NAIA Rebuts HSUS

October 16, 2007 — 

Patti Strand, director of the National Animal Interest Alliance (NAIA) recently offered a rebuttal to comments made by Wayne Pacelle, CEO of the Humane Society of the US (HSUS), in an article published by columnist Tom Hennessy. Pacelle specifically mentioned NAIA as an outspoken critic of his organization's activities and Strand requested the opportunity to offer a rebuttal to Mr. Pacelle's portrayal of HSUS.

Pacelle was interviewed by his friend Hennessy for an August 25th article in which he identifies the Center for Consumer Freedom and the NAIA as two examples of organizations "formed in part to fight and discredit animal protection groups." When asked about the criticism that HSUS is not involved with running local animal shelters but yet is often confused with the local humane society, Pacelle admits that his organization is not involved with local efforts to address animal control issues stating instead that HSUS focuses on "the root of problems, rather than just dealing with the symptoms." He defends his organization's activities in Louisiana following Hurricane Katrina and downplays an on-going investigation launched by the Louisiana Attorney General as "the result of an organized letter-writing campaign by the cockfighting community and other critics of HSUS." HSUS collected $34.6 million in the 18 months following Katrina. When asked to explain such quotes as '"I don't want to see another dog or cat born"' and '"One generation and out. We have no problems with the extinction of domestic animals,"' Pacelle describes the comments as "out of date, out of context, and uttered before I joined HSUS in 1994."

In her October 13th rebuttal, also published by Hennessy, Strand derides what she describes as corruption within HSUS. She cites three major elements including HSUS misleading its financial supporters into thinking the organization's $123 million budget is spent on caring for animals "when its real agenda is passing extremist legislation." Secondly, she chides HSUS for promoting itself as a mainstream advocacy group when its real agenda is "all about promoting vegan diets - no meat, no dairy - and ending traditional human-animal relationships across the board, from agriculture to biomedical research." Lastly, NAIA points out that "HSUS constantly engages in deceptive propaganda, half-truths and outright lies in well-funded media campaigns to win its political and legislative battles. But they are not held accountable for their tactics because they are a nonprofit group that enjoys political free speech protections."

Strand describes the NAIA membership as "individuals who interact with animals regularly in a wide variety of settings. We are pet owners, farmers, researchers, animal trainers, biologists, sportsmen, animal caretakers, dog and cat breeders and enthusiasts, educators and entertainers." She goes on to say that the NAIA supports "the responsible, traditional and humane use of animals in agriculture, biomedical research, education, leisure and recreation, entertainment and companionship. We support and advocate reasonable, effective and enforceable laws that ensure the humane treatment of animals and provide penalties for animal abuse."

The complete, well-written rebuttal is certainly worth a read.

Source: Presstelegram.com