Exotic Animal Industry in the U.S.
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-02-01/exotic-animal-industry-us
The right to own pythons, tigers, chimps and other exotic pets depends on where in the US you live. The legal US wildlife industry doesn’t get much national attention unless someone is hurt, an exotic pet gets loose or an ecosystem is damaged. A new report links Burmese pythons released in the Florida Everglades to the severe declines of in the region's mammals. In Ohio police shot and killed dozens of exotic animals including wolves, lions, and bears reportedly set free by their distraught owner. As some fight for more regulation, breeders, brokers and owners of exotic pets say they are being unfairly targeted. Guest host Susan Page and a panel discuss battles over the legal wildlife trade.
Guests
Wayne Pacelle
President and C.E.O. of the Humane Society of the United States
Andrew Wyatt
president of the United States Association of Reptile Keepers
Zuzana Kukol
president and co-founder of Responsible Exotic Animal Ownership (REXANO)
Tim Harrison
director of Outreach for Animals, and advocate group for proper behavior around wildlife
Related Items
Program Highlights
Last fall, Ohio Police killed 49 exotic animals set free by their distraught owner. A recent report says Burmese pythons released into the Florida Everglades are causing severe declines in the regions mammals. This type of reports has brought scrutiny to the exotic pets industry. Guest host Susan page and our guests take a look at different arguments concerned with balancing personal rights, public safety, and environmental health.
Differences Between Exotic Animals And Other Pets
The Humane Society's Wayne Pacelle noted that the most common domesticated pets, like dogs and cats, belong in our homes, enjoy our companionship, and are capable of being trained. Tigers, large predatory animals, constricting snakes, and other exotic pets don't, he said. "There are no good outcomes for these animals," he said. "They almost always end up injured or dead or relinquished."
Exotic Pet Owners Speak
Zuzana Kukol of Responsible Exotic Animal Ownership has owned exotic cats and thinks ownership of such animals should be regulated no differently than that of domestic pets. Andrew Wyatt, of the U.S. Association of Reptile Keepers, has also owned snakes and pointed out that not all reptiles are "exotic." Wyatt admits that Burmese pythons and other invasive species are a big problem in the Florida Everglades, but he believes the problem is fairly limited.
Effect Of Animals On Environment "Devastating"
Pacelle disagrees with Wyatt and argues that advocates like Kukol and Wyatt "want to protect the right of private citizens to have dangerous predatory animals in their homes, even if they're causing ecological havoc, even if they're causing public safety threats, and even if the animals themselves are enormous victims of this trade," Pacelle said. Kuzol said that the number of people killed in the U.S. by exotic animals - about 3 per year - is much less than that of people killed by dogs, horses, and many other domesticated animals.
Wildlife Advocates Weigh In
A caller named Chet from Georgia, who is the executive director at the Georgia Wildlife Rescue Association, said that he has heard reports of what sounds like either an anaconda or a python in his state. He said that the snakes do seem to be moving further north and he has a sense that the problem might not be as well-contained as Wyatt believes. Chet has owned exotic snakes himself, but he does have reservations about anyone being able to enter a pet shop and purchase a snake that will eventually grow up to be enormous and potentially difficult to feed, handle, and care for.
You can read the full transcript here.
Related Video
Zuzana Kukol, of Rexano:
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
"Steve Mushynsky wrote:
A classic debate tactic:
When one has no valid defense to a charge, divert! - Make an unrelated counter-statement that draws emotional agreement, like "Children and Radio Tracking Dog Collars found in the stomachs of Alligators".
Pit bulls and alligators are a separate discussion.
February 1, 2012 - 2:53 pm"
FU Mushy.
Introducing irrelevancies is also a classic debate tactic.
Sooner or later, that "harmless" Pet will become the 20+ foot predator under discussion.
And the discussion is not really about pets, but wild animals, either deliberately or not, coming in contact with Humans (or Hunting Dogs, for that matter).
