For those of you who are reading the end of the blog, instead of starting at the beginning, this post may not make too much sense to you.
If you have read this blog from the beginning to the end, then you already know how I feel about IFAW, PETA, HSUS, and all the other alleged animal rescue/protection organizations out there. This article highlights the flaws of the afore mentioned organizations. While I am against killing animals (all wildlife in my opinion is precious and should be respected--#LoveLife) for sport or pleasure, this article highlights the hypocrisy of IFAW, PETA, and other animal organizations I've been writing about for awhile now..
I hope this article gives you some food for thought and encourages you to look into these organizations before you send them any of your hard earned money.
If you really want to make a difference in the life of an animal, give something of yourself by volunteering, fostering or adopting a dog or cat at your local animal control. So many animals are killed every year because there are not enough caring individuals willing to make a difference. It is easy to write check or fill out an on-line donation form. It's much harder and much more rewarding to get "into the weeds" so to speak and really, really make a difference. Who knows, the soul you save could be your own--so go out a make a difference today!
The second article below is also very interesting discussion (as I included the comments made by others) about chimp sanctuaries.
The second article below is also very interesting discussion (as I included the comments made by others) about chimp sanctuaries.
I'd like to broaden this topic as I believe the chimp "industry" (and believe me there is a lot of money in the "chimp industry"--just look at the tax returns of the non-profits who house chimps--according to Guidestar.org, in 2013 the two largest chimp sanctuaries took in more than $5 million each) is not the only one that "exaggerates" its animal population and where/conditions the animals originated.
It is not uncommon for sanctuaries to call a simple "rehome" a "rescue." If you look up the definition of "rescue" you will see that it means to save (someone or something) from danger or harm. Moving animals from one location to another is NOT a rescue--it's called rehoming. Unfortunately, to the big money makers, "rehoming" sounds less dramatic than "rescue" and so many sanctuaries will over exaggerate the conditions from which animals originated. Or even worse, in the case of the WAO, the sanctuaries refused to acknowledge that a failed sanctuary was responsible for the deplorable conditions from which the animals were found when they finally left San Antonio area; instead sanctuaries focused on the home the animals came from prior to being sent to the WAO (ie. private owner, "roadside zoo, or circus). Right now, private owners, roadside zoos, and circus, zoos, and animal attractions like SeaWorld are on the animal rights "hit" lists as terrible places for animals to reside. I've heard these groups say that the "animals are better dead than fed" at these so-called horrible places. So for now, sanctuaries have jumped on the band wagon, even though many sanctuaries are little more than "roadside zoos" themselves or they were started with the founders own personal "pets." I predict that eventually animal rights groups will start attacking sanctuaries when they start running out of zoos and circuses to bring down. After all, for the most part, sanctuaries have rather small enclosures compared to the vast land wild big cats, bears, and other common animals found in sanctuaries, are used to roaming and enjoying. If AR groups think the whale enclosures are small at SeaWorld, what must they think of the small animal enclosures majestic animals such as lions, tigers, and ligers are forced to live in at sanctuaries all over the US? Beware sanctuaries. You are next on the AR hit list.
Did you know that all sanctuaries have their great looking "areas" that are the seen in the majority of their publicized pictures and then there are the not-so-good animal living areas that are not displayed to the public? If the sanctuary is not proud of their enclosures, you will find the picture's background of these not-so-good looking animal living areas faded out so all you can see is the front profile of the animal.
The WAO had a lot of small, not-so-good looking animal living areas at both Talley Road and Leslie Road. Two chimps named Wally and Mandingo lived in a very small enclosure (approximately 6 feet wide and about 15 fee long) for years until they were moved to the Talley Road property. When I last saw the two chimps, their living area contained hard packed ground and dead trees. The guillotine door did not work properly due to rust and the inside building had holes in the roof, burned out light bulbs and the room smelled horrible. When it rain, the enclosure flooded as there was not proper drainage. In my opinion the chimps quarters were absolutely horrible. And then there were the yellow jackets that would set up nests in the building! Yikes! There were no enrichment activities and when I mentioned to the animal caretakers that the USDA/APHIS had chimp guidelines on animal care, they had no idea what I was talking about when I brought up that they would have to present to an inspector the environmental enrichment plan and journal books if Talley Road ever became licensed! (USDA APHIS AWA - § 3.81 - Environment enhancement to promote psychological well-being).
