MORE ON HSUS
By now everyone in the U.S. who cares about animals, wild and
domesticated, is aware of the animal rights movement and its 300-pound
vegan gorilla, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).
While animal abuse is already illegal in all 50 states, HSUS's
President/CEO Wayne Pacelle addressed a group of farmers and praised
them, stating "Farmers are outstanding Americans and they know how to
do their job." He then enlightened them on how HSUS will allocate
resources in its latest campaign, a crusade against cowboys, chicken
farmers and modern-day animal agriculture which HSUS derisively calls
"Factory Farming."
Just another battle in the animal rights war, HSUS relies on a highly
effective blueprint developed in its zero-tolerance battle against the
vital role animal research plays in our society. This blueprint has
three components: The Three R's: Refinement, Reduction and
Replacement.
Since HSUS recognizes that the overwhelming majority of Americans
currently support raising animals for food and fiber, Pacelle reported
that its "Factory Farming" campaign allocates over 95% of its campaign
resources to the Refinement category. What this means in reality is
that images of illegal animal abuse are being used to soften up the
target, the farmers, "refining" how the farmers care for their
animals, often forcing methods on them by an outraged public triggered
by propaganda.
HSUS's Refinements don't have to make sense or be cost-effective. As
the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) noted in the
Proposition 2 battle in California over housing systems for egg-laying
hens, HSUS's Refinements threaten the health and well-being of the
animals.(4) And farmers noted that HSUS's nonsensical Refinements will
also cost farmers a fortune, most of which can't be passed along to
consumers able to buy cheaper eggs produced out of state in modern,
safe and cost-effective facilities. Therefore Californians are saying
adios to their egg farmers. HSUS counts this as a victory.
Once HSUS has eroded trust in animal ag by broadcasting images of
illegally abused animals, it will allocate a higher percentage of its
campaign resources to the second category, Reduction. It will argue
that, morally and environmentally, it is better if humans eat less
animal products. Nonsense. In 2000, the UN reported that producers
need to double livestock production by 2020 to feed a growing and
healthier global population. Reducing this goal will result in
malnourishment for many people.
Eventually the campaign against animal ag will be fully mature and
HSUS will move along to advocating Replacements, offering the consumer
alternatives to animal protein, arguing that humans should consume
more protein from habitat-destroying soybeans than from free-range
bison. With less than 3% of the planet's surface capable of supporting
crops for food and fiber, this agenda is nonsense, of course. But HSUS
is very, very good at propaganda.
Look at the long-running campaign against fur, for example. Both
HSUS's wildlife and farming campaigners have attacked fur for decades.
Do you want animals to live completely natural lives, stretch their
limbs and turn around? Wild fur is the ultimate in free-range product,
but HSUS opposes it 100% no matter how "refined" the production
process becomes. In 2009, Humane Society International/Canada stated,
"We are opposed to commercial trade in wildlife products ..." Zero.
If you believe in cradle-to-cradle systems and want to recycle two
tons of food production waste into biodegradable clothing, wear a
farm-raised mink.(6) But HSUS is opposed. And while HSUS says it
supports farming standards, mink farmers and veterinarians established
guidelines for raising mink way back in 1989, the earliest such
program in U.S. animal ag. Again, HSUS remains opposed.
HSUS continuously misleads the public by disseminating images of
animals illegally abused as if this is common farming practice
(Refinement); urges a zero goal for the number of animals used by the
fur clothing business (Reduction); and even actively works to close
markets while promoting "alternatives" to natural fiber fur clothing
to the public (Replacement) in the form of nonrewable,
nonbiodegradeable, unsustainable, petrochemical-based synthetics.
Again, it is all nonsense, but HSUS is very, very good at propaganda.
It's what it does best.
HSUS's 990s
Second only to misleading people and dissemination of propaganda, HSUS
excels at growing its reserves, now over $200 million. For those
trying to get a grip on HSUS, the 2007 tax returns, "990s", for this
"non-profit" "charitable" corporation are online.
This tax return only covers HSUS and does not include the 13 other
corporations it controls (Statement 19, page 71) as
subsidiaries/affiliates nor the next layer, the
subsidiaries/affiliates that these 13 corporations in turn control, or
the next.
These layers of subsidiaries/affiliates pay millions in expenses and
millions more to fundraisers every year. This is odd since most of
their funds are simply transferred from HSUS. So one must ask why
fundraisers are needed when a subsidiary is "raising" virtually all
its income from the main corporation? Perhaps one day the IRS will
require consolidated financial statements of all these
affiliates/subsidiaries. Without it even Enron style bookkeeping is
hard to track.