Need I recite the horrible Tale of the tiny little Girl who bravely fought off the Alligator, escaping several times before the Beast finally killed her??
Pit Bulls have been killed in order to retrieve little Girl's faces from the Dog's stomach in order to sew them back on the Child.
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
JungleMan, very good points, I'd like to add that horses are not native to Europe either, they are native to Mongolia, but that's a point I've tried making that no one seems to listen to.
As for snakes surviving winters, well that's really stupid, they actually have said that the Burmese that are in the Everglades are less resistant to cold than the ones in Asia, they believe from being in captivity so long they have lost the ability to burmate! There is also a chance that the breeding facilities that were destroyed had a gene that actually made them LESS resistant to cold which is why so many have died out in the 2010 freeze and in SC the study showed that all 10 pythons died over the winter. In Nothern FL they set up a pen with 10 pythons and a heated enclosure, only 2 made it through Northern FL's winter by staying in the heated enclosure. They said the main flaw of the experiment was these were snakes were fed regularly and well kept in captivity to be very healthy before the study, if it weren't for that they believe they all might have died.
Geoff George, yes by euthanizing all of the exotics. You know when PETA says they "set animals free" that's their code for euthanizing, it's right in their employee handbook.
I believe in protecting animals, without private keepers the falcon would be extinct today, but thanks to private owners (falconers) they reintroduced them to the wild after DDT almost wiped them out.
I don't like Wayne because he's very two faced, he wants to protect animals, but is ok with taking away and euthanizing all the animals we currently have??
After listening to the show, and reading some of the comments here, all I can really say is that it never ceases to amaze me how ignorant some people can be. For this being the so-called "Information Age," it is remarkable that so many Americans can be so uneducated. I really think that people from both sides of this issue seriously need to do their homework before spouting off.
First of all, lumping such a wide variety of animals together is a little unfair. For example, tigers and bears are a far cry from keeping geckos and tropical fish. But apparently, it's all black and white to little Wayne, who obviously has never had a pet in his life. I could dive into a long-winded argument over the semantics of what really constitutes as a "domesticated" or an "exotic pet" but in reality, it's a big grey area. There are many discussion floating around with different statistics, this animal kills more people than that animal, etc, but numbers are often skewed and its relative anyway. Honestly, I worry more about being attacked or killed by a person than any animal...but I will say snakes are pretty low on my "species of concern" list.
From an environmental standpoint, we humans cause exponentially more destruction than any feral cat, lionfish, python, African bee, kudzu plant or whatever. Not just in America, but all over the planet. People made the argument that so many exotic animals are collected from the wild for the pet trade, and this is devastating. You're absolutely right; it sucks. But it's a drop in the bucket compared to how much ecosystem is lost to land development. Think about it. What's worse? People going out in the bush and hand-collecting one species...or bulldozers pulverizing the entire habitat, plants, animals and all (even the endangered ones)? I don't like exotics being collected from the wild anymore than the next guy...but if you're going to whine and fuss about the environment, start riding a bike instead of driving a car before you yak at me for owning a snake.
Going back to the lumping-together of all these exotics...On the show, Wayne asked Andrew Wyatt about people owning tigers. I don't care who you are, but owning a big cat is a lot different than owning any large snake. Period. It's like comparing apples to...screwdrivers. I resent Wayne Pacelle for the insinuation that they be treated the same. Should the average person be able to own a tiger? Perhaps not. Should the average person be able to own a snake? A gerbil? A sugar glider? A hedgehog? a gecko? an angelfish? a chinchilla? a hermit crab? a llama? a macaw? a finch? Where does one draw the line? Wayne Pacelle doesn't even think there should be a line. According to him, if its not a dog or cat, no one should be allowed to own it. I'm sorry but I strongly disagree with this mentality. I don't want my boys growing up in a world where their only options for a pet is a cat or a dog. What if my son is allergic to fur and dander? Guess he could have a pet turtle or a gecko, but the way things are going, those will be illegal soon enough.
