Posted on 07/28/2007 9:11:27 AM PDT by DancesWithCats
The Humane Society of the United States applauded a move by the U.S. House of Representatives late last night to strengthen the federal protections for pets and laboratory animals. The House accepted an amendment to the Farm Bill by Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) that prevents stolen pets from being sold into research, bars the use of live animals in medical device sales demonstrations and increases fines for violations of the federal Animal Welfare Act.
One provision of the legislation is a response to a recent high-profile incident earlier this year at the Cleveland Clinic, in which a staff member demonstrated a medical device on a live dog as a sales gimmick. Another provision is in response to recent investigations of "Class B" dealers who have been known to traffic in family pets for research.
"Animals in research must be treated humanely, not used frivolously, and must be not be obtained from disreputable sources," said Wayne Pacelle, HSUS president and CEO. "This action by the Congress clamps down on the few unscrupulous animal dealers who steal or procure family pets for research, and will put a stop to a demonstration procedure that the vast majority of people in the biomedical research community consider unethical."
(Excerpt) Read more at hsus.org ...
I f you want accurate info on medical and other research testing on animals...go to NAVS.com.
Most animal research is NOT for medical purposes.
Even your home page is just very angry. You appear to just be very angry. There is no need to spew your anger obscenely to other freepers just because you disagree with them. It ruins Free Republic and btw it is very unintelligent. It shows you can’t argue the points, just name call instead.
awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.
Guess you are just an angry person also. Oh well..
Apparently everybody is angry if they disagree with you.
Well said, Girl! However, they STILL get high marks on Charity Navigator, so many are lulled into complacency. They have a budget of $124 MILLION dollars and net assets of $200 MILLION. That’s plenty of cash-ola to buy off Lobbyists and CongressCritters and keep their “name brand” looking squeaky-clean to the average schmuck. ;)
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm/bay/search.summary/orgid/3848.htm
I typed in NAVS.com, and came up with something not remotely related to this topic. However, if you are talking about the National Association of Vivisection, there’s tons of information.
Problem is, anybody can claim anything on a website, and find some “fixed” figures to back up their agenda, especially if it moves people to send them some more money.
I’ve actually read (and interviewed a renowned AR activist and publisher)that swears everyone who hooks a fish or harvests a deer is going to become serial killers of humans. That’s a LOT of serial killers, when you consider more people fish than play golf, tennis, or attend major basketball games, including priests, ministers, entertainers, judges, businessmen, and on and on.
However, this AR person told me he can back this up with facts. I asked him to send them to me, or show me where I can find them and he had only his own “scientific” research to prove it. Then he hung the phone up in my ear when asked more questions.
And you are right, some animal research is conducted not for medical reasons, but for cosmetics, product safety, etc. But the majority of it is for medical purposes, like the procedures the late AR activist Linda McCartney chose to use to save her life after she was diagnosed with breast cancer, the kind she campaigned to outlaw before she became sick. And the same kind Ingrid Newkirk, PETA founder and diabetic, uses to control her insulation levels daily.
Yep, the HSUS probably does have a good rating, until you look into the OTHER organizations they are funding, different arms of the HSUS.
And they a numerous, and downplayed publicly.
Check out the magazine “Animal People” someday, you can get the facts right from the AR community. The publisher of that magazine had beginnings in exposing the HSUS and other groups. The publisher is also a rabid AR activist. He publishes a rundown on all the AR groups annually, and started his efforts from disgust with misuse of funds and lack of services from these organizations that promote “animal welfare,” and “animal rights.”
Besides the Founders never thought of yada yada yada, blah, blah, blah.
When I was a kid the phrase "Geez, make a Federal case out of it..." meant blowing something waaaay out of proportion.
Now, everything is indeed a Federal matter.
The Founders must be whirling in their graves about now.
L
thank you for your articulate and informative reply.
I try to be careful who I support in animal protection and keep a realistic perspective, but also want to know about the researchers, their methods and is this the best way to do the research.
Youa re right also to be skeptical about ‘facts”.