The Golden Goose
HSUS declared $101 million in total revenue (page 1, line 12 of the
2007 tax return) of which $85 million was from direct public support
(page1, line 1b), down from $91 million in 2006. Out of this $85
million in funds from the public in 2007, over 11%, almost $10
million, came from four donors (page 18).
HSUS owned $83 million in corporate stocks, $21 million of which was
in foreign corporations (Stmt 12, page 65). In 2007, in a challenging
market, HSUS racked up an impressive $5.6 million profit on about $55
million in securities traded (Stmt 2, page 20).
HSUS, which constantly promotes oil-based synthetic cold weather
clothing over natural fibers, is in the oil business. It earned
$676,499 on an oil and gas lease (page 1, line 7).
HSUS closed 2007 with over $200 million in net assets, even after a
downward adjustment of $31 million (line 20, page 1). Of this amount,
$5.4 million reflects an adjustment to recognize long-term retirement
liabilities for pensions. Another $25.8 million dropped off the
balance sheet as an "adjustment to reflect changes in reporting entity
and transfers" (Statement 4, page 21).
Hands On Animal Care and Better Documentation
The good news revealed by HSUS's tax returns is that some of HSUS's
money is actually going to help animals, which is a nice shift.
After HSUS declared it had raised over $30 million for relief for
homeless animals in the Hurricane Katrina disaster, the Louisiana
Attorney General took note and opened an investigation. HSUS was
forced to actually spend some of its money on hands-on animal care in
Louisiana and Mississippi. You can see it in some of its 2007 outgoing
grants.
The bad news? It's still a tiny fraction of what HSUS declares was
raised on that disaster, and just 4% of its total income goes to
hands-on animal care. It is, however, a record, the highest level
since 1970 when HSUS abolished its commitment to share 60% of all
income with local chapters for use in humane shelters.
Another step forward, after at least a decade of HSUS and its
subsidiaries/affiliates using Share Group, Inc. as its telemarketing
firm, HSUS has finally actually listed it on its tax return as
required by tax code. Share Group, Inc. is among the top 5 contractors
receiving over $50,000 (page 10). Share, HSUS reports, received $1.7
million in fees in 2007. But it could be more. The Los Angeles Times,
among others, has commented on the fact that each time HSUS uses Share
Group, Inc., this telemarketer keeps over 90% of the funds raised, far
beyond the normal ratios paid to telemarketers.
Members Go Missing
HSUS regularly claims it has 10 million members and constituents. In
2009, HSUS's President Wayne Pacelle clarified this, stating that 10
million Americans are "associated with" HSUS, whatever that means.
But HSUS's 2007 tax filings tell a much different story, revealing
that membership is nowhere near even one million (Statement 9, page
62):
Membership services handles tens of thousands of public and
member/donor communications annually.
Common sense says this volume is far too low for any group with 10
million members, reflecting the activity generated by just a few
hundred thousand people. And further review of the tax returns (page
62) confirms it:
Publications produces ... a quarterly magazine sent every other month
to 420,000 members.
HSUS has 420,000 members, just 4.2% of what is commonly reported or
0.15% of the US population of 280 million, or one out of every 666
people, not the 1 out of 30 bantered about.
And even while HSUS's income rose from $21 million in 1991 to $101
million in 2007, the HSUS membership actually declined. In 1991, HSUS
President/CEO John Hoyt stated:
I am happy to report that during this past year our voting membership
has increased from 397,385 to 458,378 persons.
So HSUS apparently lost 38,378 members between 1991 and 2007.
Perhaps some members discovered how little HSUS supports local humane
shelters and left in disgust. And many of the remaining members are
those engaged in animal ag and wildlife pursuits who reluctantly join
HSUS simply to monitor what it's up to.
That said, with membership numbers this low, HSUS does not have a
mandate to impose a nonsensical vegan lifestyle on the world's
omnivores and pet owners.
It's time to demand accountability from HSUS for its exploitation of
abused animals for financial gain, for diverting hundreds of millions
from humane shelter resources over to advancement of a vegan agenda
while ruining the lives of hard-working people around the world.
Omnivores of the World, Unite!
Notes:
(1) For detailed information on HSUS, visit the Center for Consumer
Freedom's Activistcash.com and Humanewatch.org. HSUS's new
CEO/President Wayne Pacelle is vegan and, after just 10 weeks at the
helm, he had "already implemented a 'no animal products in the office'
policy", an office vegan food and clothing policy, reported Compassion
Over Killing (COK) co-founder Paul Shapiro (at a seminar hosted by
United Poultry Concerns, Aug. 22, 2004), shortly before he too joined
HSUS. See "The New Anti-Meat ‘Humane' Goliath," Apr. 5, 2005.