Wayne rants about how most exotic animal keepers are irresponsible and their "pets" are neglected and unwanted. He states this is irrefutable fact because he allegedly "works with these people every day." I wager Wayne's scope of perspective is rather limited. In any case, his claims pail in comparison to the countless neglected, abused and unwanted dogs and cats that end up in shelters every year. Don't believe me? Go to any of one of your own local animal shelters and see for yourself. Check out your local Craigslist and count the ads for unwanted canines and felines. They vastly outnumber the exotics hands down every time. It would seem that dog and cat owners are just as horrible at keeping pets as anyone else.
During the show, the interviewer asked, "What is the most dangerous animal you have yet encountered?"
I would like to suggest that it is the Human Animal.
What other animal would enslave and commodify others? What other animal would steal a baby from her mother, hide her away in a cage, and deprive her of her natural life just for profit or entertainment? What other animal does what we do to billions of others every year in factory farms, circuses, rodeos, pet trades and laboratories?
We are without a doubt the most violent and dangerous creatures on earth.
“As long as we see animals as ours to eat, ours to manipulate, ours to exploit, ours to confine, ours to kill, there’s no end to what we can do to them. It’s that mindset that simply lends itself to the kind of mechanized system we have today. The answer isn’t to change production methods [or regulate it]. The answer is to change our perception of and relationship with non-human animals.” - Colleen Patrick-Goudreau, Compassionate Cooks http://www.compassionatecook.com/
cpuckett, Shawn Heflick may not be a Geologist, but he is a Herpetologist and is President of the Central Florida Herpetological Society and he had this to say about the USGS study:
"Scientifically, I think the USGS report should have undergone a more stringent peer review process before being released. Issues with the use of data from the Indian python instead of the Burmese python, and speculative global climate change models would surely have raised red flags with colleagues in the peer review process. The recent cold snap in south Florida is also yielding interesting data, which includes many deaths within this wild Burmese population that would seem to refute the USGS report."
Funny how a study with actual pythons suggests differently.
It's very difficult to come up with a broad policy to cover all different types of animals.
After listening to the show I realized they were fluctuating between between the general subject of exotic pets, individual rights, and specific species.
Can one policy cover tigers and pythons? Short answer is no. They have different needs and pose different risks.
The events in Ohio were an extreme case, which prompted knee jerk reactions. The loss of the owners life is tragic, the loss of animal life is tragic, but it needs to be recognized as a bizarre and extreme case. Not something that you base state or national policy on. Sensational media just pushed those buttons for their own agenda.
Working to maintain the Florida everglades is a noble cause and they are a national treasure. The scientific studies that have been done in regards to the Burmese survivability need to be heeded because they are a critical piece in developing good policy. The answer simply is that creating a national policy for a localized problem is bad administration. The negative effects on the animals themselves from being passed around, released, or euthanized is reason for pause. Add to that the damage to the industry and people potentially becoming felons for wanting to keep their pets it is bad policy pushed by people with specific agendas.
All of that comes before the fact that it is near impossible to enforce and could potentially create a black market.
Everyone should dig deeper into HSUS and see what kind of agenda they are pushing. They use a generally good concept of stopping animal cruelty and use it to push an agenda pretty much on par with PETA.
Also, there are over 4000 invasive species in the Everglades. All those animals are concentrated in 1.5 million acres. There are many other environmental pressures on the native species. You cannot logically say that Burmese are applying all that pressure to the endangered animals. The snakes are just getting attention and being set up as a scape goat for people with extreme animal rights agendas.
Dan Subaitis, I'm a private owner of reptiles, are you honestly trying to say that the average person cannot handle a corn snake? I'm sorry, but they are considered an exotic (according to HSUS, considering they are native to the US I disagree). What about a Crested Gecko? These are harmless animals that HSUS is saying we can't have. Even the Burmese Python is a very docile animal which is why there are only 8 deaths ever in the US by these snakes. I'm sure you realize dogs and horses cause far more deaths.
