HSUS Goes Out of (the Dog Food) Business?

Remember “Humane Choice” dog food, a brand that HSUS launched in early 2010? The vegetarian kibble made in Uruguay and imported thousands of miles into the US that HSUS laughably dubbed “ethically responsible”? With the odd headshot of CEO Wayne Pacelle on the bag?

Yeah, that stuff. It looks like the so-called “Humane Choice” has been voted off the island. We can’t find it for sale anywhere.

The “Humane Choice” website, www.thehumanechoice.com, is no longer active. What about Petfood Direct? “This item is no longer available,” says the company. What about Petco? Nope. Same with Whole Foods. Even Google Shopping turned up zero results.

That’s probably for the better. We were skeptical of it, as were a host of others including HSUS fans on Facebook. Even a former HSUS vice president panned the idea of vegetarian diets for dogs, saying that dogs do best with a diet that includes (gasp!) animal protein. As a veterinarian with NYC Veterinary Specialists put it: “Dogs and cats, they’re carnivores and they do eat meat as part of their natural diet.” Another veterinarian stated, “Dogs need meat in their diet.”

HSUS promotes vegan diets for people, so we assumed that this was an attempt to extend its human ideology to pets. But as pet expert Tracie Hotchner told CNN, we should “respect each species for what it was meant to be.”

Hey, at least HSUS hasn’t ventured into the vegan cat food business.

HSUS’s “Direct Care” for Animals is Plummeting

Despite HSUS’s recent claim that it “provides direct care to more animals than any organization in the nation,” we’ve shown that local groups like the Houston SPCA care for just as many or more animals on a significantly slimmer budget. Now we’ve noticed something new: As of December 29, HSUS reported that it had cared for “more than 60,000” animals in 2011. That’s way down from 2010, when HSUS says it cared about 100,000.

In other words, the amount of “direct care” to animals provided by the Humane Society of the United States dropped by about 40 percent—in a single year.

That’s really too bad. As critical as we are of HSUS (we are a watchdog group, after all), we’ve given it a thumbs up for its direct-care programs. Hopefully this trend reverses in 2012.

According to HSUS’s 2010 annual report, the breakdown of its direct care that year is roughly: 11,000 animals helped via the Animal Rescue Team; 68,000 through spay/neuter surgeries during “Spay Day”; 6,400 from animal fighting investigations; and 16,000 in HSUS’s wildlife care centers and horse sanctuaries.

How does 2011 match up? (HSUS’s 2011 annual report isn’t published yet, so we’re going by available data.)

• Animal Rescue Team: 8,000 (a drop of 27 percent)
• Spay Day: 48,000 (a decline of 29 percent)
• Investigations and care centers (the remainder): About 5,000 (a decline of 77 percent)

It’s also interesting to note that “Spay Day”—which is a big PR event for HSUS—accounted for 80 percent of the animals HSUS provided “hands-on care” for.

Why is this significant? Because “Spay Day” isn’t long-term care. It’s a one-off event, and it seems that HSUS isn’t as effective as the Doris Day Animal League was in running Spay Day (HSUS took over the event in 2006 after the groups merged).

Remember, HSUS doesn’t run a single pet shelter, and the animals it does provide long-term care for generally are not dogs and cats. Yet, more than 85 percent of the animals in HSUS’s TV appeals are cats and dogs. According to public polling, most Americans mistakenly believe HSUS is a pet-shelter umbrella group and that HSUS gives most of its money to pet shelters.

HSUS’s ads clearly fuel this misconception for HSUS’s gain. And in the meantime, HSUS’s actual direct care—for cats, dogs, and all animals—is falling rapidly. We’ll have more analysis as more information becomes available, but it’s worth wondering: Could the decline in direct care indicate that HSUS’s budget dropped significantly in 2011?

As long as hands-on care isn’t a top priority at HSUS—it still doesn’t run a single pet shelter—the rule remains: If you want to help with the care of pets, give to a local group

PETA and HSUS: Who’s Horsing Around?

There’s been a lot of press devoted recently to the possible (probable?) reinstatement of horse slaughter in the United States. As expected, HSUS made hay out of horse slaughter’s potential return—while, oddly, HSUS’s little sister in the animal rights movement, PETA, had a different take. Speaking to the Christian Science Monitor, PETA co-founder Ingrid Newkirk said:

It's quite an unpopular position we've taken. There was a rush to pass a bill that said you can't slaughter them anymore in the United States. But the reason we didn't support it, which sets us almost alone, is the amount of suffering that it created exceeded the amount of suffering it was designed to stop.

We hate to say it, but PETA is the voice of sanity here. (Is it out of place to mention that it’s not like PETA has a problem with animals being killed?) After the ban on domestic slaughter, horses were simply shipped to Canada and Mexico to be slaughtered—a long distance to travel outside of the purview of USDA inspectors and US humane slaughter laws. Last year, the number of horses going to slaughter abroad totaled 138,000. In other words, it’s arguable that HSUS helped cause a decrease in animal welfare.

Meanwhile, horse abandonment has increased domestically. Recent research presented in the Journal of Animal Science found that 100,000 unwanted horses turn up every year, but the capacity of horse rescues is only 13,400 animals.

HSUS president Wayne Pacelle retorts that abandonment has increased because of economic circumstances. He has a point, but he doesn’t answer this one question: If slaughter is totally banned, where are all those horses to go?

Horse sanctuaries across the country are already filled to capacity. So, predictably, some animals have been left to die of starvation. Their owners can’t sell them and can’t afford the cost for a veterinarian to euthanize the animal.

Meanwhile, Pacelle’s response is normative: People shouldn’t own horses unless they can care for them. OK, sure. But who can predict an economic downturn? Welcome to reality, where things don’t always go as planned. (And it’s not like everybody has a six-figure salary and pension plan like Wayne Pacelle.)

To HSUS’s credit, it does operate a horse sanctuary out in Oregon called the Duchess Sanctuary, which holds 200 horses on 1,120 acres. But since we haven’t seen any ideas from HSUS as to what to do with 138,000 horses if all horse slaughter was banned, let us suggest that HSUS build a Duchess Sanctuary for all of them.

By our calculation, HSUS would need to build ranches exceeding 1,200 square miles in size to house all of these animals.

That would require a lot of hard work and a lot of money. Doable? Possibly. But HSUS would have to “pony up” in a major way.

Of course, it’d be far easier for HSUS to continue making hay out of the horse slaughter issue and raising money off of it. If HSUS is going to continue to oppose horse slaughter, hopefully it offers some practical solutions—for the horses.