I Didn't Need More Discouragement and Disillusionment, PETA.

I've had four cats and a dog. They've all been picked up off the street or from shelters. The one thing I admired about PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) was their aggresive defense of critters, sort of the ACLU of the animal world.

Then I see the Daily Caller article, based on government records.

Documents published online this month show that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, an organization known for its uncompromising animal-rights positions, killed more than 95 percent of the pets in its care in 2011. . . . In a February 16 statement, the Center said PETA killed 1,911 cats and dogs last year, finding homes for only 24 pets.

Kovich also determined that PETA employees kill 84 percent of the animals in their custody within 24 hours of receiving them.

What is PETA doing? What is their purpose, and how can they go so directly opposite to what they publicly proclaim?

I know I'm a little incoherent, but I'm hurt and angry. Will someone please try to justify this for me? Or at least help me make sense of it.

Oh, here's the link. dailycaller.com...

If you are in charge of taking in thousands of animals, what do you expect?

So many people hate peta as it is, do you think they're getting funds from your average joe? Like most animal shelters, you can only do so much. Unless you're one of those rich twats that prefers to spend $20k a week on a villa watching a wall screen tv and making sure your 4 year old has his own personal yacht.

can only try.

Originally posted by charles1952
What is PETA doing? What is their purpose, and how can they go so directly opposite to what they publicly proclaim?

They want the same thing as most other organisations: Money, more Money and maybe some Power on top of it.
If one truly belives that Peta are concerned about Animals and are animal-loving people, one has to be pretty naive. There "aggressive" stance and their campaigns are just tries to get attention. Controversity creates cash, everybody knows this. They know it and for them, it works.

I just wonder why so many people, celebrities or not, follow them blindly, support them, help them and think it's awesome what they do. But then again, same counts for Scientology and numerous other shady, money-hungry organisations.

Originally posted by ShadowAngel85
st wonder why so many people, celebrities or not, follow them blindly, support them, help them and think it's awesome what they do. But then again, same counts for Scientology and numerous other shady, money-hungry organisations.

Would any organisation be acceptable to you? Anything? What would it take to be a mere "animal organisation" ?

I don't see what else you can do.

Or am I missing an ivory keyed piano and a baked pig for this rhetoric to stand out?

Seriously, what does it take to wake people up, and get them aware? One person on a corner with a notpad saying "excuse me sir, have you heard that this happens?" who then is given a bottle of port and told to get off my street?

The hell does it take? do too much and "money hungry bastards with no real intent" as opposed to "toothless old man with no intent."

Argh, this world is too full of humans, I'll wait a while, see if they cull themselves down a bit.

reply to post by mainidh

Forgive my naivete, but I expect better than that. They put themselves in charge of taking in thousands of animals, no law requires that. They took on the responsility, dedicating themselves to treating animals ethically.

What do I expect? Aggressive, and effective, adoption campaigns. Building shelters, helping to pass and enforce necessary laws. I expect honesty, at least to their stated mission, and not, as another poster suggested, loyalty to money and power.

PETA did do some good in the past. Like helping get stricter laws on the treatment of animals used in experiments.

But, I mean, yeah it is hypocrytical to kill animals. But a lot of PETA types are extremists and their logic is probably something like "better off dead then to end up in the care of abusive humans". I've been around some of those types.

How does PETA euthanize animals? I bet their version of the ethical way to do it is really what separates themselves from the so-called evil animal abusers.

reply to post by mainidh

Please forgive me, I'm still a little upset.

Would any organisation be acceptable to you? Anything? What would it take to be a mere "animal organisation" ? I don't see what else you can do.

If you say you're taking care of animals, don't lie about it, put your money into taking care of animals. If you know you're going to kill the vast majority of them in the first day you have them, don't take them in. Let somebody do it who cares.

Lots of organizations have nothing to do with animals. That's fine, they don't have to. But when you commit to taking care of them, do the job or quit pretending. Either of those choices is honorable, but not what PETA is doing now.

I just stumbled across this same article about PETA, also. It looks to be another organization whose main function is to stay viable instead of helping animals.

PETA has a $37 million dollar annual budget. Last year it killed 1,911 dogs and cats and found homes for only 24 pets.


I think PETA needs to be killed ASAP.
It truly is a slaughterhouse operation.

dailycaller.com...

My sister is a PETA member and a regular St. Francis. Wears no animal products and eats nothing with a face.

The main focus of the organization is educating and making aware issues relating to animal cruelty, not sheltering. In a perfect world, there would be no need for PETA or for euthanizing animals.