I agree that many people can't own certain animals, but there are those who can't even handle children, dogs or cats; doesn't mean they should be banned. If someone can dedicate their life to an animal, but they don't own a zoo, why should they have that animal taken away and euthanized if you are properly caring for it.
When you ban something you only take it away from those who are responsible owners, the irresponsible people don't care if they are breaking the law and won't turn in their animal.
I have to agree, Kelli. These discussions, like the program itself, should stick to the topic of snakes in Florida, and not tigers, elephants, or feral dogs. To create a federal ban because of the situation -real or imagined- in Florida is like rationing water nationally because of a drought in Arizona. The high crime rate in NYC should not affect gun ownership rights in Texas. Yet that's just what people want to do here, like the rush toward bans on exotics because of an isolated incident in Ohio. And a few people have been found to have snakes and other exotics roaming freely in their home, so all owners get painted with a brush of the same color. Every species is different and has its unique care requirements, and no one can compare the care and feeding of snakes to those of dogs and house cats. -Or even lizards.
In my opinion the humane society of the United States is a scam organization, 95% of all the donations they receive go to administrative costs instead of helping animals like they’d have you believe. They have all these television ad’s running showing poor animals in distress and people just shovel money to them.
Wayne Pacelle was not being truthful at all today, Animal activist have one agenda “eliminate animal ownership”. Like pro-lifers wanting to take your rights away. Once or twice a year you hear about a very unfortunate Incident caused by the .0001% of people who are irresponsible animal owners and these animal activist pray on this negativity. Our local shelter kills a thousand of our “domesticated” animals ever month because of irresponsible owners.
I skydive, out of about 3 million skydives a year we have about 3-4 deaths. Nobody wants to shut this sport down, because there is no money in it for them, they haven’t learned how to spin this to their favor.
First I’d like to know if someone can define exotic for me. You see 90% of all animals in the United States are non indigenous to the North American Continent, therefore should be considered exotic, “horse’s cows, sheep, pigs, dogs, cats, the list is endless.
I am an American; I live in a free society guaranteed to me by my forefathers to do as I see without the fear of the government or any other organization coming on my personal property to steal my pets, or prevent me from my rights of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”…..
Try it, I dare ya
You are right on the money
The most effective points I heard made in this debate came from Wayne Pacelle... my favorite? There ARE thousands of organizations who work every day to clean up the mess of all those who think they "need" to have bobcats, monkeys, macaws, pythons, alligators, iguanas, lions, tigers, leopards, cockatoos, boas, coatimundi, kinkajous, tamarins and on and on and on...
THANK GOODNESS for the empathetic, common-sense driven segment of our population who offer their financial support, and give of themselves for hundreds of hours annually to build shelters, provide enrichment, feed, water, clean up after, medicate, and give all they can to provide for these animals that others have only because "they can". I don't believe the average person has ANY idea how many outcast exotic animals are living in sanctuaries around this country, and on how little funding they operate.
This issue IS different than so many others people keep comparing it to. We're not talking about dogs, cats, or horses. We're not talking about alcohol prohibition. In this case, we are talking about living, breathing, beautiful, and often endangered and sentient beings... NOT objects, NOT luxuries, NOT necessary in one's private home. Wayne Pacelle is 100% correct... any argument against this point of view is purely "selfish" and is not based on common sense. It's scary to think how many sociopaths may be living among us.
Klswim22, yep it's crazy to think anyone could care for a corn snake. And I know, zoos are crazy for think they can "provide adequate care, space, or other natural factors for these animals."
I'm not sure if you've ever worked with snakes, but if you give them too much space it stressed them out cause in the wild they hate open spaces, they find the smallest space they can. I've had baby corns not eat because they were in too large a cage, so I switched them to a small cage and low and behold they started eating again!