This bill makes animal dealers account for where they got their animals to prevent stolen pets from being sold into research. What can possibly be wrong with that? It doesn't prevent animal research, even with dogs and cats.
Within the confines of the Constitution, of course...
I grew up fishing, but used to wonder how anyone could kill a beautiful little Bambi. I thought it wrong to kill any animal, never (like most people) equated that with my leather boots or steak.
I sent money to Greenpeace in the 1970s after seeing the renowned documentary about Eskimos clubbing baby seals. That fundraising effort is still touted today as the single most successful fundraiser for ARs in history.
Many years later I had the opportunity to help launch an outdoor magazine, and we were trying to decide whether to cover fishing, hunting, hiking, mountain biking, etc. We finally decided on fishing and hunting, but I had to do some soul searching, and research on the topic, before I’d be involved with promoting these activities.
My research opened my eyes. And I am the biggest advocate you will find now for hunting. I detest animal cruelty, and am owned by two dogs and a cat that are spoiled rotten, treated better than many children. I have given money to local shelters, and even picked up strays on the side of the road and found homes for them.
The first thing I learned is that many game species, like deer, wild turkey, and many species of ducks, were near extinction in the early 1900s. In the 1930s, hunters lobbied Congress for laws to tax people who buy guns, ammunition, hunting equipment, and since then billions have been raised to restore these populations of game, and buy millions of acres for wildlife habitat.This habitat, which is rapidly shrinking, also benefits non game and endangered/threatened species.
The Sierra Club, “humane” societies, Defenders of Wildlife, PETA, Greenpeace, and dozens of other organizations also raise, collectively, a few billion dollars annually. How much do they contribute to wild game/non game species management, to increase and manage these? None. Many of these wealthy AR and “conservation’ organizations actually cause more problems, filing endless lawsuits against the U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, etc. (the majority of game and endangered species habitate federal and state lands purchased with money raised by hunters. They tie up lots of money/time that could be used for species management that is instead used to defend management efforts.
Many of the animal “protection” and animal “rights” organizations were founded with good intentions, and for a time some did good things. In fact, to be fair, the HSUS has done a lot to educate the public about cruelty to domestic animals. But, as a core group of AR fanatics took control of these, their mission changed. They now finance things that are very detrimental to animals and humans (the HSUS spends a ton on lobbiests, has recently formed a separate shadow lobbying organization, and is directing some serious donor funds to it) but does not neuter,spay, feed, house or do anything now for cats and dogs, let alone all the other animals. One of their primary goals is to end hunting, the single source of funding for wildlife management.
Their funds now go to ending animal research, the eating of meat, raising animals for consumption, etc. They are chipping away, a little at a time, human’s rights to choose what they eat, and what medicines they choose to make their lives better. Local animal shelters are struggling to address the issue of animal(cats and dogs)overpopulation, and the volunteers who staff local shelters are struggling for funds to even keep their doors open — while dozens of AR groups raise billions in the name of animal protection, and give nothing to these shelters. A lot of naive people send the HSUS money, thinking they are helping kitties and puppies.
BTW, I learned (from an investigative report by a Canadian journalist) many years after sending Greenpeace money that organization PAID those Eskimos to club those baby seals, to raise funds. Turns out today’s Eskimos have rifles, just like we do, and since they make a living from harvesting a minute number of seals, a clubbed seal is not exactly productive. They do use a special tool (like a club), much like their ancestors did.
As for killing Bambi, think about this: The steak I bought at the grocery store and ate lived on a factory farm, where animals are raised for consumption and pumped full of antibiotics and hormones, then slaughtered.
A hunter goes to a lot of trouble to harvest a deer, the deer has chance to outwit a hunter, and lives in a natural setting until the moment a bullet or arrow kills it. It has no hormones injected in it, or antibiotics, etc.
Hunters have been extremely successful in helping wild animals, today the deer and bear populations are larger than they were in the mid 1880s, and the wild turkey has been brought from the brink of extinction to large populations, thanks to hunter’s dollars.
But we don’t live in Adam and Eve’s garden, in a natural world, and can’t let all the little animals live, or the populations would be out of control and they’d die slow, agonized deaths, in addition to causing horrible problems for other animal species and humans.
