Read the rest here: http://www.onegreenplanet.org/news/bill-aims-to-prevent-peta-from-killing-animals/
It's getting harder and harder to find nice things to say about PETA. :no:
Read the rest here: http://www.onegreenplanet.org/news/bill-aims-to-prevent-peta-from-killing-animals/When people think of the animal rights movement, most often the name "PETA" will come to mind. While the group has been criticized for its sometimes over-the-top tactics to get people to think about how animals are used and abused in our society, there is no doubt that PETA has done incredible things for the animal rights movement writ-large. After all, without PETA many people would likely never stop to think about how their personal choices impact other living beings - even if the way that they reached this conclusion involved seeing people bathed in blood and wrapped in cellophane to simulate raw meat.
PETA has engrained the idea that using animals for food, clothing or any other purpose is murder … which is why we're a little caught off guard by the recent news that PETA euthanizes 88 percent of the animals they rescue for their shelter program, headquartered in Norfolk Virginia.
Based on the 2014 statistics from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 787 dogs and 1,536 cats were euthanized in PETA's shelter.
The shelter system in the U.S. is notoriously recognized as inefficient. About five out of every 10 dogs and seven out of 10 cats are put down every year in shelters.
As with the majority of animals who are euthanized in shelters across the U.S., the Virginia Department of Agriculture reports that the animals in PETA's care could have been adopted. What makes us even more queazy is the fact that the animals who were euthanized were stored in a $9,370 walk-in freezer, between pick-ups from Tidewater Cremation Services, that was purchased with donor dollars.
How about you personally watch the killing of 2,000 animals, many healthy and simply in need of a loving home, and then tell me how much of a pittance that is. And if an organization does kill 2,000 animals a year, maybe they can come up with a better name than People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.2,000 animals a year is a pittance...
If PETA has limited funds and resources, why use some of that money to create kill shelters for animals that could otherwise go to no-kill shelters? Killing healthy animals is not ethical, and the name of their organization is a lie.Why spend limited resources on rehabilitating, retraining, and giving veterinary care to dogs and cats when you could use those resources to save many more animals doomed to become human (and dogs' and cats') food? PETA does not have unlimited funds and can't do everything.
Millions of humans are killed each year in war, but if I killed just one I'm sure the local police would care.2,000 animals a year is a pittance...
Just because it is reality doesn't mean it's OK...While to some that's unacceptable I merely say to them - what's your idea? Rainbows and healing crystals? Reality is a ***** but non the less it's reality.
Completely agree!In case there was any confusion, this is not an action taken up by the US Senate, but by the Virginia Senate. It defines "shelter" as a place primarily for rescue and re-homing. It doesn't keep PETA or any other organization from euthanizing animals, but it does prevent an organization from calling its facility a shelter if it's more about putting animals down than about making them available for adoption. There are no honest brokers in the image fight around this one. That front for the Consumer Choice Federation, PetaKillsAnimals, is no friend of animals, it is a friend of the fast food industry, Big Tobacco, puppy mills, and probably Satan Herself. They intentionally twist and mislead, but so does PETA. It's either true or not true that the kill numbers are so high only because people bring in sick, injured and old pets and that PETA provides euthanasia for them as a valuable service. It's either true or not true that PETA volunteers or employees go out looking for stray animals to round up and kill, sometimes nabbing little dogs off their owners' own porches in the process. There's nobody covering this whose facts I trust at this point.
One thing certain is that PETA is living a public relations nightmare that's almost entirely of its own making. There are people in decision-making positions there who don't seem to know a thing about human nature, or how to hire people who do. Companion animals are the gateway to compassion for animals in general, and it seems they are fighting that with every move they make. If you want to convince tender-hearted people to stop eating chickens and cows, you don't accomplish that by killing massive numbers of adoptable companion animals.
I wouldn't know about each and every persons view on the need of a kill policy. But if you google "PETA kill policy" articles mostly talk about the fact that PETA kills. They say for a organization that talks about animals, killing animals is hypocritical.Everyone on VeggieBoards recognizes the problem of pet overpopulation, and shares your concern. That PETA euthanizes animals is not the controversy. As I wrote and as you acknowledge, every shelter does that except the no-kill shelters, but the kill rates at PETA's facility are far higher than at any other kill shelter in Virginia. The controversy is that PETA stands accused of operating an animal death camp disguised as a shelter, and that PETA makes no effort to find homes for the animals brought there. It sounds like the only animals that get adopted out are the ones a particular employee knows of a particular home for. They don't hold "pet adoption days." They don't profile adoptable dogs and cats on their website, or even allow the public to visit to find an animal to adopt. Every year they officially kill about 2000 animals inside their doors, and adopt out about 20. PETA denies none of this.
About your "you said, I said" comment: Has PETA disputed the testimony of this particular woman, who was in a position to see, hear and do exactly what she has reported and who has been interviewed extensively in the general press since first writing about her experiences? It's not a "you said, I said" situation unless PETA is calling her out as a liar and presenting evidence to refute her claims. From what I've read, her testimony is 100 percent in line with what other former employees describe.
You don't think that is suffering?...They'll tell you that living in a shelter cage is suffering, living feral by its own wits is suffering, and living with an abusive or neglectful owner is suffering."