You can read for yourself some of the issues the chimps faced from the animal caretakers' own email to the former director and founder of the WAO:
You can read for yourself some of the issues the chimps faced from the animal caretakers' own email to the former director and founder of the WAO:
Now keep in mind, the WAO had NO animal enrichment plan for the chimps or any of the other animal species living at this so-called sanctuary. Many of the chimps that went to the WAO (18+) were used in medical experiments and the HIV chimps were very aggressive animals. Their body hair looked blotch, thin, and dull in color. They had no medical care, no dental care, and they did not receive proper diets for years. I have to wonder if there are other animal sanctuaries out there that fail to provide proper care for its chimps. Are they forgotten laboratory chimps, much like the animals that used to live at the WAO's Talley Road property, or do visitors and caretakers simply do not care what conditions their chimps (or any other animals) lives in any more?
Later:
Additional reading recently sent to me:
July 31, 2014
Earlier in July, word got out that America's non-profit media darling, the Humane Society of the United States, ran into a bit of bad luck. And when we say bad luck, we mean they finally got what was coming to them. Their fingerprints were all over the movie Blackfish and they're currently leading the smear campaign against aquariums to raise money for their own selfish interests.
When you think of the HSUS you automatically think of the saintly organization that operates shelters nationwide and saves hundreds of thousands of animals, the organization that stands up for the adorable and abused animals in TV commercials, and above all you probably believe this is the organization that big-hearted animal lovers should donate to. Right?
Wrong. All those associations are complete crap.
The HSUS has historically bragged about their 4-star rating from Charity Navigator, one of the most trust-worthy charity evaluators in the game. Recently, they were downgraded to a 3-star rating and now their rating has been completely revoked, a "Donor Advisory" warning taking its place.
The deceiving game of bait-and-switch has been played for years, with the HSUS inviting misplaced associations between themselves and local animal shelters (sometimes called Humane Societies). To put this in perspective, let's break down what this despicable organization did to motivate you to reach for your wallet and fork over millions of dollars to a corrupt "charity".
A film crew would go to a local humane society pet shelter and film some of the cute, cuddly, abused animals that volunteers dedicate their lives to rescuing. Those commercials would air on national television, pulling on America's heartstrings and leading unsuspecting viewers to believe that the HSUS had a hand in rescuing that animal or providing care after the rescue.
Want the truth? The HSUS didn't have anything to do with rescuing that animal. They didn't provide medical assistance or care for that animal and that poor animal won't see a penny of your donation. They scandalously only give 1% of their budget to local pet shelters and the HSUS doesn't even operate one pet shelter of its own. Yes, you read that correctly. Even though 85% of their fundraising propaganda features shelter animals, they do not operate a single local pet shelter.
Check out this national commercial featuring Wendie Malick. But while you're watching, keep in mind what we just told you. Feeling deceived yet?
Now you might be wondering, "Where exactly do those donations go?" Here's a hint.
In June, the Charity Navigator donor advisory warning went public.
HumaneWatch.org : “The advisory notifies website visitors of the $15.75 million settlement of a racketeering and bribery lawsuit that HSUS was a part of last month.”
Also according to HumaneWatch.org, you can read more about that settlement here, but the lawsuit involved HSUS money allegedly paying a witness who lied to a federal court. Yikes.
Aside from the lawsuit, it has come to light that the HSUS diligently moved money to several funds in the Cayman Islands, calling them "investments". We're pretty sure that moving $26 million to offshore accounts in the Cayman Islands is called stashing money. And it's shady as hell.
The HSUS has essentially operated under the same donation-guise as PETA, where a large portion of their funding comes from people who are clueless about their real agenda. The time has come for American citizens to open their eyes and stop allowing the HSUS to misuse their hard-earned money.
In fact, PETA and the HSUS are driving the anti-captivity movement not for the welfare of animals, but to make money for themselves. They use and deceive people to promote corrupt agendas and the Cayman Island accounts confirm just how rotten this organization has become.
So if you care about puppies and kittens, as opposed to lobbyists and corrupt organizations, send your donations to local pet shelters instead of the HSUS. The animals will thank you for it.
End.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
If you have been reading my blogs from the beginning, then you know this article comes as no surprise to me. I believe I used IFAW in my example as to how large animal organizations uses animals to further their own agendas and line their own pocket with your contributions for years.
I have to wonder--why did it take us so long to realize that exploiting animals was such a huge business?
Much later: I found this video on the Big Cat Rescue Watch Facebook page. I think this video highlights the hypocrisy of AR groups who target SeaWorld and not exotic animal sanctuaries for the same alleged misdeeds. Well done, Juan. Well done!
Much later: I found this video on the Big Cat Rescue Watch Facebook page. I think this video highlights the hypocrisy of AR groups who target SeaWorld and not exotic animal sanctuaries for the same alleged misdeeds. Well done, Juan. Well done!
No comments:
Post a Comment