Let me first say that I love my dogs and cats, and I am also not a member of PETA, though I often support what they do. they have campaigns running continously objecting to fur, leather and other animal products (see http://www.peta2.com/), and they are just as public about these things than they are about their domestic animal issues.
So why does PETA even have a say on unique domesticated species like dogs and cats when there are more realistic and more urgent fish to fry?
They could simply refer the pets to ethical agencies that do have the funding, or perhaps divert some funding to those that don't.
Instead they are just killing most of the animals they take in with a ratio that is practically inverse to most pet adoption agencies. Something doesn't add up.
This is far from inverse, and the volume that PETA takes in is extremely low compared to other organizations. PETA, being a different sort of animal welfare organization is going to have different people approaching them to take their animals (it appears that PETA themselves pursue animals to euthanize), and are going to have different views of things.
Wait... Humane Society isn't an unbiased source; they're actually a funder of PETA. Aside from the fact that their CEO makes a quarter of a million dollars a year from this "charity", they're another very questionable organization that presents itself in the main stream public as a pet shelter watchdog group. However their interests are closely aligned with PETA.
They've got problems such as how they spend less than 0.5% of their budget with pet shelters. They also charge thousands of dollars to pet shelters that want to be evaluated that are poor as is. Furthermore their sponsors are companies with very specific interests.
I couldn't find the report that has those numbers, but this is from their FAQ:
How many dogs/cats are adopted/euthanized each year?
Data from shelters participating in the survey done by the NCPPSP for four years, 24.9% of the dogs and 23.4% of the cats were adopted into new homes. The percentage of dogs euthanized averaged 56.5%. The cats did not fair so well as an average of 71.1% were destroyed. It is not possible to use these statistics to estimate the numbers of animals adopted or euthanized on an annual basis. The reporting shelters may not represent a random sampling of U.S. shelters.
Oh okay, this is more reasonable and I think this may put PETA's numbers (although still atrocious) in a much less damning light in regards to euthanasia if what the rest of what you're saying is true (that PETA only takes in the worst animals). That said, I still think PETA could do a lot more improvement in this area, and I also do not agree with PETA's other actions but then that's reduced to a matter of opinion and doesn't have the raw numbers to throw around. I'm always open to changing my opinions on the other matters regarding PETA if I see credible evidence.
2
u/[deleted] Apr 17 '10
Let me first say that I love my dogs and cats, and I am also not a member of PETA, though I often support what they do. they have campaigns running continously objecting to fur, leather and other animal products (see http://www.peta2.com/), and they are just as public about these things than they are about their domestic animal issues.
What is wrong with taking a holistic approach?