(2) "HSUS official says public concerns drive initiatives," by Ken
Anderson, Apr. 28, 2009, Brownfield Network is worth listening to.
Pacelle is defensive in several sections of the presentation over
attacks on HSUS's sincerity by those involved in hands-on animal care.
Pacelle's full Apr. 27, 2009 speech to the National Association of
Farm Broadcasting with Q&A is at
http://agwired.com/2009/04/27/hsus-challenges-american-agriculture/
and direct at www.zimmcomm.biz/nafb/ww-09-hsus-remarks.mp3 In his
speech, Pacelle discussed how fears over BSE were tied to images of
workers using legal and illegal methods to get cattle to their feet
when the animals refused to stand after a long transport to a
slaughterhouse. The result? 50 nations shut their doors to US beef.
Ignoring the fact that cattle are often transported long distances as
a direct result of the closure of local slaughterhouses, HSUS raised
lots of money, sadly, on a problem they appear to have helped create.
Ditto for the battles over horse slaughter. HSUS believes that this
option for horse owners should not exist. In Nebraska, the Farm Bureau
donated hay to feed neglected horses that had been transferred from
the BLM to private ownership, another HSUS campaign gone awry. But
listen to Pacelle complain that cowboys didn't want to work with HSUS
when it organized a photo op with the neglected horses as props.
Attacks on feral horse control and horsemeat, combined with closure of
slaughter facilities (resulting in longer transport times for horses),
appears to be tied to an increase in abandoned horses. This has
overtaxed the safety net of humane shelters set up by responsible
animal owners. HSUS uses this sad state, which they helped created, as
one more opportunity to raise more money and while little goes to
hands-on animal care and much goes to promoting policies that
exacerbate the problem. No wonder the cowboys are angry! Perhaps it's
time for HSUS to spend some of its $200 million in reserves on
actually caring for horses and other animals in distress.
Russell and Burch first coined the "Three Rs" and ordered them
Replacement, Reduction, Refinement. The order HSUS gives them,
Refinement, Reduction and Replacement, may carry importance in
understanding what it thinks is possible for their campaign given
current public views on animal ag. HSUS's interpretation differs from
the way the Three Rs are viewed by scientists since, not surprisingly,
HSUS has modified the original meaning. In science, "Reduction" means
using fewer animals to meet your goals, perhaps by decreasing variance
by using cloned animals. "Replacement" means using computers or cell
cultures (which originally come from animals, of course) when one can.
If one's goal is to use natural biodegradable fibers for cold weather
clothing, then "reduction" and "replacement" differ from the claim
that the vegan "alternative" "plastic" synthetic fibers is the same
thing. "Reduction" might be served by efficiently using fewer animals
to provide the same amount of fur by increasing the fur yield per
animal, a common goal of most farmers who operate within the confines
of the free market system and its emphasis on cost effectiveness,
reduction of waste and production more from less.
The AVMA issued a statement condemning Proposition 2 as inhumane,
saying it "contains livestock confinement standards that may hurt the
animals they are intended to help" and "ignores critical aspects of
animal welfare that ultimately would threaten the well-being of the
very animals it strives to protect." For a specific comparison of the
health of conventionally caged chickens vs cage-free chickens, see
"More scrambled claims from animal activists," Center for Consumer
Freedom, May 5, 2009.
Transcription by Media Q Inc. of Press Conference, April 21, 2009
10:30 a.m., National Press Theatre, Ottawa, Canada; Principals:
Rebecca Aldworth, Director, Humane Society International/Canada; The
Honourable Mac Harb, Senator; Subject: Senator Mac Harb and
Representatives of Humane Society International/Canada Hold a News
Conference to Discuss Ending the Commercial Seal Hunt. Statement on
HSI/Canada's opposition issued by Rebecca Aldworth, Director, Humane
Society International/Canada.
(6) See "Super duper recyclers - how fur farmers turn waste into
beauty," FCUSA commentary, October 1999. Or if you still believe
petrochemical synthetics are the way to go, see "Plastic bags on our
backs," FCUSA commentary, Mar. 14, 2008.
(7) For an example of HSUS's marketing of synthetics, see this video
footage from the 4th Annual Cool vs. Cruel Competition, 2008.
(8) See FCUSA recommendations to the IRS, Oct. 2, 2005.
http://www.furcommission.com/resource/Resources/FCUSAtoIRS.pdf
(9) The IRS now requires info on security trades so look forward to
seeing more detail on how HSUS had such an impressive trading record.
See Implementing FAS 158 for Year-End Financial Reporting, by JP
Morgan, Jan 18, 2007.
