The list is striking the nerves of some in the vegan community.  One user, @MFIoF, tweeted “From HSUS: “50 Things You Can Do to Help the Animals and The HSUS”–not a single mention to go #vegan. So sad/pathetic” along with a link to the list itself.  And they’re right.  So what did Mr. Pacelle say excactly?

Well, it says, “Follow the 3 Rs of eating: reducing your consumption of meat and other animal-based foods, refining your diet by avoiding animal products derived from factory farming, and replacing meat and other animal-based foods with vegetarian foods.”

He is advocating vegetarianism rather than veganism.  And if that wasn’t bad enough, the list goes on reading, “Ask your local restaurants and grocery stores to switch to cage-free eggs, and to protect seals by boycotting Canadian seafood.”  Is he implying that we should only purchase seafood from America?

That, after this one, “Adopt a friend for life from a local animal shelter or foster an animal waiting for a home.”

Confused yet?  I am.  Why bother to suggest adopting an animal from a shelter (one that was most likely saved from slaughter) if you are going to also encourage people to support purchasing eggs?  It doesn’t matter if they are “cage-free” or not, it’s still factory farmed.  And regardless of that, it’s still contributing to the slaughter of animals.  Everyone has seen the baby chicken grinder they use to kill male chicks (Please be aware that the link is to a graphic video – view at your own risk), right?

I feel the same way about promoting people’s “reduction” of their consumption of meat.  Reducing the consumption of meat still sends animals to slaughter, whether it’s one cow or two.  With revenues into the hundreds of millions, the HSUS is perfectly set up to make a large, positive impact on animal rights issues- specifically the vegan movement.  It is well past the time for a large animal rights organization to take a firm stand on the human use of animals.  Then real change can begin.

via hsus.com

“In response to the story “Sikeston seeks public input on new railroad, pet regulations”: If this proposition to spay and neuter all dogs were to spread to the rest of the country, there would be no more service dogs, no more search and rescue dogs, no more dogs to help with cattle and other livestock.

What are you thinking? Have you thought of the consequences? Have you been taken in by the animal rights movement of the Humane Society of the U.S. and PETA?

By the way, if no one is breeding any more puppies, how are veterinarians going to survive?

If this idea takes hold, the entire economy of the U.S. will be affected: dog food companies, veterinarians, pet supply stores — any industry associated with pets. You know as quickly as the animal-rights people finish with the dogs, they will go after the cats, birds, horses — perhaps cows. No more leather. No more hamburger or steak. There go the restaurants. Grocery stores will be affected.

Think about the consequences if every town in the country does what Sikeston is proposing.”

Yeah, I know.  Wow. So what is it that Sikeston is doing to upset Judy?  Well, the original article states that “The legislation, if adopted, would make it unlawful for residents of Sikeston to own or care for cats or dogs over the age of six months which were not spayed or neutered. Special exceptions would be in place for animals whose health would be jeopardized by the spay/neuter procedure and breeders of service animals or operators of commercial kennels.”

Please notice that commercial kennels (aka puppy mills) are not required to adhere to the spay/neuter procedures.  Breeding and raising animals should not be a commercial industry.  We are talking about lives here people.  Furthermore, we have millions of unwanted animals in our shelters, more on the streets, that need our help.  Hasn’t anyone told her about the overpopulation crisis and the problems that result from it?  Why are we still creating a bigger problem for ourselves and the animals “breeding” pets?

As for Judy Hill’s article, well I’ll just let that highly intellectual piece speak for itself.

via semissourian.com

The Humane Society of the United States and Parson The New School for Design (you might know them from Project Runway) have announced a partnership and it’s a pretty awesome thing.  The HSUS will work with Parsons’ fashion design and fashion marketing students on issues surrounding apparel that uses animal fur (including cruelty!!), advertising and even environmental imapcts.

Seriously awesome.

The thought is that, by providing the students with local and global perspectives of the issues within the animal fur trade (and I assume the loss of life), they will be able to make better decisions about using the animal products in their designs.

Did I mention awesome??

Simon Collins, Dean of Fashion for Parsons has this to say:

“We encourage our students to consider the global impact of the apparel industry and with this we have an obligation to educate them on the treatment of animals…  By partnering with The Humane Society of the United States, we are providing our students with the tools to make thoughtful decisions about the materials they use during their career.”

The HSUS is currently promoting more than 140 fur-free retailers and designers online at humanesociety.org/furfreeshopping.

Now, about leather, wool and silk……

“Everyone assumes (HSUS) is something it really isn’t; they do more harm than good…” and  “They are primarily concerned with perpetuating their own existence.”

Kunzleman believes that the HSUS uses its name to mislead people by letting them think that their goal is to help local animal shelters.  He thinks that they are more concerned with lobbying goals in Washington.

First, I have to say that any organization that isn’t concerned with perpetuating their own existence is one that will accept extinction at some point of it’s career.  Secondly, really?  HSUS is only concerned with lobbying in Washington?  Really?

According to a recent NPR article:

“…the HSUS set up a “foreclosure pets fund” that provides financial aid to pet owners who are facing foreclosure or eviction.  To date, the society has distributed more than $100,000 to 57 organizations. Shelters and animal rescue clinics have used the grants — ranging from $500 to $2,000 — to set up pet food banks, to assist with the cost of temporary boarding and to help owners defray the costs of emergency medical care.

The Humane Society also maintains a Web site that encourages down-and-out people to hold on to their pets until the bitter end. It reminds folks that just because a family loses its home doesn’t mean that the family’s pet should be forced to lose both a home and a family.

The HSUS believes that this Kunzleman fellow is trying to get people’s attention from the fact that they allegedly sell puppy mill puppies.  I agree.

But Kunzleman isn’t the only one yapping about the HSUS.  The Ohio Farm Bureau is pretty “concerned” about them too.  Joe Cornley, senior director of corporate communications, thinks that the HSUS is unfair because they ask that “farm animals to be treated as family pets and encourages the reduction of meat from the American diet.”  Oh no! Not compassion!  Joe goes on to say:

“They don’t have the recognition of how farmers treat their animals and why it’s different…   You treat them both humanely, but being humane to a farm animal is different than the treatment of family pets.  If you don’t want to eat milk or eggs or meat, that’s fine, you can live your life as you choose…  Our concern is when they try to shove that lifestyle down our throats.”

He never did say why the treatment of farm animals is different.  It apparently just is.

I find it to be a double standard that people who advocate for compassion (read: animal activists) are labeled as “extremists” and come across as “shoving a lifestyle down one’s throat”.  But the dairy industry advertises in magazines, billboards, TV and creates catch phrases such as “got milk?”, along with a myriad of other tools used to promote dairy; that they are not labeled the same.  It is considered “advertising”.  Is it because the meat and dairy industry are considered a business?  Possibly.  If this was the case, Petland’s CEO would have nothing to say about HSUS having 30 million of it’s profits going towards payroll.  By turning animal activism into a business we could possibly eliminate the double standard.

Regardless, animals are not commodities.  They live, breathe and create life.  They have agendas  that, believe it or not, are their own.  And, I’ll bet if you ask a cow, that agenda has nothing to do with producing babies and milk for humans.  Humans have no ownership rights to all life on Earth.  It’s just so unfortunate that we seem to think that we do.