Category: Animal Rights

PETA Lawsuit Imperils Rhino Populations

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

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

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

CapitolSouth6Evidence 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.

Read more

Animal Rights

New Poll: HSUS Continues to Dupe Donors

CapitolSouth6Evidence 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.

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:

Read more

Animal Rights

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

Animal Rights

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

Animal Rights, Hunting, Wildlife

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

Animal Rights

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

Animal Rights

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.

Animal Rights
1 … 13 14 15 16 17 … 60