what in the world was the 250-300 residential units for?

let me guess- perks for employees? on site housing?

this is how an animal protection group spends its money- building massive headquarters and hundreds of housing units.

why, why, why are these people not being investigated for fraud?

They have 400+ employees, so they need to put ‘em somewhere. Don’t see the big deal here.

@James E. - Why can’t they get apartments or houses like the rest of society? I mean, my job doesn’t provide me with a house or apartment to live in close to work!

Hopefully, the IRS Dallas office will get this report for consideration.

Interesting they would display a no hunting sign. Must be for fanfare,as Gaithersburg Maryland prohibits the discharge of any weapon for any reason within the city limits.

Humane Watch should investigate if this property is mortgaged.

Here is what the CFO of the HSUS said at the time

“Ultimately we have an obligation to our constituents our members and our donors to enhance the value of our assets and this is a significant asset with the Humane Society So let me close by saying that we would
like to have a quality development for this site ... ‘

What the heck?? People don’t own STOCK in the HSUS.. They do not get anything BACK for their “investment”.. no dividends.. no stock splits .. no way to sell their investment .. so why does the HSUS have an “obligation to their constituents” to do anything except help animals. Why would a donor feel their donations was “enhanced by the HSUS building 300 homes..
Guess what.. they won’t.. Please make sure everyone you know hears about this..
HSUS is a BUSINESS .. and their BUSINESS is making mo’ money.. anyway they can..
How will building 300 homes help animals??

Don’t cults provide housing for their followers?  I seem to remember Waco and all of the housing they provided.  Where is Janet Reno when you need her?!

Where’s Wayne’s parking space?  Do you think he has a company car?

I wonder how that tree feels about having a sign NAILED to it? Tree rights people need to investigate.

700 Professional Drive
  Gaithersburg, MD 20879
Owner: HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES

Total land value: $5,472,800

Total value for property: $9,439,366

Total assessed value for property: $9,439,366
Base area of building: 33,904 square feet
Number of stories: 2
Date of current assessment: 01/2008
Year property was built: 1982

Oh give me a break Humane Watch aka front organization for animal abusers.  Why don’t you attack how our government wastes it’s money and buildings?  Tons of non profits have massive headquarters.  All the better to fight off the massive corporations.  Your blog makes me sick.  While Wall Street and BP rape our country you are busy attacking an organization that at least means well.  Go volunteer at a shelter or simply donate to animals off this site. WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO SAVE ANIMALS?  exactly.

Lexi?  Feeling a little off-kilter yesterday?
What are you talking about, these people on this site want to abuse animals?  What?

HSUS is going to develop acreage for housing and offices??? Can you imagine the vast number of defenseless forest creatures that will be killed or disposessed of their homes, all for the greed of this corporation that masquerades as an animal rights group? In one fell swoop these greedy bastards will kill more animals than the average hunting club kills in decades.

Animal rights is not the concern of the HSUS: making money is. They are worse than any corporation in the U.S. becuase they are greedy hypocrties.

Of course they need it. They need to be continuously expanding, because in order to change all the animal laws in all the states, plus all the federal regulations, and let’s not forget the Constitution itself - they’ll need a lot more people to shuffle paper and probably even more attorneys to write boilerplate laws. And, of course, defend them from lawsuits from the good people they’ve savaged civilly, emotionally and economically. Not to mention the animals they have killed and traumatized, but I forgot - they don’t count, unless their circumstance is exploitable.

@Lexi - How do you arrive at the conclusion that people who resent the Animal Rights movement’s willingness to exploit both abused animals and animal lovers to press their very anti animal agenda as being pro- well, pro what exactly?

How is it OK for people who believe that owned animals - even pampered pets - are being ‘abused’ because they are ‘enslaved’ to pretend they are using animal lovers’ money to look after animals?