(10) See "Humane Society of the United States does little to help
homeless dogs and cats. Animal rights group devoted less than 4% of
its budget to pet shelters in 2007," Center for Consumer Freedom press
release, Apr. 7, 2009.
(11) See "HSUS calling? Hang up," Center for Consumer Freedom press
release, July 7, 2008.
(12) Page 3, "Report of the President 1991" by John A. Hoyt at the
HSUS Annual Membership Meeting, Saturday, October 12, 1991, Embassy
Row Hotel, Washington, DC.
See also:
FCUSA press kit special feature: Regulating the conflict industry.
http://www.furcommission.com/resource/pressConflict.htm
In their own words: Revealing quotes from the mouths of HSUS.
http://www.furcommission.com/debate/words2.htm
Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) FAQ
The HSUS does not run any shelters. They do administer state federations of humane shelters that consist of paid memberships from various animal shelters. They also publish recommended guidelines for operating a shelter, managing adoption and humane education programs, and conducting cruelty investigations. Via this network of state federations, they do manage to align animal shelters with their ideas about animal ownership and they encourage legislative activism that supports their agenda.
HSUS publications are filled with statistics and numbers which will horrify you as to the scope of animal shelter problems. However, please be advised that HSUS rarely if ever sites a direct reference to support their numbers. Figures are extrapolated and facts are manipulated. One example is that animals are moved from shelter to shelter to create inflated numbers by counting the same animal over and over.
HSUS a “humane society” in name only. While most local animal shelters are under-funded and unknown, HSUS has accumulated $113 million in assets and built an empire by capitalizing on the confusion its very name provokes. Most animal lovers are unaware that HSUS raises enough money to finance animal shelters in every single state, with money to spare, yet it doesn’t operate a single one anywhere. That’s right, it does NOT operate one humane shelter.
In 1995 the Washington (DC) Humane Society almost closed its animal shelter due to a budget shortfall. HSUS, also based in Washington, DC, withdrew an offer to build and operate a DC shelter at its own expense that would serve as a national model. In exchange for running the shelter, HSUS wanted 3 to 5 acres of city land and tax-exempt status for all its real estate holdings in the District of Columbia. The DC government offered a long-term lease, but HSUS refused to proceed unless it would “own absolutely” the land. The district declined, and what might have become the only HSUS-funded animal shelter never materialized.
The Animal Rights movement chides people for using animals in any way, shape or form – but they are notorious for using animals to raise money for their war chests. HSUS is a vast global network that spreads its influence, power and politics wherever it is. The other animal rights organizations also interconnect globally to create an even larger web of deceit.
HSUS spends millions of dollars to lobby via its Political Action Committee (HumaneUSA PAC). This is the largest electioneering arm of the national U.S. Animal Rights movement. Members include HSUS, the Fund for Animals, the Farm Sanctuary, ASPCA, Doris Day Animal League, the Animal Welfare Institute, the Ark Trust, the Animal Rights Foundation of Florida and others.
HSUS seeks to create ever stricter regulation that will economically cripple meat and dairy producers; eliminate the use of animals in biomedical research labs; phase out pet breeding, zoos, and circus animal acts; and demonize hunters as crazed lunatics.
HSUS does sensationalize, and often creates various animal campaigns in order to generate sympathy and concern from the general public, as well as their generous donations.
The Birth of HSUS and PeTA and the Ties that Bind them Together
In 2004 Wayne Pacelle was named president of the world’s richest animal-rights organization, the Humane Society of the United States. Pacelle began his animal rights career working at the anti-hunting group the Fund for Animals. There he helped Paul Watson and his violent Sea Shepherd Conservation Society raise money for ships. He also assisted Alex Pacheco and Ingrid Newkirk (who both created the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) They all worked together on an undercover investigation of a primate research lab.
Pacheco, was part of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and supported “direct action” sinking of whale ships. Arson, property destruction, burglary, and theft are ‘acceptable crimes’ when used for the animal cause,” says Alex Pacheco. Rumored to be a “commander” of the Animal Liberation Front -- a criminal group listed as a domestic terrorist organization by the FBI -- Pacheco has been subpoenaed in connection to ALF activities
Pacelle’s wife, Kirsten Rosenberg, works for Ark Trust, now the HSUS Hollywood office. Prior to being named president of HSUS, Pacelle was an Executive Dir. & National Dir. of the Fund for Animals; a former president of the Animal Rights Alliance; a former chairman of the Animal Rights Network Inc. and a former editor, The Animals’ Agenda magazine
HSUS and PeTA have shared key employees throughout the years. It is well known that Ingrid Newkirk has allies on the HSUS BOD, such as Wayne Pacelle. Their alliance was forged when he held the position of VP for media and government affairs. Pacelle was hired by the HSUS directly from Cleveland Amory's Fund for Animals. Amory was also the mentor of PeTA co-founder Alex Pacheco.
