Arguably, the most people know about PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) is that its members occasionally parade in the nude (or near nude), on the theme "we'd rather go naked than wear furs."
It is especially newsworthy when the likes of Pamela Anderson and Kim Basinger participate. PETA justifies nudity on the basis of "advertising through the media;" nude activists for animals "consistently grab headlines."
Founded in 1980, PETA has done stellar work in curbing cruel and often useless torturous experimentation on animals of all sorts -- as reflected in a summary of its mission statement: "Animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment."
As such it opposes circuses, zoos, farms, pet stores and the like.
PETA advertises itself as the largest animal rights organization in the world, with over three million members and supporters. PETA stages "rescue" operations of abused animals, and can serve a useful purpose, which it is exceedingly adept at publicizing.
What PETA does not publicize, however, it euthanizes -- kills -- some 85% of the animals it rescues.
As far back as 2008, the Center for Consumer Freedom petitioned Virginia's Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) to have PETA officially reclassified as a "slaughterhouse." It claimed PETA's own official reports, which indicated that it put to death virtually ever dog and cat it took in for adoption. This policy extended from 2006 through 2011.
Virginia requires animal shelters to report the number of dogs and cats taken in each year -- how many are euthanized and how many are adopted.
These statistics are available through Virginia's Sunshine Law and, as incredible as some may find it, since 1998, of the 31,815 animals (mostly dogs and cats) admitted to PETA shelters, only 3,159 were adopted -- and 27,751 were killed.
That's a 9.7% adoption rate and an 87.2% kill rate -- a ghastly record for an organization purporting to work on behalf of animals. To me that suggests a view that if an animal isn't free and in the wild, it is better off dead.
But wait, it gets worse. Since 2006, the PETA adoption rate has dropped precipitously, and the kill rate risen dramatically. In 2006, of 3,061 animals admitted to PETA's shelter, 12 (0.39%) were adopted, 2,981 (97.49%) were euthanized.
Last year - 2011 -- some 1,992 animals were admitted, 24 were adopted (1.2%) and 1,911 (95.9%) were killed. And this is just Virginia.
PETA's practice of euthanasia has resulted in an alliance with the Humane Society of the U.S. A zero birthrate is the goal for dogs and cats, not a zero kill rate.
Yet according to Newsweek, Humane Society shelters in Nevada, New York, San Francisco, and Texas have adopted a "no-kill" policy that saves money, gets dogs and cats adopted. The save ratio is 85%.
That strikes me as more humane than PETA -- and is curiously mindful of what the Toronto Humane Society was aiming at before the provincial OSPCA took it over, with its kill rate secret, but around 50%. They must love PETA.
Today, Toronto Animal Services (TAS) seems to discourage adoption in favor of euthanasia, and prospective customers for adopting a dog or cat are often told none are available.
Robert Frogge': We the... Animals? The Push to Give Fido Constitutional Rights
PETA Kills Animals: Proof PETA Kills
PETA and Euthanasia - The Daily Beast
Peta under fire over claim that it kills most animals left at its US ...
“Veterinarians and animal control officers said the PETA workers had promised to find homes for the animals rather than euthanize them, according to police.”
In a December 2, 2008 interview with George Stroumboulopoulos of the CBC, Stroumboulopoulos asked Newkirk: “Do you euthanize those pets, the adoptable ones, if you get them?” Newkirk responded: “If we get them, if we cannot find a home, absolutely.”
In 2010 an investigator for Virginia DACS found a majority of the pets were killed with in 24 hours. That’s not much time to find a home for a pet.
Many other groups with tiny budgets manage to rescue and rehabilitate abused pets successfully. Why can't PETA?
PETA's ultimate goal is an end to pet/companion animal and speaks of this being the last generation of companion animals. Newkirk cited her goal as being "total animal liberation," in a 2007 HBO special. “it would have been in the animals' best interests if the institution of "pet keeping"—i.e., breeding animals to be kept and regarded as "pets"—never existed.” “Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation" Newkirk
http://www.peta.org/about/why-peta/pets.aspx
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38978396/ns/health-pet_health/
This article is extremely biased and does not show any of the reasons why PETA does not support no-kill shelters.
re PETA's systematic slaughter of animals. In 2011, PETA killed 97% of all animals it sought out. As many as 99% are now dead. Only 1% were adopted. PETA has argued that all of the animals it kills are “unadoptable.” In fact, PETA’s attorney stated that in his letter threatening a defamation lawsuit if I did not back down. But this claim is a lie. It is a lie because the numbers historically come from the State of Virginia’s reporting form which only asks for data for animals taken into custody “for the purpose of adoption.” It is a lie because PETA refuses to provide its criteria for making that determination. It is a lie because rescue groups and individuals have come forward stating that the animals they gave PETA were healthy and adoptable. It is a lie because testimony under oath in court from a veterinarian showed that PETA was given healthy and adoptable animals who were later found dead by PETA’s hands, their bodies unceremoniously thrown away in a supermarket dumpster. It is a lie because, according to the Daily Caller, “two PETA employees described as ‘adorable’ and ‘perfect’ some of the dogs and cats they killed in the back of a PETA-owned van.” And it is a lie because Newkirk herself admitted as much. And when asked "what sort of effort it routinely makes to find adoptive homes for animals in its care," PETA had "no comment."
