Are most people here PETA supporters or fans?

[Lou]

I was going to stay out of this. I am a PETA member and not un-biased.

This discussion (or argument) sits on statistics and emotion and is influenced by philosophy. (there is probably some religion and politics in there too). so arguing this is a losing proposition.

This is also a 1st World problem and it might only be a certain kind of 1st World problem based on the weather.

Here in America, there have been several really good censuses done on dogs and cat populations. One of the best conservative estimates of homeless dogs and cats in the US is about 70 Million. (I've seen estimates of over 100 million - and one researcher stated that the number of homeless cats is actually uncalculatable because every day so many are born and so many dies.)

Something like only 10% of these animals are in shelters. The other millions are truly homeless. One guy did the math and one homeless, un-spayed cat and her offspring can produce 420,000 kittens in 7 years. With this kind of math, this problem is like a steam locomotive without brakes heading down a mountain.

@Andy_T said sarcastically that maybe we should send hunters in to kill the animals on the spot. Well, that is what they decided to do in Australia when their feral cat population was causing native wildlife extinctions.

In the US our animal shelters do a pretty good job. About 30% of the dog that goes to a shelter are reclaimed by their owners. And about 5% of the dogs and cats are adopted. but that still leaves the majority in the shelter. Here in California only kittens that can be fully domesticated and tamed are kept in shelters. Feral cats are spayed or neutered and the returned to wherever they were found. But no one thinks we can do that with dogs. If a dog is in a no-kill shelter he might stay there for months or years. (There was one dog who remained caged in a shelter for over 5 years).

The math is too hard. No-kill shelters will always be filled up. And then what? I think PETA looked at the problem and realized that no-kill shelters were not only unsustainable but were also inhumane in a different way. They took a stance and they knew that their position would be unpopular with animal lovers. I actually have a lot of respect for them that they can take an unpopular position, one that will be hard to defend and also make them easy targets for anyone who is biased against PETA. But they made that decision on that it was the one that makes the most sense and causes the least harm.

 

[Bitki]

I don't actually know too much about PETA although being new to Veganism I needed a new handbag and went shopping the other day. I had trouble at the shops finding something as things weren't clearly labelled, so I went online and PETA support various online shops that sell vegan friendly clothes and accessories.

It made it much easier to find and buy something appropriate so in that sense I appreciate their efforts. I did find that some shops were labelling some handbags as vegan but when you clicked on them sometimes you would find leather products so having PETA support certain brands made it so much easier to shop ethically.

 

[Poppy]

I was going to stay out of this. I am a PETA member and not un-biased.

This discussion (or argument) sits on statistics and emotion and is influenced by philosophy. (there is probably some religion and politics in there too). so arguing this is a losing proposition.

This is also a 1st World problem and it might only be a certain kind of 1st World problem based on the weather.

Here in America, there have been several really good censuses done on dogs and cat populations. One of the best conservative estimates of homeless dogs and cats in the US is about 70 Million. (I've seen estimates of over 100 million - and one researcher stated that the number of homeless cats is actually uncalculatable because every day so many are born and so many dies.)

Something like only 10% of these animals are in shelters. The other millions are truly homeless. One guy did the math and one homeless, un-spayed cat and her offspring can produce 420,000 kittens in 7 years. With this kind of math, this problem is like a steam locomotive without brakes heading down a mountain.

@Andy_T said sarcastically that maybe we should send hunters in to kill the animals on the spot. Well, that is what they decided to do in Australia when their feral cat population was causing native wildlife extinctions.

In the US our animal shelters do a pretty good job. About 30% of the dog that goes to a shelter are reclaimed by their owners. And about 5% of the dogs and cats are adopted. but that still leaves the majority in the shelter. Here in California only kittens that can be fully domesticated and tamed are kept in shelters. Feral cats are spayed or neutered and the returned to wherever they were found. But no one thinks we can do that with dogs. If a dog is in a no-kill shelter he might stay there for months or years. (There was one dog who remained caged in a shelter for over 5 years).

The math is too hard. No-kill shelters will always be filled up. And then what? I think PETA looked at the problem and realized that no-kill shelters were not only unsustainable but were also inhumane in a different way. They took a stance and they knew that their position would be unpopular with animal lovers. I actually have a lot of respect for them that they can take an unpopular position, one that will be hard to defend and also make them easy targets for anyone who is biased against PETA. But they made that decision on that it was the one that makes the most sense and causes the least harm.

I appreciate your candor - and I understand it.

