Who Kills More Animals: PETA or HSUS?

While this is not a website about People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), the group does occasionally come up. For instance, a number of staffers from PETA have migrated to HSUS. One notable example is HSUS food policy director Matt Prescott, who while at PETA designed the noxious media campaign comparing using animals for food to the Holocaust.

Unlike the Humane Society of the United States, PETA does run an “animal shelter” at its headquarters. And PETA kills the vast majority of cats and dogs in its care at this shelter—about 90 percent, or 1,647 cats and dogs, in 2012 and about 30,000 animals since 1998. That’s shocking to many people, and the news is making waves both here and abroad at the London Daily Mail. (Please join our PETA Kills Animals Facebook page to stay up to date.)

Based on public information, it seems PETA directly kills more animals than HSUS, since the latter doesn’t run a shelter. But what about indirectly? According to HSUS, 3-4 million dogs and cats are put down in shelters every year, and according to our survey, most HSUS donors think their gifts will help care for pets or trickle down to shelters. If HSUS chose to use this money to either run pet shelters of its own or gave the money to other groups, as people think it does, how many pets that are currently euthanized would instead be alive?

Given that HSUS raises over $100 million a year, it’s probably a lot more than the 1,647 cats and dogs that PETA killed last year.

Posted on 03/22/2013 at 2:44 pm by Humane Watch Team.

Topics: Pets


  • Added to that, TV Program, “Hoarders” (Animals) U.S., always has the HSUS (Humane Soc.) collecting huge numbers of raided/hoarded animals, ensuring the Hoarder that they will find new homes for all the Animals. This lie encourages distressed Hoarders to surrender quietly. And donating viewers to this TV Show believe it too. I’ve always thought, “BS Liars”, HSUS.

    • Sue Ann DeVito

      I don’t watch that show all the time, but the one I saw about a cat lady, they did explain that some of the cats would have to be put down. They even gave her back the ashes of one of them so she could say goodbye.

      • alex tingle

        thats discusting. i dont understand how people can do that, just kill them for absolutely no reason. atleast cattle is used for food and not just killed off “because theres alot of them”

        • acrula

          A home has to be found for them and what if nobody will take the animal? Would you be prepared to fill your apartment up with unwanted animals? It is all very well saving birds and beasts, but what do you do with them after that? If you go work, live in a “no pets” apartment or travel a lot? Humans need to use their brains here.

  • Susan Griffiths

    The problem is that the animal organisations mentioned have limited budgets and it must be heartbreaking for them to decide what cause or campaign gets more or less. The fact is that neither have enough money to do all that they would like and definately all that needs to be done.

    Rather than focus too heavily on critizing such organations we should look at how to help their budget problems. For example if corporations were required to donate a small fee to such organisations each time they advertise using animals and/or a portion of the fine a person pays for neglecting, mistreating or abusing an animal were similarly paid to these organisations, they could do so much more. My question is, why are these organisations not receiving this type of revenue?

    • Brilliant idea.

      • ~love~ the idea that animal abuse criminals should pay a fine directed towards animal care but then I also think human convicts should pay for their own upkeep via work rather than rest on tax payers…fine revenue directed at victims has never really been used to my knowledge as much of the deterrent and useful repercussion that it could..too bad.

    • acrula

      Now our local greyhound industry is being threatened with wholesale shutdown, thanks to the hard line and graphically aggressive lobbying by these groups, these very same groups are now running to the Government with their hands out, asking for money to start their own little industries. Animal rehoming businesses could become very dangerous for the animals involved if big money is pumped into them, as participants in these kinds of activities often have a lot more on their minds than the simple care and welfare of animals, especially when they get to the animal hording and aggressive political activism stage. Most of them seem to lack the social skills to convince the general public to take on a recycled animal as a pet, perhaps amply demonstrated by their contributions to social media where they state emphatically that they prefer animals to humans.