Have you ever met a private owner? No tigers should not be in someone's garage, but I know a gentleman that owns several exotics, but he's not a zoo, he does educational presentations and goes around the country teaching and educating and takes just as good of care of the animals as any zoo, but if you're against zoos too, well then I guess by your standards he shouldn't teach children.
Well said! Bravo.
Can someone post here the names of all the local rescues and animal service groups sponsored or helped by HSUS? There is one -count 'em, ONE- animal "rescue" group that coincidentally happens to be their own, that gets funding from them. And it does a piss-poor job at that. Most of the contributions to HSUS pay for advertising, lobbying (illegal for a 501c3 charity) payroll, and a cushy retirement fund for the top brass. When they do participate in a raid or "rescue," they pack up and leave before it's done, leaving the loose ends -and legal fights- to the struggling local groups. Somebody prove me wrong and post a list here of all the local groups that benefit financially from the millions in the HSUS coffers.
My professor in college said once that common sense is an oxymoron, and it's true.
-----
You cannot compare keeping macaws to bobcats, or pythons to tigers, etc. As many enlightened people have already stated, each species has its own unique requirements. Painting all "exotics" or "non-natives" with the same brush is not fair or accurate. There are over 40 different species of python alone, and only a handful actually grow large enough to even pose the smallest threat to any human being. Many grow no larger than a baseball bat.
I don't think anyone can accurately say the percentage of responsible pet owners versus neglectful ones, unless you physically inspect every single household in America that has pets. This includes dogs and cats, too. So for anyone to say that most exotic pet keepers are irresponsible is a limited viewpoint, not fact. Period. And if you were really to continue this argument, this is all because all these poor animals are unwanted and neglected and no one cares for them properly, then you have to include dogs and cats in the ban as well. Why, you may ask? Because regardless of whether the animal is domesticated or exotic, there are still many more neglected dogs and cats than exotics in America. Excluding them makes you a hypocrite. After all, if you're going save animals from bad keepers, you can't be prejudice!
for_common_sense, I'm sorry, but their main point was that exotics are not cats and dogs, so the HSUS side brought that up to begin with. I simply pointed out that you're right, dogs kill more people than all the exotics kept in captivity combined.
So based on what you said, because police work to clean up the mess made by people drinking we should ban alcohol again?
And I'm sorry, but how much damage have ball pythons caused? For that matter what about Anacondas, Boas and Retics? None are in the Everglades and the issue with the Burmese has been resolved through regulations such as microchips and licenses.
And so if the average person can't care for them, why should they be banned, what about those who can properly care for exotics, I know a lot of people who can and dedicate their lives to their animals, but Wayne thinks they should be taken away and euthanized, I for one love animals and would be really sad to see them all euthanized.
You may say you're not talking about cats and dogs, but you've compared exotics to cats and dogs, now you're mad that you've been proven wrong. I'm talking about how bans don't work, so I think the alcohol ban was a valid point, you're just upset that you're wrong, bans don't work. Honestly how well has the pot ban worked? You know what happens when you ban something, it goes underground and hurts the economy cause now it can't be taxed.
Most snakes are not endangered and the only animal that can be considered sentient is dolphins. Sentient means self aware, which science has proved that dolphins are one of the only animals that fall into that category, aside from humans of course.
for_common_sense, also you said, "We're not talking about dogs, cats, or horses. We're not talking about alcohol prohibition. In this case, we are talking about living, breathing, beautiful, and often endangered and sentient beings... NOT objects, NOT luxuries, NOT necessary in one's private home."
Are dogs, cats, and horses no longer fall under "living, breathing, beautiful." Don't know about you, but my cats, dogs, and horses are all of those.
PETA says it's selfish to have any pets cause we shouldn't own any animals and compare pets to slaves.
