemarketing campaigns in 2014. By comparison, only 17% of the total campaigns were in the red for other organizations. In one instance, HSUS paid $69,501 for a campaign that raised $13,403 – a net return of a whopping negative 518%. See the table below for the full results.

Solicitor Gross Net to HSUS % to HSUS
Donor Care Center, Inc.  $232,423  -$65,955 -28%
Donor Services Group, LLC  $966,851  -$282,781 -29%
Fine Line Communications, Ltd.  $258,371  $248,073 96%
InfoCision, Inc.  $41,915  $243 1%
PDR II, Inc.  $13,403  -$69,501 -519%
TOTAL:  $1,512,963  -$169,922 -11%

 

We’ve previously written about two HSUS fundraisers that are listed in the Pennies for Charity report: Donor Services Group and Donor Care Center. Another firm HSUS pays to solicit funds was exposed in a report by Bloomberg Business titled “Charities Deceive Donors Unaware Money Goes to a Telemarketer.

The Humane Society Legislative Fund, the HSUS’s lobbying arm, didn’t fare much better. It spent $14,000 more on telemarketing than it took in for the year. And HSUS has had similarly poor telemarketing results in Massachusetts and California.

Of course, deceiving donors and then spending their money inefficiently is nothing new for HSUS. It recently received a paltry C-minus grade from Charity Watch for high overhead costs, only gives about 1% of contributions to local pet shelters, and had a donor advisory issued against it.

Here’s the upshot: If HSUS is on the line, hang up.

HSUS Booted From CPAC

This from humanewatch.org…

logoCPACaltLast week we questioned why the radical Humane Society of the United States would be permitted to exhibit at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). After all, would PETA be welcome at a conference of political conservatives? Probably not. It didn’t take long for HSUS to get the boot.

Once CPAC organizers got wind of HSUS’s anti-agriculture and anti-hunting agenda, HSUS quickly lost its spot at the convention. Plus, when it comes to political spending, 80% of HSUS money spent through its lobbying arm Humane Society Legislative Fund (HSLF) and corresponding PAC goes to fund Democratic candidates and liberal causes, according to FEC records.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation explains:

The presence there of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) with its anti-hunting agenda made little sense — except that HSUS works to hide its true political nature under the guise of being a funder of animal shelters.

In fact, this group sends next to nothing to local shelters. So when the watchdog group HumaneWatch pointed this out to CPAC management, supported by NSSF, action was taken and HSUS was shown the door.

Read more

SCI Provides Winning Arguments Against Constitutional Challenge to Three Antelope Rule

Posted by firstforwildlife on March 6, 2015 · Leave a Comment

3 antelope ruling dama gazelleSafari Club International played a pivotal role in a federal district court’s ruling that dismissed a constitutional challenge to the law that exempts the hunting of U.S. captive members of three exotic antelope species from permit and other Endangered Species Act requirements.  Based in great part on SCI’s arguments that the anti-hunting plaintiffs lacked standing to raise their constitutional claims, the D.C. federal district court dismissed the case on March 4, 2015.

Read more

Did Wolves Really Change Rivers?

This from the Boone and Crockett Club…

One year ago, the pro-wolf movement produced a video titled “How Wolves Change Rivers”. The video proclaimed that wolves interaction with elk and deer populations was responsible for a trophic cascade in Yellowstone Park which ultimately improved the ecosystem. The dramatically narrated video went viral, and to date has had nearly 15 million views, undoubtedly altering millions of non-hunters’ perceptions of wolves, while creating fanatical support for unmanaged wolf populations.

A recent study covered by Discover Magazine challenges that claim.

“Changes in the system were perceived as a consequence of wolves,” Middleton explains, but these reintroduced predators actually have a relatively small impact—one that is far outsized by the hoopla surrounding them. The elk population in Yellowstone is at the mercy of a much larger, human-altered ecosystem.”

Discover Magazine’s Article

Video: How Wolves Change Rivers

Boone and Crockett Club’s Stance

Michigan DNR appeals federal court’s wolf decision

The Michigan Department of Natural Resources today filed an appeal of a December 2014 federal district court ruling that returned wolves in Michigan and Wisconsin to the federal endangered species list and wolves in Minnesota to federal threatened species status. The appeal – filed by the Michigan Attorney General in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia – asks the court to uphold the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s December 2011 decision that removed the Great Lakes Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of wolves from the federal endangered species list.

 

“Returning wolf management to wildlife professionals in the state of Michigan is critical to retaining a recovered, healthy, and socially-accepted wolf population in our state,” said DNR Director Keith Creagh.

 

“Michigan residents who live with wolves deserve to have a full range of tools available to sustainably manage that population.” Wolves in Michigan are 15 years past the population recovery goals set by the federal government. The DNR will argue against the federal district court’s ruling that wolves must recover across their historic range – which includes the lower 48 states and Mexico – before Michigan’s wolf population can be removed from the federal endangered species list. In addition, the state will argue against the district court’s conclusion that the USFWS failed to demonstrate that Michigan’s laws and regulations adequately protect the wolf population within Michigan.

 

“Wolves in Michigan and the other western Great Lakes states are fully recovered from endangered species status, which is a great success story,” said DNR Wildlife Division Chief Russ Mason. “Continuing to use the Endangered Species Act to protect a recovered species not only undermines the integrity of the Act, it leaves farmers and others with no immediate recourse when their animals are being attacked and killed by wolves.”

 

Michigan’s wolf population numbers approximately 636 in the state’s Upper Peninsula. With the return to federal protection in December 2014, the DNR lost the authority to use a variety of wolf management methods, including lethal control, to minimize wolf conflict with humans, livestock and dogs. The change in status also suspended state authority that allowed livestock and dog owners to protect their animals from wolf depredation when wolves are in the act of attacking those animals.

 

The federal district court’s December 2014 decision came in response to a lawsuit filed by the Humane Society of the United States, in which the State of Michigan participated as a defendant-intervener arguing against returning the Great Lakes DPS of wolves to the endangered species list. Michigan joins the USFWS and a number of hunting and conservation organizations in appealing the ruling.

 

For more information about Michigan’s wolf population and management plan, visit www.michigan.gov/wolves.

1 12 13 14 15 16 59