The world is not a perfect place, and judgments are made. I am going to judge that the group who dug up the dirt on PETA, this Center for Consumer Freedom, is out to paint PETA in a bad light, because PETA goes after factory farming and CCF, as the article states, "runs online campaigns targeting groups that antagonize food producers."

So, an organization that supports the killing of millions (billions?) of animals a year for food, should not be throwing stones at an organization that euthanizes way less and is against factory farms. I'll bet CCF is really an astroturf industry front group with a hefty budget. I'll bet it doesn't have members like my sister but instead is comprised of plenty of companies and is run by pr/lawyers.

In a perfect world, I wouldn't experience discouragement and disillusionment brought on by industry front groups.

reply to post by desert

Dear desert,

I don't care if the Marx Brothers published the information. The motivation isn't a question. The only question is "Is the information accurate?" The figures are from the state, and PETA representatives are accepting the charges as factual.(If I remember the article correctly.)

Their main focus is not sheltering? You nailed that one. Why take them in if you know you're going to kill 17 out of 20 that same day? And at least 2 of the remaining 3 eventually.

Fine, judge the groups as biased. I don't care if they are. Again, what matters is the information. If you say it's false, OK, let me know how the state has false information. If it's true, the focus should be on PETA.

Best wishes

reply to post by charles1952


Here's the thing, you're damned if you do, and you're damned if you don't.

Now, shelters take in animals because they have nowhere else to go. We would have an epidemic of feral animals if they didn't.

Animal shelters that have huge budgets can house animals, but most do not have the budget to do that.

So it is either take animals in, and hope that you can find a home for them, or leave them on the street? If you can't find a home for them what do you do? Just put them out on the street? No they can't do that. Should they have taken them in the first place? Again what is the more moral thing to do, ignore the issue, or try to at least do what you can? If shelters were not taking them in in the first place it would be worse for the animals and people.
Feral animals would be rounded up and killed, not even a chance to be adopted.

So what would you suggest they do with the animals that can't be adopted? Should PETA simply not take in animals in the first place? Then you'd be complaining that they don't do anything. What are you doing? How many animals have you sheltered and tried to find homes for? How about donating to FEMA, and perhaps then they could afford to house animals longer?

Nah you just want an excuse to demonize them. I don't see anyone complaining about city animal shelters that do exactly the same thing.

I think the real solution has nothing to do with PETA, but with people being more responsible with animals for pets.

reply to post by ANOK

Dear ANOK,

I appreciate your response. Mind if I shuffle the parts around a little? It will make it easier for me to talk about.

What are you doing? How many animals have you sheltered and tried to find homes for? How about donating to FEMA, and perhaps then they could afford to house animals longer?
Nah you just want an excuse to demonize them.

Please refer to the first two sentences of the OP

I've had four cats and a dog. They've all been picked up off the street or from shelters.

One cat I picked up was stranded on the median of a highway which was in the middle of a very aggressive demonstration. I just opened the car door, swooped up the cat, and threw it into the back seat. "Thunderpaws" was a favorite of mine for years. And no I don't want to demonize PETA, I thought my motivation was clear from the title and my writing. Of course, you have every right to believe I'm lying, but I don't know why you would. I AM disappointed and saddened.

OK, now that the personal stuff is out of the way. . .

You seem to be asking two questions. One, what is society to do about the feral animal problem? I haven't thought out a solution to that, that's not what the thread is about. And, two, what do I think PETA is supposed to do about the feral animal problem?

PETA is perfectly free to define it's own mission. It can announce to the world that it's just educational and will be handing out flyers, I don't care. And I certainly wouldn't blame them for not saving strays.

In the same way, I wouldn't blame the National Organization for Women if they didn't put out a line of cosmetics to make women look prettier. Sure, that would deal with women, but it's not what they want to do.

But my point through all of this, and my reason for putting it in this forum is that PETA is lying. I'm sad, disappointed, disillusioned, all sorts of bad things. Couldn't PETA, at least, be a clean, uncorrupted organization?

With respect,
Charles1952

Dear Charles,
i feel your pain, disdain, disillusionment and completely agree that PETA should not be permitted to manipulate their public image, especially when this is exemplary of their track record for decades.
you might not want to read this but it goes to show you, this is nothing new PETAs Horrible Secret

Unlike local animal shelters, PETA doesn't even bother trying to find homes for these pets. All of them are killed within a few hours. In fact, PETA has gone through several area vets, and they refused to euthanize healthy animals. Finally PETA constructed their own facilities for this practice.

PETA's mission statement, written by that group's leader Ingrid Newkirk states "We believe that animals have an intrinsic worth of their own".

yeah, that intrinsic worth translates to cash in their coffers, nothing more.

now some will complain about the source but i don't care cause there are plenty more available.