How is it OK for them to generate reams and reams of anti animal law - laws which do not in any way protect animals, but which make it incrementally more difficult for you and I and other animal lovers to continue to own and manage our animals? The fact that they give the laws warm fuzzy names does NOT make this body of law benign; they are taking advantage of the fact that the public doesn’t read the text of the laws they vote for, and as often as not, neither do the politicians who sponsor these bad laws!

One of their key strategies is to call anyone who opposes them or their policies ‘animal abusers’ or ‘animal abuse supporters’.

As you have just done. They are using you to further their ends; a great deal for them, since animal lovers are by far the majority, and their biggest obstacle, and you don’t cost them a dime. Such a deal!

@ Lynn - What Humane Society laws are you saying do not protect animals?  Would you prefer there be no animal cruelty laws?  The Humane Society means well. It’s not my favorite animal welfare organization but they have been very successful.  I think a watchdog organization is fine.  By all means keep The Humane Society in check but don’t fault it’s progress.  This country still has a long way to go to improve the lives of animals and people.  We are one of the only civilized countries that still performs tests on Chimps, allows factory farming to go unchecked and ignores the indecency of puppy mills.  Are these not areas that need improvement?

Still @ Lexi - ‘... a front for animal abusers ... ’ What on EARTH does that mean?

Lexi, tell us, how many animal abusers do YOU know of PERSONALLY?

I don’t mean how many have you read about on animal rights sites, or in the newspapers, or seen on TV, but people you personally know who are abusing animals?

Leaving aside the issue that if you DO know someone who is abusing an animal, pushing for another bad law isn’t what you should be doing, you should be calling your local authorities, but the reality is that you probably don’t directly know of any animal abuse cases. You characterize any animal you ‘adopt’ as abused, and/or may have been told was abused - which brings us to another question: what do you mean by ‘abused’?

The animal rights organizations are working hard to redefine the term ‘animal ownership’ to mean ‘animal abuse’, and they are nearly there - a great many people like you seem to believe that a majority of animal owners abuse their animals, and only they themselves are non-abusers. They accept any nonsensical and arbitrary ‘standard’ offered by an AR organization to be ‘good’, and any traditional practise in use by someone who has given their life to animals as ‘bad’.

It’s also not sufficient for a person who has been *accused* of abuse to be counted as an abuser unless he or she has been convicted in a court of law, but far too many people are willing to accept that anyone who is accused is guilty.

This is technically known as ‘witch hunting’.

And even if you are a vegan animal rights supporter, it does not put you above the law. Owning animals and raising them for meat, milk, eggs, wool, honey and other animal products and activities is perfectly legal, so far, at least. You are perfectly free to choose your own diet and lifestyle, but only if it doesn’t hurt anyone else - the old adage says you are free to swing your arm, but only up to the point where it approaches someone’s nose. This means that you may choose the vegan lifestyle, but you may NOT inflict it on others.

The reality is that there is very little *actual* abuse out there, only a truly regrettable amount of ignorance of animals in general, and the tiny percentage of psychotics who will abuse animals (and probably any other living thing within range) regardless of the number of laws that are passed. And, of course, accusations which are not in any way founded, but are attended to by the authorities because of the body of very bad law which has been passed over the last thirty years or so.

Lynn - please stop by the ASPCA to meet the dog thrown from a 5 story building, or the Bulldog beaten so severely by a LI woman he has brain damage (caught on video).  I would love to live in your area.  Sadly abuse still exists.

@Lexi - There are more than adequate laws in all jurisdictions to deal with the kind of psychopath who would do this. The laws you are now supporting are laws which prevent ordinary people, who love animals and do NOT abuse them from owning and breeding them.

@ Lynn—The laws we have now are NOT adequate.  And what am I supporting?  I am not a vegan nor an HSUS supporter. Just because I dislike the HumaneWatch doesn’t mean I support everything the HSUS does.  You are both getting off base and losing the point.  Perhaps your hearts might be in the right place.  Judging from the hostility in your posts you must be some sort of animal breeder.  What laws exactly are you angry about?  Prop B?  Why are you not lobbying instead of attacking the HSUS?