A few former PeTA employees and associates, who are now employed at HSUS, include the chief computer programmer, the head of its national and international investigations (who also oversees the HSUS affiliate, the Wildlife Lands Trust) Two key HSUS investigators, people throughout the HSUS corporate structure and employees in its lab animal section began their careers with PeTA. During the 1990’s, HSUS assimilated dozens of staffers from PETA and other animal-rights groups, even employing John “J.P.” Goodwin, a former Animal Liberation Front member and spokesman with a lengthy arrest record and a history of promoting arson to accomplish animal liberation.
The change brought more money and media attention. Hoyt explained the shift in 1991, telling National Journal, “PETA successfully stole the spotlight … Groups like ours that have plugged along with a larger staff, a larger constituency … have been ignored.” Hoyt agreed that PETA’s net effect within the animal-rights movement was to spur more moderate groups to take tougher stances in order to attract donations from the public.
The Sticky Web Catches More Flies : Scandal Abounds
HSUS is a multinational conglomerate with ten regional offices in the United States and a special Hollywood Office that promotes and monitors the media’s coverage of animal-rights issues. It includes a huge web of organizations, affiliates, and subsidiaries. Some are nonprofit, tax-exempt “charities,” while others are for-profit taxable corporations, which don’t have to divulge anything about their financial dealings.
The complex infrastructure of HSUS allows it to hide donations and grants (both to the affiliate, and in turn, to other AR organizations) without public scrutiny. For instance, the HSUS Wildlife Land Trust collected $21.1 million between 1998 and 2003 and spent $15.7 million of that amount on fundraising expenses that directly benefited HSUS. This arrangement allowed HSUS to bury millions of dollars in direct-mail and other fundraising costs in its affiliate’s budget, giving the public (and charity watchdog groups) the false impression that its own fundraising costs were relatively low.
Until 1995, HSUS also controlled the Humane Society of Canada (HSC), which Paul Irwin had founded four years earlier. But Irwin, who claimed to live in Canada when he set up HSC, turned out to be ineligible to run a Canadian charity because he actually lived in Maryland. Irwin’s Canadian passport was ultimately revoked and he was replaced as HSC’s executive director. The new leader later hauled HSUS into court to answer charges that Irwin had transferred over $1 million to HSUS from the Canadian group. HSUS claimed it was to pay for HSC’s fundraising, but didn’t provide the group with the required documentation to back up the expenses. In January 1997 a Canadian judge ordered HSUS to return the money, writing: “I cannot imagine a more glaring conflict of interest or a more egregious breach of fiduciary duty. It demonstrates an overweening arrogance of a type seldom seen.”
HSUS and its affiliates have received embarrassingly low scores from established charity watchdog groups. Worth magazine gave HSUS a “D” rating for spending as much as 53 percent of its expenses on fundraising. And online rating service Give.org noted that the huge HSUS corporate family does not have an active governing board overseeing the overall structure, and criticized the organization for holding only three board meetings during 2000, two of them on the same day. Charity Navigator gave only one star (out of four) to HSUS’s Earth Voice International, and zero to the Humane Society of the United States Wildlife Land Trust.
Hiring the Animal Liberation Front
Even seasoned animal-rights veterans were surprised in April 2000 when the Humane Society of the United States sent John “J.P.” Goodwin on an anti-fur junket to China. Goodwin was not just any animal activist: he was then an avowed member of the terrorist Animal Liberation Front (ALF). Less than a year later he was formally identified as an HSUS legislative affairs staffer; Goodwin would later change his rhetoric to match HSUS’s corporate policy of not endorsing violence as a protest tactic.
Goodwin, a high-school dropout who had previously co-founded the Texas-based Coalition to Abolish the Fur Trade, pulled no punches when it came to his priorities. “My goal is the abolition of all animal agriculture,” he had written to one Internet activist mailing list.
Goodwin himself has been arrested and convicted for being the ringleader of a gang that vandalized fur retailers in multiple states during the 1990s. The animal-rights newspaper Animal People News profiled Goodwin in 2000, noting that he “gleefully announced a string of Animal Liberation Front mink releases and arsons against furriers and fur farms” while a “spokesman” for the underground terrorist group.
Goodwin also fielded press inquiries after a Petaluma, California, slaughterhouse arson in February 1997, and shocked the public with his comments on the March 1997 arson at a farmer’s feed co-op in Utah. Referring to a fire that caused almost $1 million in damage and could easily have killed a family sleeping on the premises,
Goodwin told The Desert News: “We’re ecstatic.”