I would only add that the "No-kill" movement is a growing movement, supported by major corporations and philanthropic organizations, and it has grown dramatically. I'm very involved with a no-kill shelter in central Virginia. Our shelter is indeed "always full" and we want it that way! But the number of days an animal is under our care is far fewer now than just 5 years ago. We do not accept owner drop-offs, and suggest anyone trying to release their animal take it to a local pound. And that's where we get our animals - from local and rural pounds, where animals are far less likely to have adoption opportunities. We have three transportation vans and we drive throughout central and western VA removing animals from rural counties who need a chance at a new life. Because we and many other shelters in the "no-kill" movement pull strictly from municipal shelters, many of these have seen their rates of euthanasia drop dramatically over the past few years.

But still, people won't spay and neuter and there are still many homeless animals.

 

[Lou]

I appreciate your candor - and I understand it.
....
But still, people won't spay and neuter and there are still many homeless animals.

Very cool. it is always good to hear from people with first hand experience.

 

[Andy_T]

Had nearly forgotten about this gem, thanks Facebook for bringing it up as an "anniversary" ....



Right, remember when a group of armed white supremacists and cattle ranchers took over the Malheur Wildlife refuge to protest that they were no longer allowed to let their animals graze for free on public lands?

PETA thought it would be the perfect opportunity to visit them and have TV crews film them bringing vegan snacks to them.
Seriously, who is in charge there for identifying those possible publicity ideas?

 

[Sax]

Seriously, who is in charge there for identifying those possible publicity ideas?

Someone who's clearly gotten your attention

 

[Lou]

Years ago, I think it was on Fresh Air, I heard an interview of Dan Mathews. He did a great job explaining the mindset behind their publicity stunts. I'm pretty sure I can't do it justice but the takeaway is that publicity put PETA on the map. It changed the public perception of PETA members from the crazy old cat lady down the street to brave, hip, young, energized, vegan crusaders.

You know the old saw, there is no such thing as bad publicity.

 

[Hog]

@ Nekodaiden

I watched the video Humane Meat over and over again. Brilliant Video.

 

[Forest Nymph]

Sure, tell me again how it is statistically meaningless that out of 1,992 animals that were given to their shelters in 2011, they killed 1911 (surely, all of those must have been incurably ill).

You might want to check if your university is offering refunds.

They are not contesting that their strategy is to simply kill unwanted animals handed to their shelters, and say the blame lies with the owners. Ingrid Newkirk has publicly confirmed that, and it is indeed a position one can take.

I simply blame them for the business decision they made at some point to invest most of the money they raise into super expensive and (IMO) meaningless ads and not allocate more of it to caring for animals in their shelters.

1) The university I attended is known internationally for their Environmental Science program and has one of the best natural resources and life sciences departments of all the state schools in California. It's considered the best bang for your buck in the state college system especially if you're a science major. The professor who taught the specific lesson I referenced flies to Europe for green energy conferences, worked on zero emissions vehicles, and is reforming our local energy along with others in the community. My overall GPA when I graduated was 3.8. You're way out of your depth here. Your "ask your college for a refund" reminds me of ignorant climate change deniers and people who are arguing that grass fed is sustainable in 2020. You're in really poor company, so you might want to rethink your arrogance. It leads to Dunning Kruger.

2) You don't seem to comprehend the explanation of context for the statistics. You also know nothing about PETA. They invest over 80% of their funding directly to animals and only 16% to outreach. They do legal campaigns and take people to court, they have one of the best legal teams in the nation. That's not a "meaningless ad campaign." I've noticed a trend in your posts to trash animal rights activists who are actually doing things in the real world, based on half-truths and outright slander. How Franciobot of you.

 

[Emma JC]

BTW the founder of PETA was on Bill Maher last night and it was very informative and great exposure.

Emma JC

 

[Lou]

thanks. i will watch it

 

[Vegan Dogs]

No kill shelters are like squeezing toothpaste tube....they r good or to attract funds but the vast majority of unwanted pets get killed elsewhere...the toothpaste is pushed elsewhere

 

[Poppy]

No kill shelters are like squeezing toothpaste tube....they r good or to attract funds but the vast majority of unwanted pets get killed elsewhere...the toothpaste is pushed elsewhere

I don't understand this example. The toothpaste tube gets emptied.

 

[Andy_T]

No kill shelters are like squeezing toothpaste tube....they r good or to attract funds but the vast majority of unwanted pets get killed elsewhere...the toothpaste is pushed elsewhere

In Europe, in most countries, healthy animals are not murdered in huge numbers in "shelters", as far as I know.