I object to any laws which give the government a license to practice veterinary (or human) medicine, for starters. My animals should be able to count on individual attention so far as their health is concerned, and that should be determined by me and my veterinarian, not by government bureaucrats or special interest factions, whether they are AR organizations or corporate industry.

If I were an animal breeder, what of it? Is that illegal?

Well, come to think of it, when you pass laws forcing the sterilization of pets, according to a schedule determined by the government, (and dictated by an extremist activist organization), I guess you are outlawing breeding, aren’t you? Why would you do that?

However, so far it hasn’t happened here. Oddly, I am not a breeder, but my pets were bred by someone, weren’t they? Why would I want to outlaw breeding, if I want to keep pets?

Am I hostile? Only to those who want to define me as an abuser because I disagree with them. To my mind, that’s a hostile position, and you might reasonably expect to receive hostility in return. Still, why would you take this personally? I disagree with the animal rights position, and consider it criminal for them to pervert the legislative and legal system to pursue their agenda.

Ok Lynn - so what is your point? NO ONE is trying to outlaw breeding or mandate sterilization.  Are you mad?  I think we might agree on 99% of the issues here.  What the Humane Society does do is help shut down puppy mills.

So far $125,000 has been spent cleaning up this one. Not the kind of cash your local shelter has lying around.  So if you want to condemn them for stockpiling money tell me who will step in. You just stated you don’t want the government mandating this?  I have no problem with responsible breeding.  But there is way too much blind breeding for nothing to be done.

I never defined you as an abuser Lynn.

Last time I checked my local ballot there was nothing on there mandating veterinary medicine (maybe rabies shots) or sterilization.  Maybe you need to get some meds Lynn.  According to your posts there is mass veganism, animal rights extremism and “they” (whoever they are) want to sterilize your pets. Get help… and soon.

@Alexandra - What is Mandatory spay/neuter if not government forcing people to sterilize pets? There is enough of that around to tell us that it is bad for animals and bad for shelters; everywhere an msn law has been passed, the pet ‘over population´ has escalated. This is a classic example of the AR organizations ‘fixing’ a problem which didn’t exist until their ‘fix’ was put in.

Don’t take my word for it; look at the official figures for those jurisdictions which have passed msn laws. They are all public record.

And who, exactly is it who has spent all this money cleaning what up? HSUS spends money on very little besides their political agenda, and nor does any other animal rights organization. They haven’t shut down any puppy mills that I’ve heard of, either. Every breeder I have heard of or know of personally who has been shut down has been an individual fancier, a hobby breeder. The kind of breeder who screens puppy homes, who screens for health conditions, who sells with contracts requiring the animal be returned if for any reason it must be rehomed ... responsible breeders in other words, not commercial breeders licensed by the USDA which is what is usually meant by the term ‘puppy mill’.

Of course, the AR position is that if you breed anything - a single litter - you are a puppy mill; this is why the dog fancy is in such trouble, really. Each breeder points the finger at another; “not me, take him ... ”

As to your defensiveness about my comment about being called an animal abuser - why would you take this personally? It’s a standard AR epithet, directed at anyone who disagrees with AR policies. I have been called an animal abuser, and a supporter of animal abuse by any number of AR supporters, some who understood what they were supporting and some who did not. This was not a comment directed at you personally. I admit that I find it tiresome and offensive, but I wasn’t pointing at you.

You are being led up the garden path, my dear. You have been lied to by those you are defending so loyally.

@Alexandra - What is Mandatory spay/neuter if not government forcing people to sterilize pets? There is enough of that around to tell us that it is bad for animals and bad for shelters; everywhere an msn law has been passed, the pet ‘over population´ has escalated. This is a classic example of the AR organizations ‘fixing’ a problem which didn’t exist until their ‘fix’ was put in.

Don’t take my word for it; look at the official figures for those jurisdictions in California which have passed msn laws. All public record.