Most of our world has been paved over and developed. The places left for wild animals to live have been paid for with dollars from people who understand nature, and have experienced it outside of going to a zoo, or watching propaganda created by urbanites who don’t understand nature, and think humans are not supposed to be part of it.
We can’t let all animals live in harmony, never kill an animal. And the human is at the top of the food chain, with the ability to reason, and to do what’s right for lesser animals.
And even companion/ domesticated animals are a part of this. At one time there weren’t poodles, or dalmations, they all descended from wolves, and those (many believe) peaceful Indians interacted with them and finally interbred and created what we know as dogs today.
Check into it sometime, do some research, and learn what the AR community hopes to accomplish over the longterm. The HSUS leaders are the same ones who have the same mission as PETA. They are wolves in sheep’s clothing, and several years ago made an effort to distance the HSUS from the more radical groups. But the facts are out there. Just check out the agenda of the annual animal “welfare” conferences, and you’ll see what the true mission of these powerful organizations are. If they are ever successful at these efforts, animals, and people, will suffer greatly.
BTW, I think a person who puts a dog, any animal, on a chain, and lets them fight to death, or doesn’t provide them food, shelter, and water, should have the same thing done to them.
I live in an area where rooster and dog fighting is fairly common, and actually have confronted animal abusers. But I also know that the HSUS and its millions of lobbying dollars often use these high profile incidences to advocate laws with some really dangerous things added.
Apparently, these people don’t have enough to do.
thank you for teaching us all a lot! I respect your efforts on behalf of all animals. I agree that hunting is quite ok and so is fishing. When I watch some nature shows, you really see how Nature “manages” the eco system.
By the way, what kind of fish do you catch? My favorite eating fish is rainbow trout and my favorite hunting food is a Muscovy Duck.
Good to hear back from you. I am pinging some folks I think could add to this conversation, because they too have seen how nature “manages” the eco system up close, in addition to watching the Animal Planet TV channel.
Oh, I don’t have a favorite fish, I like catching them all except catfish, even carp, turn all of them loose after abusing them. I have trout, bass, striper and many other species available to me nearby, but don’t get to fish as much as I used to.
I have shot and eaten one duck, a wood duck, although I have aimed at many. I usually hunt these with expert duck guides, and let them tell me which species they belong to. The duck population will continue to thrive as long as hunters continue to purchase habitat, and someone with my shooting skills target them.
I also witnessed, first hand, nature managing the eco system once, on a trip I took to Amistad Lake, on the Texas/Mexico border. I was hiking and saw a lot of deer slowly dying, and deer corpses piled high. The deer were in various stages of slow starvation, but since the shoreline of Amistad in that particular area was managed by the U.S. Park Service, hunting was not allowed.
Since the eco system was overgrazed, because there were too many deer, there were other animal species also suffering from lack of forage.
Heck, I read the local newspaper while camping/fishing that area. About six people were killed in a few days on highways there in deer/vehicle crashes, but thankfully the U.S Park Service was bound by laws that compassionate people who knew what was best for the animals had managed to have added to laws governing the management of national park land.
Right now, in suburban areas near Nashville, TN, and many other areas like this, the beautiful animal, the coyote, is thriving on people’s dogs and cats, since they can’t be hunted (local statutes) near these human populated areas. The coyotes are not native here, they expanded their range from states west of us. Mother nature is always better than human intervention.
I have pasted below the link to the 2007 Animal Rights Conference that was held recently. You can find on this link, and links to past conferences, topics, and info on the speakers at these. You’ll find an interesting list of organizations involved, and learn a lot about their plans for the future.
In between munching on tofu, meditating, and planning ways to let the eco system manage itself, they make some interesting points about how they feel about eco terrorism, property rights, and promoting their propaganda. You’ll see some familiar names on the speaker’s list, some of which used to (and still do) the HSUS.
They also discuss, at length, abortion, and their opinions about the role the human animal should not have in the overall scheme of the eco system. (see link below)
http://arconference.org/schedule.htm
Bump post 47.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.