I know people who educate children about animals and take their exotics all over the country to do so, I don't know about you, but I think that children should be allowed to see and learn about these amazing creatures even if they don't have a zoo in their area.
Wayne is not correct, it's not selfish to love our animals, I'm sorry, but snakes thrive in captivity and any herpetologist will tell you take, but Wayne, who does not study reptiles for a living, obviously knows more than those who do.
Do you even hear yourself?
jon_holmesx, well said! I think it's pretty obvious humans are the most invasive species. They blame these snakes, but ignore that humans keep building golf courses and houses deeper and deeper into places they shouldn't.
During the interview, even Andrew Wyatt admitted to not being familiar with big cats to answer a question about owning tigers. Wayne Pacelle, on the other hand, has about as much humility as he does tact and manners, as well as a real educated understanding of the animals he so passionately hates. Apparently, hating something makes you an expert.
Wayne Pacelle claims to see all these exotic owners everyday, how does he find the time being a CEO and going around the country doing book signings and going on radio shows. He's a face, nothing more, he doesn't go out in the field (but he does make over $250,000 a year) and honestly compare the number of abuse cases of non-exotics to exotics. There's a reason that there are sanctuaries for exotics to live out their lives, but none for cats and dogs. There are more irresponsible domestic owners than exotics. Why not make reasonable regulations and just require a license. Animal control can come check out my snakes, they are well cared for, I have nothing to hide.
"Why not make reasonable regulations and just require a license. Animal control can come check out my snakes, they are well cared for, I have nothing to hide"
Ditto! Heck, my tortoises and snakes probably live more comfortable and stress-free lives than I do! I'm certain the tortoises actually eat better as well.
Seriously though...do these people really listen to themselves? It's so contradictory. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
- You can't support this legislation, with the argument that too many animals are neglected and too many people are irresponsible, because with that mentality, you have to lump ALL animals in captivity in that boat, including dogs, cats, and livestock. Ergo, if the average American shouldn't be allowed to keep snakes, birds, or fish, then they are obviously unfit to care for any other animal.
- You can't argue the danger issue, because dogs and horses cause more injuries than exotics. So once again, you can't ban one group without banning the other.
- You can't argue the environmental / invasive angle, because feral cats are a much greater issue than any exotic or non-native.
- You can't use the wild-collection/importation / devastation to wild ecosystems debate, because mankind does much more destruction worldwide than any type of collecting for the pet trade.
So my advice for all you bleeding heart animal rights nuts is this: If you REALLY love animals, and you want to protect the environment and save the world, I suggest you re-evaluate your roomy, townhouse in suburbia, ride a bike instead of driving your gas-guzzling SUV, think about how many micro-organisms you destroy with each footstep on your freshly manicured lawn...before you point your fingers at people like me just because you're a ignorant, prejudice rube.
JungleMan, please provide sources for your information. It sounds like the propaganda spewed by the animal abusing lobbies.
Here is a list of shelter contributions made by HSUS
http://humanewatch.info/blog/shelter-contribs-2009/
The fact is HSUS's mission is national - including rescue and disaster relief, education and lobbying for humane laws.
Even though their mission is not to fund shelters, HSUS gives millions to shelters each year - more than any other organization. HSUS runs 2 sanctuaries, 3 wildlife rehabilitation centers, funds The Shelter Pet Project with millions, and offers a variety of support and services to local shelters.
As a result of HSUS backed anti-puppy mill laws, thousands of puppy mills have closed across the country. Thousands more will close as this legislation sweeps across the country. That takes a huge financial burden off shelters. That means millions less animals will not be the victims of poor breeding, early death and lifelong health problems. That means relief for the millions of dogs used as breeding machines, suffering in unspeakable conditions in puppy mills.