  • Mirkka Salo

    Properly and carefully done euthanasia is better for animal than to be given to experiment and sadly sometimes also than to be given to some human and a new home. In Finland one artist (nowadays nominated professor of fine arts) got in 1980’s an abandoned cat from Finnish animals shelter Hesy and promised to take care of the cat, but killed the cat by ax by several blows and masturbated over the suffering and dying cat and filmed it in video what was shown then as an piece of art in Helsinki and other cities. This is how it happened in reality. Many homes are good but most important is that animal gets dignity in life and death. Happy life is wat every living being deserves, but often euthanasia is not the cruellest alternative. It is very important how the animals are killed, the method and respect towards them. Let’s give respect and dignity for all living creatures.

    • Yes! death is NOT the worst thing that can happen to an animal…we don’t desire death, but an end of suffering is preferable to suffering …yes?

      • watch_this

        I know your right but I hate to see either

      • Stefan Hansson

        People should’nt suffer either, yes? -_-

      • alex tingle

        no there are options other than death. putting animals through that is just something we do when we ouselves cant afford it, there is always a better option. we just tell eachother its ok so we dont feel as bad as we take away the rest of the animals short life for really no reason.

    • threenorns

      the bottom line is that we’re not going to be able to adopt our way out of this mess.

      it used to be that when a litter of pups or kittens was born, only the strongest and best were allowed to live. taking the runt of the litter was a gesture of pity – normally, the runt (a sickly, puny little thing) would be put down out of kindness since, statistically, it would dwindle and die anyway.

      but now we have this “life uber alles” attitude where every single living being must be “given a chance” – even though this is in direct contradiction to the laws of nature, which say that only the best survive.

      this is why we have so many unwanted pets and this is why “purebred” is now little better than a joke.

      • Didi Magnin

        you are right!

      • TomKi

        Can you prove that we have “so many unwanted pets”?

        • Pam

          I mean just look up statistics of how many stray animals there are especially in inner cities. On top of that the older an dog is the less likely it’s going to be adopted. Cats are different however people are always iffy with older dogs because they can be harder to train. Then on top of that there are a lot of pit bulls that die in shelters because of the stereotypes. I move around a lot due to military however I always find a way to volunteer at animal shelters and the stories are all very similar.

      • Vicky Bl N O

        Seriously, you want proof of unwanted pets? REALLY?? have you been to your local animal shelter lately? please take a trip to one and see for yourself. If it is a no kill shelter then your community is lucky but sadly most are not. I am afraid you will find the answer to your question as YES TOM there are many many unwanted pets either in the streets struggling to survive or hopefully cared for by a TNR program, or in so called shelters waiting for their furever home or a date with the gas chamber or needle. Actually take a trip to several shelters.. your question will sound so silly after seeing for yourself!

      • alex tingle

        every living thing deserves a chance. even the runt. it may look puny but it could still grow into a very healthy dog or cat or whatever. you shouldnt just kill a newborn because it looks weak…

      • Angie

        Not True- 30 million Americans a year are looking to adopt while we Kill 6-7 Million so the homes are there, as are the Inhumane Directors and the Kill Contracts. You want to know which race has Killed the most and is reproducing itself out of extinction take a look in the mirror. The laws of nature do NOT say we can nuke the air and radiate the ocean but “we” have done so. The word “euthanasia” is inaccurate here – that is reserved for the terminally injured and ill. Where animal Welfare Laws are tougher, communities are healthier and there are less social Crimes and assaults against the entire community like dog fighting, drugs etc and less abused and unwanted: check it out – civilized states No Kill Backward states High Kill

    • Kate Riviello

      you are a kill apologist, plain and simple, petapuff

  • hsus kills more INDIRECTLY………….they take money away from caring for animals with their deceptive advertising. Then they cause the death of even more by getting ridiculously restraining laws passed with their lobbying efforts.

  • See this is why I get irate with Peta and such. It costs between R500 to R1000 a month to keep a pet, in fact usually less but lets use that as a ballpark. Lets multiply that by the 2000 animals a year they put down (rounded off). So that comes to R24 Million. Which is $2.5 Million. My cats and dogs (2 of each) would cost less than R1000 a month for all 4 together ($110). Did I miss something? Are they putting down the animals because they cannot afford to feed them caviar and moet? Think its time they shut down and let a group that actually cares for animals take over, their priorities are seriously misguided.

