Jun 23 2010
Paying $25K for “Garbage”
The über-wealthy Humane Society of the United States continues to baffle ordinary people everywhere by charging pet shelters exorbitant fees to evaluate their operations. We saw this in March with the city of Dallas, which ponied up $25,000 for what amounted to a spiral-bound report card. And now in the city of Superior, Wisconsin, tempers are flaring over a similar arm-and-a-leg evaluation.
HSUS's "Animal Sheltering" website features glowing testimonials from a handful of what the group calls "our clients." The City of Superior's Finance Director is one of them:
We had what I thought was a VERY good meeting today to discuss the report you prepared for us. It has been received very well by the vast majority of individuals who have read it. Jeff and I have met with our City Attorney, Mayor and council leadership and will be working over the next few weeks on identifying who we feel will best fill the role of the task force. Recommendations will be brought forward to the March 16th city council meeting for formal approval...
Keep in mind that this is from a municipal bean-counter, not a shelter professional. In today's Superior Telegram, one of those actual shelter experts had his own choice words to offer:
The Humane Society of the U.S. report is garbage. The report is full of errors. They only talked with us for two hours. The report is based upon money, nothing about animal care.
That's Bill O'Keefe, the Vice President and Treasurer of Superior's Animal Rescue Federation (ARF).
Apparently, HSUS's report recommends that at least two of the city's three main animal sheltering organizations should be forced to merge if they want to continue receiving city contracts for animal services once a brand new (planned, not yet funded) $2 million shelter is built. But it's clear that HSUS never asked the groups involved if they were interested.
O'Keefe added: "Why does a vendor who has been successful for 23 years have to go away?”
Why? Money.
HSUS wants ARF to merge with the nearby Humane Society of Douglas County, the Telegram writes, because it "may bring together additional talent needed for a capital campaign to build the proposed $2 million facility."
Fair enough. It takes talent to raise that kind of dough. But you have to wonder why the city government isn't floating a bond issue the way it would to build a new school or tack a new wing on the City Hall.
And you also have to wonder what kind of hubris it takes to waltz into town, talk to a few people for a few hours, tell them to make sweeping changes to everything they do—and then charge them for the experience.
No wonder HSUS is getting such a bad reputation. They're working overtime to earn it.
Comments
let’s not forget what has occurred here in Sacramento with our new multi million dollar shelter- no one planned any way to fund it and just months after the glitzy new facility opened, is facing closure. they’ve already demolished the prior location so where will these animals go now?
Sacramento was told they could easily pay for the shelter expenses every year through licensing fees- however, HSUS strongly supported and helped push a mandatory spay/neuter ordinance here with tiered licensing fees. predictably, responsible owners felt they should not be fined in advance of any wrongdoing and have refused to pay the extortion, excuse me, FEES required to own an intact pet. add to that local AC will seize animals from anyone over the rather small limit allowed (regardless of level of care) and for being intact if owners can’t afford the ridiculous fines- adding to the shelter numbers and putting well cared for, well loved dogs to death for the intolerable crime of existing in their natural form.
I’ve often wondered what an “evaluation” from HSUS would look like. Since they run no shelters, and have no animal care experts on their staff or board, they cannot possibly be giving any actual shelter management advice . . . It just has to be fund raising advice, where HSUS is really expert.
So it makes sense now.
Let’s expand on this a bit…..
“Jeff and I have met with our City Attorney, Mayor and council leadership and will be working over the next few weeks on identifying who we feel will best fill the role of the task force.”
See any talk of animals in there? Nope, these are LEGISLATORS, and they want to create a TASK FORCE.
HSUS prefers to work with LEGISLATORS, not ANIMAL CARE professionals. They get the cash-strapped animal caretakers to foot the bill for a bogus report which gets them in good with the *legislators*.
What a racket.
Remember, boys and girls: “One generation and out. That’s the goal. We have no problem with the extinction of all domestic animals”.
That’s good ole’ Wayne being honest for once. Does it surprise anyone in any way that the H$U$‘s primary purpose is to bankrupt enough shelters, and make ownership of pets onerous enough that the few remaining shelters are so completely swamped, that mass euthanasia becomes the only option?
Dallas paid over 20,000 dollar to have HSUS look at their shelter. HSUS must have a preprinted form because even though from different states, they all basically say the same thing, not very much varies from state to state. HSUS could just put out another manuel for 19.95 and sell it to each AC or shelter. Gosh that would save our city who are already in the red a bunch of money.
Comments are moderated, and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive. Extremely lengthy comments and those that contain obscenities may be edited before they are posted.
Add a comment:
This is one of H$U$ most sleazy activities. I’ve heard time and again from shelters who thought they would actually get a useful evaluation and good recommendations, but got just what ARF got – garbage.
Not only does H$U$ not support local shelters – it steals from them. There seems to be no bottom to how low H$U$ will go.
Humane Watch should ask how many other shelters have been similarly fleeced.