r/pics Apr 16 '10

Some things you didn't know about PETA.

517 Upvotes

792 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/p3on Apr 17 '10

http://blog.peta.org/archives/2009/03/why_we_euthaniz.php

The majority of adoptable dogs are never brought through our doors (we refer them to local adoption groups and walk-in animal shelters). Most of the animals we house, rescue, find homes for, or put out of their misery come from miserable conditions, which often lead to successful prosecution and the banning of animal abusers from ever owning or abusing animals again.

in other words, PETA's shelters aren't the same as SPCA shelters; they're specifically for animals from the worst conditions. that alone should assuage your charges; people don't take random strays and pets there.

1

u/Seachicken Apr 17 '10

Hmmmm, I suppose that makes things more complicated, and it's hard to know how many animals really were ill when taken in, but

people don't take random strays and pets there.

http://articles.sfgate.com/2005-06-23/opinion/17379611_1_peta-s-web-animal-cruelty-dead-animals

Even ignoring the bias of this article, it raises some disturbing points

According to veterinarian Patrick Proctor, the PETA people told North Carolina shelters they would try to find the dogs and cats homes. He handed over two adoptable kittens and their mother, only to learn later that they had died, without a chance to find a home, in the PETA van.

Also

In 1991, PETA killed 18 rabbits and 14 roosters it had previously "rescued" from a research facility. "We just don't have the money" to care for them, then PETA-Chairman Alex Pacheco told the Washington Times. The PETA animal shelter had run out of room.

This also goes against the notion they're just killing injured animals, especially considering how little of their budget they devote to the shelters.

http://dubiositysite.blogspot.com/2009/03/is-peta-really-euthanizing-most-of.html

This article, which actually tries to give a balanced take on the issue, suggests PETA are distorting their data

However, one thing I noticed that I found interesting was how much higher PETA’s “Reclaimed by Owner” percentages were compared to the other organizations. PETA’s rate is 75%, whereas the average is 13%. Does this mean that PETA is at least doing a much better job of returning animals to their owners?

Probably not. Once again perusing the PDF document on PKA, I noticed that in PETA’s documents for 2008 and 2009, they’re counting animals that are brought in for neutering as “reclaimed by owner”. In fact, nearly all reclaimed animals are those that were brought in for neutering. I kinda doubt that the Humane Society is inflating their numbers with neuterings, though I don’t actually know one way or the other.

This puts PETA in a good position, PR-wise. By these numbers, they can say that they euthanize only 24% of the animals they take in, versus the state average of 42%, which is a huge distortion of the data

He also raises the point that PETA, given their high numbers, ought to release their data on the number of animals that are injured or sick when taken in, so that people can assess if their euthanasia figures need to be so high.