    • groggyduck

      Except that one of PeTA’s long term goals is to end pet ownership completely.

      They (the seriously deluded ones) think that all animals should be “released into the wild” instead of being “enslaved” by humans, and genuinely believe that by killing these animals (many of the methods employed are NOT humane euthanasia AT ALL) they are freeing them from the “torment of enslavement”

      • Dave B Nolan


    • acrula

      They don’t believe in pet ownership. I’d suggest reading some of their social media sites. I can’t any longer – the graphic animal torture scenarios make me feel sick. I think they have gone beyond the basic aim of trying to stop the mistreatment of animals. Maybe they realise that there are not enough people to rehome these animals or maybe they have decided that people should not own animals at all. The vegans don’t eat animals or use their products. The problem remains about what to do with our birds and beasts after that, so show them being tortured, put the whole world off them then kill them. Or let them loose in the woods to fend for themselves.

  • mxprivateer

    As a long time volunteer at a local, no-kill shelter, I can say that the best use of anyone’s money (who is considering donating) is to send it to their local, no-kill shelter. PETA, the Humane Society, etc. are large corporations whose directors and upper level staff earn large salaries. The shelter I work at is 100% volunteer and is funded by a thrift store and donations. Each year, we help over 500 cats and dogs find homes and have never euthanized an animal because it couldn’t find a home.

  • Lee Mh

    Please don’t donate blindly, many shelters need the fund to keep going who genuine
    care for these animals

  • Ana Luisa Luque M

    But is not about euthanasia, who is, in every last letter, a terribly death, no. Is telling people to sterilize they pets, so no more puppis and kittes are in the hands af the people who can kill them. Is better a great dog or cat sterilize, that a litter that end up been sleep.


    it is the fight of ego. we are confused. we want animal protection

  • silvana

    killers!!!!!! and they say that to be vegan?????

  • Rehana VN

    No different to SPCA’s! Collect in the name of “caring” but are in fact killing machines. Do NOT donate to any of these organisation as the people who are supposed to be caring for the animals are the ones milking the system by paying themselves exhorbitant salaries, bonuses & riding in the most expensive vehicles.

  • diana d.

    totally agree, death is not the worst thing that can happen to an animal, provided it is done humanely and provided it is done because there is no other choice available… i am obviously not talking about the ones slaughtered for fur and meat, in which case, there is nothing “humane” about the whole process… having said that, still, be careful where you place your donations, large welfare groups can be deceiving sometimes…

  • Denise Brown

    I have to admit reading all the comments and this article has really got me thinking twice about my donations to a couple of orgs that were mentioned. I will donate local. Thanks everyone!

  • Daniel Haney

    And…They were caught red handed dumping cat and dog carcasses into local dumpsters…
    Donate to your local shelters but PLEASE…not these over the top psyco’s who kill dogs and cats but tell us not to kill animals for food.
    Complete hypocrites….

  • Johanna Moreno

    Most of
    the cats suffer when they are adopted for cruel people. People take them and
    promise care them but that is FALSE. Cats and Dogs SUFFER MORE LIVING WITH THAT
    LIFE. People don’t want good euthanasia for cats and dogs (for avoid more suffering) but
    people don’t say nothing about killing cows, pigs, chickens, geeses, etc…that is not cruel? Hypocrite consumers!

    • alex tingle

      most animals who are adopted are genuinely cared for and loved by the families. its true that some can be cruel, but the good far outways the bad and every animal deserves the chance at a happy life. and we have no right to take that away from them.

      • acrula

        There are not enough of these “good” people, especially as most of them would have some kind of a fulfilling life that might involve work, travel and an environment that might not be appropriate for pet ownership, at least not the multiple and supposedly dedicated pet ownership that these people are talking about. You need to be realistic. There are not enough people to go around for all of these unwanted animals. That is it.

  • hanspy


  • Micha Shepher

    This is not an ethical question but a practical one. Excess pets can be dealt with in the following ways:
    1. Let them starve
    2. Kill them
    3. Eat them.
    Killing them would always be the better option, and killing cannot be humane. Killing is the best available option, unless you consider eating pets.