PETA is a disgrace. for all their funding, for all their years, what have they really accomplished?
PETA should be disbanded and permanently prevented from lobbying anyone for anything.

before anyone asks "what do you do" ... here's my answer (among others previously stated) ... my home county does more for all animals than PETA ever dreamed about doing.
no-kill community

County Commission approved a no-kill resolution by a unanimous vote! This resolution is historic because it is the first such resolution in any city or county in Florida. --- snip --- What’s happening in Manatee County is inspiring because for so long people have said that no-kill is not possible in Florida. Manatee County is proving that no-kill is possible in Florida, and that it starts as an act of will.

which circles back to ... if there is a will, there is always a way.

reply to post by Honor93

Dear Honor93,

Thank you a hundred times over! I needed some good news and you, and Manatee County have provided it!

There is something in us that gets hardened when we destroy life by the thousands. Life becomes cheap, something I am not looking forward to as the Mid-East gets ever screwier. Weren't there some studies showing that animal abuse by children was a good predictor of adult anti-social behavior?

As far as saving PETA, maybe, maybe not. There are, as an earlier poster reminds us, some very good people among PETA's volunteers. I wish there was a way to keep them and slough off the rest.

Anyway, thanks again for the wonderful news!

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952

you're quite welcome and believe me it wasn't an easy journey.
from the days when we performed TNR, against the prevailing laws to the days when an island Mayor published an article in defense of well-established feral colonies and their caretakers.

both locals and visitors (tourists) were taking actions against the ferals and their supplies and the Mayor put a public halt to it and declared "if you mess with them, you're messing with me" (or something to that effect)
[can't link the article, archives don't go back far enough but if i find it, i'll scan it and u2u ya ... that story will definitely put a smile on your face]

that was the beginning of many years of cooperation culminating in this unanimous vote.
personally, i currently care for 10 felines, have re-homed dozens and participate in the TNR activities as i can.

once upon a time i supported PETA, then i found out what they're really about and i've prayed for their demise ever since.

reply to post by charles1952


Hi Charles, I believe this to be propaganda and/or a smear campaign

Although obviously animals that haven't found a home unfortunately get euthanized.

Anyway check the link and see what you think...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Chadwickus

Dear Chadwickus,

Thanks for the comment. You always inspire me. Bear with me while I go through my thought processes.

You raised the point that this may be propaganda or a smear. I assume you mean that the information is false and is being pushed for bad motives. If the information is true, I don't much care what the motives were.

So, how in the world would I ever be able to find out if this is true or not? Well, you gave me the name "Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services." I went to their home page and put "PETA" in the search box. The first hit was their animal disposition report for 2006. That report appears to be information supplied by PETA to the state, and it looks just as bad as it's reported to be.

Here's the link: VDACS animal disposition report It shows 12 adopted and 2981 euthanized, about 2/5 of 1%.

So, for now, I have to believe the reports.

Thanks again for motivating to do some searching on this issue, I'm grateful.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


Peta is not the same organization it was in it's early days after Alex Pacheco (co-founder) had formed the group to get out the message of the cruelty in animal research, specifically the Silver Springs Monkey case (Hidden Crimes).
They did incredible work for many years exposing the horrors of animal research and the fur industry. I applaud Pacheco and those that maintained an indifference to the glare of lights and attention. The Animal Liberation Front was born out of this type of selfless dedication..

I think these days Petas main concern is raising money for the paychecks and the overhead, exploiting further the animals they profess to protect. Personally I think they alienate more than educate.

Truth is that Feral Animals (mainly cats & dogs) are a Huge Problem.
Cats kill millions of birds every year.
Some of them have attacked people.
They are, each and every one of them, a flea breeding farm, a resevoir for heart worm and other parasites that eventually make their way to our own well cared for pets.
TNR is not the solution.

Feral dogs are a danger to people and should never, ever be allowed to exist.

Many animals picked up by or taken to shelters are unadoptable.
It just is not logical/practical or reasonable to keep them for their whole lives....they just keep coming from everywhere. There are millions of them, maybe even billions.
Do any of you have a majickal solution to the problem?
If you have, I'm sure PETA and other animal shelters would like to hear it.
If not, then don't get your knickers in a knot when you learn that strays are being euthanized by the thousands.
County Animal Control Services do this on a regular basis.

Maybe there should be a stiff fine for anyone who has not spayed/neutered their pets (double if they have reproduced), and have a special licensing program for serious breeders of purebred cats and dogs.

There should definitely be a school program that teaches children to be responsible pet owners.
They are obviously Not getting taught this at home.