And who, exactly is it who has spent all this money cleaning what up? HSUS spends money on very little besides their political agenda, and nor does any other animal rights organization. They haven’t shut down any puppy mills that I’ve heard of, either. Every breeder I have heard of or know of personally who has been shut down has been an individual fancier, a hobby breeder. The kind of breeder who screens puppy homes, who screens for health conditions, who sells with contracts requiring the animal be returned if for any reason it must be rehomed ... responsible breeders in other words, not commercial breeders licensed by the USDA which is what is usually meant by the term ‘puppy mill’. Those are not just exempt from state laws because they are under the oversight of the USDA, but almost all anti puppy mill laws have an exemption subsection which explicitly exempts them from that particular statute.

Of course, the AR position is that if you breed anything - a single litter - you are a puppy mill; this is why the dog fancy is in such trouble, really. Each breeder points the finger at another; “not me, take him ... ”

As to your defensiveness about my comment about being called an animal abuser - why would you take this personally? It’s a standard AR epithet, directed at anyone who disagrees with AR policies. I have been called an animal abuser, and a supporter of animal abuse by any number of AR supporters, some who understood what they were supporting and some who did not. This was not a comment directed at you personally. I admit that I find it tiresome and offensive, but I wasn’t pointing at you.

You are being led up the garden path, my dear. You have been lied to by those you are defending so loyally.

Bottom line, I am GLAD that someone out there tells me the truth, even though it is a bitter pill to swallow, because I donate every single F%^#ken month to these people, my money that I really thought went to the dogs. No wonder why the job to stop the abuse of animals can’t be won, that would put these people out of blood $$$$$$$$$.$$ No, tears don’t fall. They crash around me.

If they are investing, it is to grow their funding sources. This is something that non-profits do all the time, with the ultimate aim of making more money for their cause.

There are organizations that work “on the ground” directly with the animals they are trying to help, and organizations which support lobbying efforts. They are two totally different types of organizations. Perhaps you could say that HSUS has at times been misleading in marketing materials, but they certainly have animal welfare as their top priority.

@ Alexandra - Well, you’ve bought the whole pup, haven’t you?

Their ‘stop puppy mill’ laws actually target hobby breeders, not the HVCB which they pretend to. Do you read the entire text of the laws you support? If you did, you’d discover that most of them explicitly exempt USDA licensed breeders, which are those the public generally think the legislation is targeting.

Most States have no jurisdiction over USDA licensed kennels at all.

How does a law which limits animal ownership protect animals?

How does a law which prevents *conscientious* breeders from breeding help animals?

How does a county statute which requires a person with more than two intact dogs, or more than four sterile dogs to build a kennel facility which exceeds USDA standards, which would run well over six figures, help animals? As nearly as I can tell, this is a mandate to limit the number of dogs one owns to four, absolute max - or go commercial! Does that help animals somehow?

How does it help animals for the HSUS to confiscate animals and dump them in kill shelters? Most of the animals go to an environment *worse* than the one they came from, many are killed even before their owners see a courtroom - where they are most often acquitted of any wrong doing. The result of this is that the shelter, underfunded and overcrowded to begin with, sees an even higher kill rate, thus giving HSUS the excuse to sponsor yet another B.A.D. law which will result in MORE animals dumped in the kill shelters - Help me out here; this helps animals how???

That does force, without actual mandate, s/n. There are laws in some states which DO mandate s/n. In those places kill rates have consistently gone up.

Please, please, do some real research away from the AR sites. What they do does not help animals in any way whatever. Their laws and policies have resulted in more pet deaths than all the abusers in the country combined. We have laws against animal abuse in all jurisdictions, if enforcement in your area is poor, by all means pressure them to improve that. Just don’t support any more animal legislation. Much more of it will result in our not being able to own pets at all.

They don’t have to outlaw it; they just have to incrementally regulate it to death. Literally, in the case of our pets.

And that is exactly what they are doing.