Also, better find something new that that single court case when the unbiased jury of non-vegetarians having heard all the evidence unanimously acquitted the PETA workers of all cruelty and false pretense charges except "littering" into a private dumpster and even that didn't stick and got thrown out on appeal.
PETA is not perfect, but you can't argue with their overall message: animals are not ours to kill for pleasure and entertainment + adopt instead of buying + spay & neuter, and they seem to walk the talk by doing the latter in their area for free or a nominal fee.
If you were not a criminal, but thought to have committed a crime and, consequently, were convicted and sentenced to imprisonment, would you step forward and volunteer to die? Really, take the time to think about it. Honestly, you'd rather be murdered? Dogs and cats aren't getting a chance. Think you'd change your mind about that. A life in a well-organized shelter with volunteers or dead and burnt up -- yeah, the dogs and cats would elect to be murdered. If PETA is not running a well-organized shelter with volunteers to spend time with the animals, then PETA needs to cease their rescue activities (and stop their lies to the public and mis-use of those individual's donations). So a grass roots campaign is needed to run PETA out of business.
However, please, please, if you're going to donate, don't donate to PETA. There's plenty of alternatives out there. Dogs are perfect and they deserve more of us after they've stuck with us for 80.000 years.
Cats are alright too.
I'm a dog person.
- Why do they kill 95% of their pets, when much more underfunded shelters and organizations don't?
- If their purpose is not to get animals to adoption, then why do they take in abandoned animals in the first place?
Why not give them to the responsible shelters?
Why not take their 36 million dollars and buy a farm somewhere and just set the animals free there?
The most common cop-out answer is that PETA does it because people don't spay or neuter their animals, so there's pet overpopulation.
That doesn't explain why they kill so much more animals than other shelters that face the exact same situation of overpopulation and have much less money.
There's no getting around this, this is truly a black-and-white kind of thing here.
I'm not discussing the merits of animal rights or any of their politics. I have plenty of vegan friends and I think everyone should stand up for what they think is right.
What I'm saying is: If you're into animal rights, there's no reason you should keep giving money to PETA when there's probably hundreds of other NGOs out there with the same agenda which use their money responsibly and stay true to their ideals.
with whom at
times we have
to dance
as we sign
their petitions
to give animals
a chance
but killing homeless
pets will not go away
there is no defense
for this
okay PETA what you
gotta say!!!!
Sadly we are in a throw away society..so in other words, if a person does not like his dog after a few years, he/she can dump it, and in the next breath he can get himself a puppy..
Spaying and neutering sure is a huge step..but as long as there are puppymills supplying dogs to petstores and people continue to buy from petstores..things will never change..BYB are everwhere..people do not seem to think long term..It is an epidemic..it is sad and abusive..When I see pictures of a momma dog in a shelter WITH puppies, ( or cats and kittens) and I read that rescue has taken all puppies and left mom, I just want to SCREAM...that is NOT rescue/.that is brokering..leave the pups there as they most likely will be adopted..or take the whole family OR only take mom..Mom needs to come first.
On a serious note, what difference does make then how the animals are killed, euthanized, etc -- dead is dead. PETA's a joke
This story definitely lost me when I saw a reference to Center for Consumer Freedom. This company is paid to lie. Their money comes from big industries like tobacco, alcohol, and food pay them to lie.
I wish people would leave PETA and others alone. They do great things for animals, none of which is mentioned in this article of lies and exaggerations.
Peter Worthington himself runs a newspaper that is geared toward males. It includes a sunshine girl on the second page of every edition. It wouldn't surprise me to see ads for hunters, fisherman, and rodeos alike.
People want to complain about things? Complain about the corporations that are ruining this world and every inhabitant, all for money:(
See PETA's response:
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/daphna-nachminovitch/peta-adopt-pet_b_1301826.html?show_comment_id=137487946
Frankly, PeTA is one one of the more disgraceful organizations out there. Among other things, they have an open offer to pay the legal fees of anyone convicted of an ALF related crime. The ALF is the central organization behind the US's number one domestic terrorist threat.
You may think comic books telling young children to be afraid of their parents, because they murder animals and might murder them too, are cute, but in actuality, they are sick.
You might think ads such as this one, making light of a vegan man putting his girlfriend's head through a wall during rough sex is cute, but it is sick too:
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/02/15/peta-boyfriend-went-vegan-ad_n_1280061.html
Hey I don't agree with everything PETA does (although I do agree 99% of the time), however, you can't change the fact that they've made a real difference for animals. That will never change, regardless of what people say. That may scare the opposition, which is why they get so many criticisms.
It's best not to believe everything you read, especially when it involves money and the exploitation of others.
Peace.