 

[Mischief]

I assumed that most people in vegan forms strongly support PETA. Is this assumption true?

Does anyone participate in animal rights groups in their local area?

I'm not a PETA supporter or fan.

I generally find overwrought tactics offputting, and PETA's tactics are no exception.

As far as my own activities: I have done footwork to try to change legislation in this state wrt cock fighting, regulation of puppy and kitten mills, etc.

I also have done TNR on my own dime for over three decades. The bulk (by far) of the household budget is used for non-human animal feeding, vet bills and other associated expenses.

 

[Mischief]

I was going to stay out of this. I am a PETA member and not un-biased.

This discussion (or argument) sits on statistics and emotion and is influenced by philosophy. (there is probably some religion and politics in there too). so arguing this is a losing proposition.

This is also a 1st World problem and it might only be a certain kind of 1st World problem based on the weather.

Here in America, there have been several really good censuses done on dogs and cat populations. One of the best conservative estimates of homeless dogs and cats in the US is about 70 Million. (I've seen estimates of over 100 million - and one researcher stated that the number of homeless cats is actually uncalculatable because every day so many are born and so many dies.)

Something like only 10% of these animals are in shelters. The other millions are truly homeless. One guy did the math and one homeless, un-spayed cat and her offspring can produce 420,000 kittens in 7 years. With this kind of math, this problem is like a steam locomotive without brakes heading down a mountain.

@Andy_T said sarcastically that maybe we should send hunters in to kill the animals on the spot. Well, that is what they decided to do in Australia when their feral cat population was causing native wildlife extinctions.

In the US our animal shelters do a pretty good job. About 30% of the dog that goes to a shelter are reclaimed by their owners. And about 5% of the dogs and cats are adopted. but that still leaves the majority in the shelter. Here in California only kittens that can be fully domesticated and tamed are kept in shelters. Feral cats are spayed or neutered and the returned to wherever they were found. But no one thinks we can do that with dogs. If a dog is in a no-kill shelter he might stay there for months or years. (There was one dog who remained caged in a shelter for over 5 years).

The math is too hard. No-kill shelters will always be filled up. And then what? I think PETA looked at the problem and realized that no-kill shelters were not only unsustainable but were also inhumane in a different way. They took a stance and they knew that their position would be unpopular with animal lovers. I actually have a lot of respect for them that they can take an unpopular position, one that will be hard to defend and also make them easy targets for anyone who is biased against PETA. But they made that decision on that it was the one that makes the most sense and causes the least harm.

I generally find your posts well reasoned, but I really disagree with this one.

An emphasis on neutering and spaying, on adoption rather than buying from breeders, and TNR do work to minimize the number of homeless domesticated animals. It's slow work, but progress is being made, and nationwide, the numbers bear that out.

That's why, in certain areas, rescues are going to Southern states and pulling animals from high kill shelters - there are homes available in areas where spay/neuter has been a priority, and where it's not profitable to operate puppy/kitten mills because adequate regulations have been enacted.

There aren't actually many shelters where animals are being warehoused for years on end, because most no kill shelters are selective about taking in animals.

And that brings me to my main issue with your defense of PETA on this issue: God knows there is no shortage of institutions and people ready and willing to kill "excess" animals. So why would a group that claims to be about animal rights take in animals under false pretenses and then kill almost all of them?!?! Surely those resources could be put to better use, such as actually promoting animal rights.

BTW, I'm also not particularly persuaded by the argument that a non-human animal would prefer to be dead than caged, if those are the only two options available. Most humans, for example, choose to be imprisoned rather than killed in death penalty cases. It seems rather arrogant of us to make a different choice for the nonhumans among us.

Finally, I'd be interested in the source of the numbers and percentages in your post. They don't correspond to the ones of which I'm aware.

 

[Andy_T]

“Pornographers for the Euthanization of Tame Animals” is a description I have heard today...

 

[Mischief]

Also, since I didn't specifically mention it before:

I find PETA's support of breed specific legislation despicable. They have contributed toward making pit bull terriers (among others) a despised breed and thus bear responsibility for the deaths of thousands upon thousands of dogs every month. In ordinary people, I despair at such ignorance and cruelty. In a group that purports to support nonhuman animals, I find it unforgiveable.

 

[Vegan Dogs]

In Europe, in most countries, healthy animals are not murdered in huge numbers in "shelters", as far as I know.

That is not true. Same percentage as USA fyi

 

[beancounter]

Not a fan.

IMO, they promote a negative image of vegans/vegetarians to the general public.