J.P. Goodwin doesn’t represent HSUS’s only intersection with the animal rights movement’s violent underbelly. Miyun Park, a Washington, DC anti-meat activist hired by HSUS in 2005, was acknowledged in 1999 as a financial benefactor of No Compromise magazine, a publication that supports the ALF and promotes arson and other violent tactics. And in the investigation leading to the 2005 animal-enterprise terrorism trial of six SHAC (Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty) activists, Park was among those named in at least six federal wiretap warrants.
Ariana Huemer, an HSUS government-affairs employee, may figure in the case of fugitive animal-rights bomber Daniel Andreas San Diego. An FBI evidence recovery log from the search of San Diego’s car describes a check Huemer wrote to him. San Diego, currently on the FBI’s “Most Wanted” list, is presumed responsible for 10-pound shrapnel bombs detonated in 2003 at two California biomedical research companies. One of these bombs was accompanied by a “secondary” device, timed to detonate after paramedics and firefighters arrived on the scene.
During 1998 and 1999, the Humane Society of the United States reported to the IRS that it made small financial contributions toward the operation of WASTE.org, an Internet website that was then the main distribution point for the “communiqués” of the terrorist Animal Liberation Front (ALF). In addition to hosting the ALF’s “Frontline” mailing list, WASTE.org hosted a list for the HSUS-coordinated “Inter Campus Animal Advocacy Network” (I-CAAN); the official mailing lists of a Minnesota group called Compassionate Action for Animals (CAA); and mailing lists for approximately a dozen other organizations. CAA, originally called the Animal Liberation League, was started by activist Freeman Wicklund -- who has spoken openly about his desire for other activists to “embrace the Animal Liberation Front.”
Questions remain about HSUS’s support of the WASTE server. In 1999 HSUS’s operating budget was over $50 million, and it already operated at least four other e-mail lists -- all operated from its own network servers. Why did the group need an outside server for its I-CAAN mailing list? And why use this particular server, one that also happened to host a terrorist group’s press operations, instead of one of hundreds of other commercially available services?
Some of HSUS’s hefty fundraising expenses have ended up in the pockets of the notorious fundraising company Share Group, Inc. The telemarketing firm made headlines during the 2000 Democratic National Convention when the DNC and the Gore 2000 Presidential Campaign both dropped Share Group after a reporter pointed out that former owner Michael Ansara was still involved in the company. Ansara had been ordered to surrender control of Share Group, after he pleaded guilty to a felony conspiracy charge related to a money-moving scheme for Ron Carey’s 1997 Teamsters Union presidential reelection campaign.
In the fundraising business, returning 30 to 35 percent of funds raised to a given charity is considered acceptable. But according to reports from New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, Share Group kept $2.18 million between 1999 and 2000, and passed on only $273,560 to HSUS -- a return rate of only 11 percent.
In New York, Share Group only gave HSUS $16,543 of the $1.08 million it raised during the year 2000 -- a return of only 1.53 percent. In 2004, Share Group raised over $1 million in HSUS’s name, but HSUS wound up paying over $173,000 for the privilege. This dismal record probably didn’t surprise HSUS: back in 1996, Share raised $60,045 and returned nothing.
The 2001 Letter of Agreement between the two groups shows that HSUS agreed to a minimum guarantee of only 1 percent of the gross receipts. The Illinois Attorney General’s office reports that HSUS paid Share Group over $1.87 million for 2001 fundraising that netted less than $750,000 to the animal-rights group -- a negative 150 percent return.
Hurricane HSUS
The HSUS boasted that it raised over $5.5 million in one week to deal with the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Apparently their $113 million in assets was not enough to provide adequately for pets displaced by Katrina. For $5.5 million, you'd expect HSUS to conduct a major rescue effort, but according to their press release: "So far, The HSUS has helped to rescue more than 300 animals in Louisiana and Mississippi, including dogs, cats, ferrets, and a seal."
CBS News reported that the Houston SPCA rescued nearly 1,000 animals and sent them to a temporary shelter near the Astrodome. The Houston Chronicle reported that the Louisiana SPCA is handling an additional 700. According to the Guidestar nonprofit directory, the two organizations' combined resources are less than 8 percent of HSUS's $95,000,000 annual budget. And the Petfinder service notes that the LSU School of Veterinary Medicine in Baton Rouge is sheltering another 600 animals -- without anything close to a $5.5 million payoff.
If indeed HSUS did help "more than 300" animals, that means they spent approximately $17,000 for every animal rescued! The Salvation Army reports that a $100 donation "will feed a family of four for two days [and] provide two cases of drinking water." Perhaps HSUS has decided that a ferret's life is worth 160 times the assistance required by its owner and his entire family.