Here is a list of HSUS program expenses showing that the majority of donations are used to help animals. This information can also be seen on the financial documents/tax forms on the HSUS website.
http://www.humanewatch.info/images/HSUS_Spending_2008_v3b.jpg
Here is a list of HSUS's accomplishments from 2011. Most of the anti-cruelty laws we have today are because of HSUS, and the reason I donate.
http://www.humanesociety.org/about/overview/2011_accomplishments.html
jfreed, please provide sources for your information showing HSUS uses 95% of their donations for administration.
Financial statements, on their website, show that 73% of their funds are used to help animals.
Please provide sources that show HSUS is against pet ownership.
They have pages of information on their website promoting shelter adoption and responsible pet ownership. They have information on how to buy from a responsible breeder.
Most of their employees have pets. Most animal advocates have pets.
While you are entitled to your opinion, I don't appreciate your false statements about HSUS.
Tiki108 - There is a huge difference between a zoo, with the goal of preserving rare animals and educating the public about animals that are from other parts of the planet, and an individual keeping an exotic animal in the confines of his/her home or backyard. Don't even think the two are comparable.
I will concede that tank animals, such as many reptiles and fish, may have different circumstances than large wild mammals. Like everything in life, there are shades of gray in between the black and white. Still, there is the problem of people releasing said creatures into the wild once the animals have become too large or difficult to continue keeping. Regulations are necessary.
Tiki108, there is a huge difference in the behavior, size and damage potential between a corn snake and a python. A corn snake may bite you if it gets overly hungry or agitated, but it will not wrap itself around you and prevent you from breathing. Just like there is a huge difference between a gecko and a monitor lizard. Monitor lizards also have nasty temperaments and will bite just because that's what they want to do. And since they are meat or fish eating, they have the teeth to do damage. To compare keeping your corn snakes, which mainly eat mice, frogs and birds in the wild, to a python, which has been documented to eat alligators and deer, is ludicrous.
And as for the argument that alligators eat babies, the difference is that an alligator can't come into your home through a 6 inch opening at night when you are asleep. An alligator can't climb a tree and slither onto your roof or in your open window. People killed by alligators are usually in or near water and should have been aware they should be on the lookout for them.
MDavey, thank you! This conversation seems to have deteriorated into an 'I want it' vs 'You can't have it' and what is being lost sight of is the damage being done now and the potential for much, much worse damage ahead. Maybe there have been failures of containment in the past, but we have a window of opportunity to prevent this one and everyone will be losers if we waste it by sqabbling.
Caro Perry, my mother taught us that our rights ended where someone else's began. I'm in the same position as you.
Bill S- You get your "facts" from humanewatch.info; I get mine from humanewatch.org...
You seem to be mixing 2009 and 2008 there. Try to stick to one year at a time, please. Try this one on for size:
http://humanewatch.org/index.php/documents/year/2008/
On their form 990-T for 2008, HSUS reported $62,440 net income from advertising. After deductions, its total unrelated business taxable income was -$100. This is just for advertising, and the bottom line profit after the millions spent.
Or try this one:
http://humanewatch.org/index.php/documents/detail/2008_hsus_annual_report/
This is the annual report that HSUS published to describe its program priorities in 2008. HSUS claims to have "cared for" more than 70,000 animals during 2008. But nearly 33,000 of these were dogs and cats that were spayed or neutered in conjunction with HSUS's "Spay Day," a promotion that saw HSUS supporting pet shelters in nominal amounts to do the surgeries. (Neither HSUS nor any of its affiliates ever actually "cared for" these pets.)
The list in your first link contains an awful lot of "$575" contributions, and most are for "spay/neuter" -which, if true, just supports Pacelle's goal of "one generation and out."
I know you'll say humanewatch.org is full of lies against HSUS, but I could say the same about humanewatch.info being full of lies in support of H$U$. And there's plenty of other places to find the true facts. IRS is a nice start, with their tax fraud investigation.
Believe what you like. I don't much appreciate your false statements in support of Pacelle, so I guess we're even on that.