May 05 2011
California SPCAs Snarl at Name Confusion
Countless Americans confuse the Humane Society of the United States with their local humane societies, sending donations to HSUS with the belief that their money will trickle down to the pet shelters in their own communities.
Unfortunately, it likely won’t. Polling we commissioned shows that 71 percent of Americans mistakenly believe HSUS is a pet-shelter umbrella group, and 59 percent wrongly believe HSUS gives most of its money to groups that care for dogs and cats. HSUS doesn’t run a single pet shelter, but aggressively pursues an animal rights agenda. Most of the public confusion, as you might guess, is driven by its name.
Yesterday, California news outlets reported that the State Humane Association of California, which represents more than 100 animal welfare organizations statewide, filed a formal complaint with the state Attorney General against the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) over the same sort of “humane confusion.” Here’s how the executive director of the State Humane Association of California laid out the issue:
Ever since the ASPCA began to aggressively fundraise several years ago, humane societies and SPCAs throughout the country have suffered. Our member humane societies and SPCAs frequently report hearing from people who gave to the ASPCA believing they were giving to their local shelter. These shelters believe they are missing out on funds that were intended for them.
The parallels to HSUS in this complaint are striking. And in some respects, HSUS’s aggressive fundraising tactics provide an even more egregious example.
Just as the ASPCA is not affiliated with individual SPCAs, HSUS shares no affiliation with community-based humane societies in California—or anywhere else, for that matter.
The complaint alleges that ASPCA’s tear-jerking ads suck money away from struggling pet shelters. The same criticism can be leveled against HSUS: Ninety-five percent of the animals depicted in a recent HSUS television ad (the one featuring Jenna Elfman) are cats and dogs. Neither the ASPCA nor HSUS make it clear that donations won’t directly benefit hands-on pet shelter organizations.
What’s at stake, financially speaking? In the case of the ASPCA, the New York-based group hauled in loads of cash but shared very little of it with California humane organizations. The State Humane Association of California alleges that the ASPCA raised $116.5 million in 2009, but only one-third of one percent ($352,100) reached California last year.
This is also true for HSUS. We’ve catalogued, state by state, how little of HSUS’s budget (four-fifths of one percent in 2009) consists of money sent to pet shelters. In 2008, for example, HSUS gave grants to pet shelters in only 15 states. It spent far more money on political initiatives in states like Arizona, Michigan, Colorado—and, yes, California—than it did on pet shelters in those states.
One important distinction: Unlike HSUS, ASPCA does operate a pet shelter (in New York City). So it can legitimately claim that it spends money on the hands-on sheltering of cats and dogs. Not in California, of course, but somewhere. HSUS can’t say the same thing.
A representative of the Pasadena Humane Society told CBS Los Angeles that “all animal shelters have compelling stories. We all have abandoned, lost, stray, homeless animals.” That’s absolutely true, but pet shelters don’t have mega-marketing budgets that can compete with the ASPCA and HSUS.
In this David versus Goliath battle, hands-on pet shelters are the ones carrying the pebbles.
The State Humane Association of California apparently expects to see similar deceptive-fundraising complaints in other states. We think future grievances should also target the much bigger problem: HSUS’s ads.
Comments
I agree. I was one such ignorant person giving donations to the HSUS, only to find out they have no connection to local Humane Societies at all! As ASPCA is the same way, I believe there should definitely be a clearing up of titles to stop the confusion.
I agree with what you are all saying. When one thinks of HSUS they think of their local shelters. Its unfortunate to see these big groups be selfish and only care about money.
Instead of attacking legitimate animal businesses and sports, HSUS and ASPCA should focus on ending genuine abuse (thankfully isolated incidents) like this: http://www.fox4kc.com/news/wdaf-phoenix-puppy-set-on-fire-faces-slow-recovery-process-20110505,0,5133431.story
If they would focus on cases like this or Dually the rodeo barrel horse a couple years ago (stolen by a bunch of drunks, ridden hard down the street—so hard his shoes came off—and hog-tied and stretched out) and actually supporting shelters for stray animals, then I would be first in line to donate my time and money to help.
Meghan, h$u$ and and other animal rights groups are not just selfish they are selfish to the point of crimial!
If the ASPCA is based in New York and the funds it raises through public donations is used to help dogs and cats there, then why are people in California seeing these commercials? Between their ads and the ones from the HSUS, it seems like we’re being bombarded by them every other commercial. I say that as long as our shelters in California, be they local humane societies or spca’s, aren’t receiving any funds that the commercials are bringing into the bank accounts of the mega-nonprofits ASPCA and HSUS we shouldn’t have to see them.
and Regan liars too don’t forget that!
Even though I agree that the ads should be correctly represented, real reform of animal cruelty issues start with changing the laws -getting to the root of the problem. Thank goodness for ASPCA & HSUS for addressing the source of the problems. Throwing money into individual humane groups to save a few individual animals will never result in real change for the overall suffering of animals in countless venues.
Hey Kathy, what are you smoking? ASPCA and HSUS are working hard to pass laws that are resulting in increased shelter intakes and deaths. That’s not surprising, though, when you consider that they openly call for animals to be killed. HSUS asked the judge to kill the Vick dogs. Sayres is no different than Pacelle, just an opportunist who makes a big salary off the back of animals. And, “The source of the problem”? WHAT problem? We have plenty of animal cruelty laws on the books in every state of the union.
You must think solving a problem means prohibiting anyone in the US from breeding any nice pets, while we import rabid strays from Taiwan, the Caribbean, Romania, and Mexico. Yeah, real good idea. Shelters have been importing pets for many years, because we don’t have enough here in the US to meet the demand for pets. Somehow, rabies doesn’t strike me as a good way to end anybody’s “suffering”.
Comments are moderated, and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive. Extremely lengthy comments and those that contain obscenities may be edited before they are posted.
Add a comment:
There’s another player on the field. Best Friends Animal Society takes in millions of dollars a year and they also have only one hands on shelter. They have done more good with the money they take in than either the HSUS or the ASPCA, but they are all about the money. Last year, they joined forces with the ASPCA to defeat Oreo’s law, a law in NY state that would have required shelters to allow qualified rescues to take pets on death row out of those shelters. My own experience is NY is that shelters are not always cooperative with rescues and this law would have saved many lives. It is estimated that since that law was defeated last year, 25,000 pets that could have been saved were killed in shelters.
Best Friends took sides with the ASPCA because they are opening an office in NYC, where there are many deep pocketed donors. They needed to play nice with Ed Sayres (head of the ASPCA, and the guy who ordered the death of the dog, Oreo, even though a qualified shelter offered to provide lifetime care to the abused dog) and with Jane Hoffman, who gets to decide who gets the money from the Mayor’s Alliance for NYC Animals. Literally millions of dollars flow through that agency and are distributed to shelters and rescues at the direction of Hoffman.
All of these powerful animal oriented corporations are all about one thing; the money. From the money flows their power.