The Decatur (AL) Daily News reports that shortly after Katrina hit, HSUS representatives began calling Alabama newspaper reporters to find out how many chickens needed help. "They wanted to come here and capture any chickens running loose and homeless," state veterinarian Tony Frazier told the Daily News. "They were going to find homes for the chickens."
International Rumor Mongering
In 2000, the Humane Society of the United States was refused entrance to the 16th meeting of CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species) Animals Committee for “filing false accusations about CITES member nations.” HSUS had made wild allegations to the CITES Secretariat about illegal trade in ivory between Namibia and Taiwan, and Zimbabwe and China, supposedly in exchange for military armaments, equipment, and helicopters. When pressed for documentation, HSUS declined to supply any. The CITES Secretariat issued an official Notification (#2000/060) about the HSUS-instigated allegations, noting that absolutely no evidence existed to support HSUS’s claims.
Nevertheless Money, Power and Politics Still Rule and HSUS Marches On
In 2002, the multi-million-dollar conglomerate gave less than $150,000 to hands-on humane societies and animal shelters. Worse, HSUS employees have complained to the press that their organization wastes its resources on fundraising expenses and high salaries for its chief executives. Robert Baker, an HSUS consultant and former chief investigator, told U.S. News & World Report: “The Humane Society should be worried about protecting animals from cruelty. It’s not doing that. The place is all about power and money.”
HSUS lobbies heavily to change the laws of communities across the country. Like other national animal-rights groups, HSUS has learned that pouring huge sums of money into ballot initiative campaigns can result in legislative victories in a way public relations and lobbying never could.
When John Hoyt took over its presidency in 1970, the Humane Society of the United States had 30,000 members and an annual budget of about $500,000. By 1994, HSUS’s annual revenue had grown to $22 million. In 2003, that number jumped to $123 million, including nearly $3 million in investment income. At the end of 2003, the nonprofit HSUS declared assets totaling over $113 million, including almost $16 million in cash and over $80 million invested in securities. It pays over $11.8 million in annual salaries, and another $3 million in employee benefits and pension contributions. When HSUS merged with the Fund for Animals in 2004, the group announced that its 2005 operating budget alone would be $95 million.
Raising money is First Priority. The Second mantra is “the Means Justify the Ends.” HSUS will even adopt conflicting positions in order to satisfy individual patrons. Two HSUS donors once wrote to John Hoyt with very different views of the sinking of Icelandic whaling ships by Paul Watson’s violent Sea Shepherd Conservation Society in the late 1980s. In one response, Hoyt agreed with the donor that Watson’s actions were wrong, writing: “I am unequivocally opposed to any and all acts of violence in the pursuit of efforts to protect animals from abuse and suffering.” In the other, he declared that Sea Shepherd’s work was “indeed, a daring and masterful bit of James Bond on behalf of the great whales.”
HSUS recently joined the lucrative third-party certification business. Some environmental and animal-rights groups have developed “eco-labels,” offered (for a price) by sponsoring organizations to certify food and clothing as environmentally friendly. HSUS is a founding member of the Humane Farm Animal Care coalition.
School Activism 101
The Humane Society of the United States has gained entry to countless segments of polite society. One of the more worrisome consequences of this is the group’s relatively unfettered access to U.S. schools.
Through its National Association for Humane and Environmental Education (NAHEE), as well as a series of animal-rights-oriented publications, HSUS spreads animal-rights propaganda to schoolchildren as young as three.
One package, titled People and Animals -- A Humane Education Guide, suggests films and books for teachers to present to their students. In these recommended teaching tools, sport hunters are called “selective exterminators” and “drunken slobs” who participate in a “blood sport” and a “war on wildlife” with “maniacal attitudes toward killing.” Another teachers’ guide contains anti-circus stories in which animals are repeatedly depicted as overworked and abused.
At the same time, HSUS hypocritically complains that it is inappropriate for the federal government to distribute educational materials about the need for laboratory research animals, complaining: “These materials inappropriately target young people, who do not possess the cognitive ability to make meaningful decisions regarding highly controversial and complex issues.”
