Activities of animal activist are rapidly increasing and are having a detrimental effect on the agriculture industry. The urgent need to tell the real story of what these groups are up to is paramount. I will post articles and links to any information I find on HSUS’ devastating impact on animal ag below:
The following two articles below just came out in the Oklahoma Cattlemen’s Newsletter
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) – “Doing Less with More”
The Humane Society Of The United States (HSUS) donates less than one-half of 1% of its total budget for the actual hands-on care of dogs and cats, according to The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF).
CCF says analysis of HSUS’ 2008 tax filing shows the total amount given to pet shelters came to $450,000, even though HSUS raised $86 million in contributions.
So where does the money go? CCF reports HSUS spent $24 million in 2008 on fundraising efforts. Another big line item was the almost $20 million in “campaigns, legislation and litigation.” An even larger sum – $30.9 million – went to salaries and other compensation for HSUS employees. In this same tax filing it appears the organization paid a company over $4 million to open and process all the donations they are receiving from their aggressive “save the puppies” campaigns.
We can only hope these figures infuriate the many kind-hearted folks who have been duped into donating to HSUS with the belief that their contributions actually go to make life better for dogs and cats.
EPA Plans New Measures on CAFO Discharge Regulations -
EPA is launching several new efforts aimed at Bush-era Clean Water Act regulations governing nutrient – and possibly pathogen – discharges from CAFOs, according to InsideEPA.
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson this week announced the launch of a new rulemaking to strengthen existing Chesapeake Bay state CAFO programs. She told a conference sponsored by Choose Clean Water – a group that advocates for Bay cleanup – that the agency would prefer nutrient runoff from CAFOs be reduced through existing regulations and enhanced measures in state environmental plans.
But she warned that “in the event that state programs are not sufficient, our new rulemaking will seek to strengthen CAFO requirements and improve manure management to reduce nutrient loading.” However, she also said that EPA will not implement the new requirements “if states, on their own, have adopted programs that will effectively do the same thing”.
InsideEPA notes that Jackson’s comments come as the agency and environmentalists work to finalize an agreement in principle to settle activists’ litigation challenging the Bush-era CAFO rule, a settlement that industry sources expect includes an agreement to launch a new rulemaking to address pathogens from CAFOs and other environmentalist priorities in exchange for environmentalists dropping their challenge.
Industry groups fear the Obama EPA has agreed, in its settlement with activists, to include permit and pathogen requirements in a new rulemaking.
ANIMAL WELFARE
New Activist Tactics Increase Threats To Producers
By Todd Domer – Kansas Stockman Sept.2009
A segment of the animal rights movement has dramatically changed its approach to influencing consumers and decision-makers. According to Animal Ag Alliance (AAA) Executive Vice President Kay Johnson Smith, the new activist is professional, reasonable and convincing. Smith told livestock producers attending the August 25 KLA/Kansas State University Ranch Management Field Day near Hutchinson while People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals will continue to use ridiculous publicity stunts, the real enemy’s tactics are a greater threat to animal agriculture.
Smith said the number one objective of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is to do away with the food animal industry. The organization has a $150 million annual budget and 30 state directors who lobby for animal cruelty bills that can cast a broad net over livestock production. “They have learned sensationalism doesn’t work,” Smith told those gathered for the field day, hosted by Stroberg Land & Cattle at the Mollhagen family’s Reno Ranch.
HSUS plays to the emotions of dog and cat owners to generate funding for its work against the meat, milk and egg industries. The group is not connected to local humane shelters, although its name would give that appearance. As a prime example of how HSUS spends money donated in the name of companion animals, the group provided most of the financing for the public relations campaign leading up to passage of Proposition 2 in California last year. This public initiative effectively will ban the use of cages for laying hens and farrowing crates for the swine industry by 2015. HSUS has targeted Ohio, Missouri and Michigan for similar bans on animal production techniques. Smith said HSUS and other activist groups were successful in supporting the passage of more than 100 animal cruelty bills across the country last year. These efforts were supplemented by an increase in the number of lawsuits filed against animal owners and protein processors. She said HSUS soon will have 12 full-time attorneys in its legal division.
Another tactic used by the new wave of activists is applying pressure to publicly held food companies. Smith said activist groups and their members buy stock in these companies and try to influence corporate policies, through shareholder meetings, that force changes in animal care, production and handling back through the supply chain.
“HSUS is the absolute most dangerous, but there are others,” said Smith, who grew up on a dairy farm in rural Virginia. Smith, whose group exists to serve as a counter-voice to the animal rights movement, said producers must stop being modest and stand up for their industry. She said individual ranchers and feeders have to become vocal and visible to avoid regulations, laws and public sentiment that could force them out of business. This can be accomplished, Smith said, by delivering the industry’s positive animal care message to the traditional media, civic groups and to individual consumers through social media, like You-Tube and Twitter. “It’s up to every one of us to be an advocate for the future of animal griculture,” she said.
Influencing decision-makers is another strategy endorsed by Smith. She said it’s important to support KLA, NCBA and other groups that effectively lobby against restrictive legislative and regulatory proposals. The efforts of these organizations can be complemented by individual producers meeting with elected officials before damaging legislation is introduced. “Tell lawmakers what you do and what’s important to your business,” Smith suggested. Smith said ranchers and feeders must make sure their houses are in order as another step in the process of wrestling public opinion away from animal activists. Shoring up employment procedures can help identify potential workers who are truly interested in animal welfare and avoid intruders conducting undercover investigations that later appear in the media.
“Know who you’re hiring,” she suggested. Smith recommended adopting Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) practices and training employees to follow the guidelines. Information
AGRICULTURE COALITION
Winning The Battle Against HSUS
Starts With Us