    • juliet-kozlik-crabbe

      I think you are a very very very sick person to have the guts to say that micha shepher

      • alex tingle

        but the thing is they arent excess. they have the money to get them all spayed and neutored and take care of them, but they choose not to. thetd rather waste all the donation money on random crap

  • LingYai45

    I lost my sidekick Dweezle on the UCLA campus in 1973. A friendly black and silver miniature elkhound mix who joined me in class, she was a campus mascot – everybody’s friend. I got to the “Humane” Society a day late. I will never forgive those jerks.

    Now I live in Phuket, Thailand where I am closely involved with Soi Dogs. John Daley is a hero. You may have heard how Soi Dogs saved stranded dogs from “islands” during the Bangkok floods, or how Soi Dogs took on the Vietnamese dog meat trade. This in a country far less rich than the US or Europe.

    We also maintain an activist position as well.

    Soi Dogs – http://www.soidog.org – somehow survives in Thailand (and always needs your donations). I have $30/month (B1,000) automatically taken out of my bank account. You can help too.

    My point is that if Soi Dogs maintains a “No Kill” policy – for real – in Thailand, why can’t the “Humane” Society or PETA. do the same in America.

    I will always remember Dweezle,the campus favorite, and the S.O.B.s who put her down. If we have No-Kill in Thailand, there is no excuse for killings dogs and cats in America.

    Screw you, “Humane” Society!

  • Vanessa Thomson


  • David

    They are all liars.. If you follow them closely you will see that all 3 of the big 3 are nothing less than donation scams.. The way they spend money on advertising and pension funds is heinous when you see all the animals being killed that could be saved with that money if people had enough brains to donate that cash to shelters in their own communities. HSUS doesn’t even own a shelter and it sends their dogs to high rate kill shelters and the ASPCA has done the same thing many times over the years while stating “We don’t kill because we don’t take them due to space”.. that doesn’t mean they aren’t responsible for their deaths.. They ARE .. They are getting all of the donation money by lying and telling you that they are “Saving puppy mill dogs’ and rescue animals but the truth is, they aren’t saving shit unless you think saving means killing.. PETA ,l well, they should be illegal altogether and how the FEDS have allowed that fraud to continue for so long is beyond me. All 3 of these groups are no better than any other City Kill shelter, the only difference is, the BIG 3 have gotten filthy dirty rich lying and scamming and the local shelters are just broke and can’t do any different.. The local groups don’t have a choice because people are so stupid they won’t donate to them because they say ” they will just kill them”.. Hell if you would donate and volunteer and have your animals spayed and neutered so you can stop dumping your animals off on them to BE KILLED, they wouldn’t have to.. How do you blame them for killing them when you won’t support them so they can get some staff and a decent facility? The ASPCA, HSUS and PETA certainly don’t have that excuse with the billions of dollars they’ve screwed dumb people out of over the years with their continual lies and fraud.. I KNOW they won’t take an animal when you TRY to get them to because I’ve tried for years to get help with animals and you can barely get ANYBODY to take them BUT THE CITY KILL SHELTERS.. That’s the communities fault .> The truth is, The ASPCA, HSUS and PETA are big ole RICH SCAMMERS and 99% of the public REALLY DONT give a damn except when they see those commercials and it last long enough to donate a few bucks and then it’s over with.. This is a KILLING SOCIETY full of worthless people for the most part that just don’t give a damn about anything but themselves..

  • Kate Kleinert

    Pretty sure if I was “standing between” the 2 groups I would call my local shelters and possibly the local law enforcement to make sure all went smoothly. I would NEVER turn to PETA because with them the animals would be as good as dead anyways and I’d prefer the animals to actually LIVE.

    • acrula

      Yes, they call it collateral damage or a once-off purge. Like banning greyhound racing and not caring what happens to healthy active dogs. They’re not going to find homes for the dogs since they’ve shown all these torture videos and portrayed virtually every animal as a helpless, crippled and unhealthy victim. Aversion therapy to put people off pets for life. Actually, I believe they oppose pet ownership too – something to do with domination and slavery. All animals are meant to run wild in the forests or some such thing.