The “Humane” Web
In addition to the HSUS flagship offices in Maryland and DC, the organization’s global network includes control over the following legal corporations (this list is evolving as new information becomes available):
Nonprofit affiliates:
Alice Morgan Wright-Edith Goode Fund (DC);
Alternative Congress Trust (DC);
Animal Channel (DC);
Association Humanataria De Costa Rica;
Center for the Respect of Life and Environment (DC);
Charlotte and William Parks Foundation for Animal Welfare (DC);
Conservation Endowment Fund (see ICEC) (CA);
Earth Restoration Corps. (DC);
Earthkind Inc. (DC);
Earthkind International Inc. (DC);
Earthkind USA (DC);
Earthkind USA (MT);
Earthkind UK [also affiliated with the International Fund for Animal Welfare];
Earthvoice (DC);
Earthvoice International (DC);
Eating with a Conscience Campaign (DC);
HSUS Hollywood Office (formerly The Ark Trust Inc.) (CA);
Humane Society International (DC), which also operates
The International Center for Earth Concerns (ICEC) in Ojai, California,
The Center for Earth Concerns in Costa Rica, and
The Conservation Endowment Fund in California;
Humane Society International Australian Office Inc.;
Humane Society International of Latin America;
Humane Society of the United States (DE);
Humane Society of the United States (MD);
Humane Society of the United States (MT);
Humane Society of the United States (PA);
Humane Society of the United States (VT);
Humane Society of the United States California Branch Inc. (CA);
Humane Society of the United States New Jersey Branch Inc. (NJ);
Humane Society of the United States Wildlife Land Trust (DC);
Humane Society of the United States Wildlife Land Trust (KS);
Humane Society of the United States Wildlife Land Trust (OK);
Humane Society of the United States Utah State Branch (UT);
Humane Society University (DC);
Institute for the Study of Animal Problems (DC);
Interfaith Council for the Protection of Animals and Nature (GA);
International Society for the Protection of Animals (UK);
International Wilderness Leadership Wild Foundation Inc. [d/b/a The WILD Foundation] (CA);
Kindness Club International Inc. (DC);
Meadowcreek Project Inc. (AR);
Meadowcreek Inc. (AR);
(NAHEE) National Association for Humane and Environmental Education (DC);
(NHES) National Humane Education Society (VA);
The Farm Sanctuary helps them distribute HSUS Humane Curriculum materials for teachers and classrooms
Species Survival Network (MI);
State Federation of Humane Societies
Valerie Sheppard Humane Society University (DC);
Wildlife Rehabilitation Training Center (MA);
World Federation for the Protection of Animals Inc. (DC);
World Society for the Protection of Animals (DC);
World Society for the Protection of Animals (IA);
World Society for the Protection of Animals (ND);
World Society for the Protection of Animals (VT);
World Society for the Protection of Animals - Canada;
World Society for the Protection of Animals - Deutschland;
World Society for the Protection of Animals International (UK);
World Society for the Protection of Animals UK (UK); and
Worldwide Network Inc. (DC).
For-profit affiliates:
The Humane Catalog (VA);
Humane Equity Fund [defunct] (DC);
Humane Society Press (DC);
Humane Society of the United States Connecticut Branch Inc. (CT);
Humane Society of the United States Virginia Branch Inc. (VA);
World Society for the Protection of Animals (MA);
World Society for the Protection of Animals - Australia;
World Society for the Protection of Animals Executor Services (UK);
World Society for the Protection of Animals Trading Company (UK).
NOTABLE QUOTES
“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
“[T]he Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is not affiliated with, nor is it a parent organization for, local humane societies, animal shelters, or animal care and control agencies … The HSUS does not operate or have direct control over any animal shelter.”
— From a 2001 disclaimer issued by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)
“The Humane Society should be worried about protecting animals from cruelty. It’s not doing that. The place is all about power and money.”
— HSUS consultant and former HSUS Chief Investigator Robert Baker, in U.S. News & World Report
“I’m not an admirer of HSUS. They’ve always been primarily a direct-mail operation, and what’s known in animal rights circles as a credit-grabber.”
— HSUS co-founder Cleveland Amory
“My goal is the abolition of all animal agriculture.”
— HSUS grassroots coordinator John “J.P.” Goodwin
“HSUS really needs to be called to task for its triple sided hypocrisy. When HSUS addresses scientists they say they support animal research as necessary. When HSUS addresses the public they say it is evil but sometimes necessary. When HSUS addresses its members and other animal rights groups, they say it is evil and unnecessary.”
— Dr. Pat Cleveland of the University of California, San Diego
“If we could shut down all sport hunting in a moment, we would.”
— Associated Press
“Our goal is to get sport hunting in the same category as cock fighting and dog fighting.”
— Bozeman (MT) Daily Chronicle
“We are going to use the ballot box and the democratic process to stop all hunting in the United States ... We will take it species by species until all hunting is stopped in California. Then we will take it state by state.”
— Full Cry magazine
“We would be foolish and silly not to unite with people in the public health sector, the environmental community, [and] unions, to try to challenge corporate agriculture.”
— “Animal Rights 2002” convention
Sources
Activist Cash. http://www.activistcash.com. The research division of Consumer Freedom. http://www.consumerfreedom.com
