PETA Defends Euthanization of Sick, Injured Animals
It’s disingenuous, to say the least, for the deceitfully-named Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) to complain about the number of unwanted and suffering animals whom PETA has been forced to euthanize because their guardians requested it, or because no good homes exist for them.
CCF is a front group for Philip Morris, Outback Steakhouse, KFC, cattle ranchers, and other animal exploiters who kill millions of animals every year, not out of compassion, but out of greed. CCF promotes meat-eating and defends corporations that send billions of cows, chickens, pigs, and other animals to terrifying, gruesome, and painful deaths in slaughterhouses.
PETA makes no secret of its shelter of last resort. We have never tried to hide the fact that we euthanize animals. Euthanasia is a kindness for sick or injured, suffering, and elderly animals, and those who have been discarded and for whom no good homes can be found. We are proud to be here for elderly, sick, aggressive, and injured animals—those whom so-called “no-kill” shelters often turn their backs on.
Most of the animals we take in are broken beings for whom euthanasia is, without a doubt, the most humane option. To cite just one example, PETA caseworkers were able to gain custody of a dog who was locked to a 15-pound chain and who was starved until she was severely emaciated. We had to carry her into the emergency clinic because she could barely walk; the veterinarian recommended euthanasia due to the severity of the dog's condition. PETA pursued criminal charges against those responsible, leading to their convictions for cruelty to animals.
We also provide a peaceful, painless release to suffering animals whose guardians can’t afford to take them to a veterinarian for expensive treatment or euthanasia. We generally refer adoptable animals to a local open-door shelter, where they have a chance at finding loving homes, and we have managed to find excellent, lifelong homes for many animals ourselves. While euthanasia is an unavoidable necessity for PETA and animal shelters across the U.S.—thanks to breeders, pet stores, and people who don’t spay and neuter—it is only a tiny percentage of our work to help animals.
In the past decade, PETA’s Community Animal Project (CAP) has delivered more than 4,200 doghouses stuffed with straw to chained "backyard dogs" who previously had only a plastic barrel—or nothing at all—to huddle under during snowstorms and driving rain. CAP transports animals to veterinarians for treatments and vaccinations—often footing the bills ourselves—and provides priceless moments of love and attention to animals who have known only suffering from human hands.
Most important, PETA works to end the overpopulation crisis (and the abuse and homelessness that result) at its roots, by preventing more animal births. PETA’s mobile SNIP and ABC clinics sterilize hundreds of cats and dogs at little or no cost to their guardians each week, preventing hundreds of thousands of animals from being born only to end up on the streets or euthanized for lack of homes. To date, we have sterilized more than 50,000 animals.
We’ve spent thousands of dollars in print and TV ads and other educational materials for our Animal Birth Control (ABC) campaign, which has reached countless people with the urgent message that spaying and neutering are the keys to ending animal homelessness.
PETA works tirelessly to reach the day when every animal has a loving home, but we can’t solve this crisis alone. Please, help us stop overpopulation: Sterilize your animals, push for mandatory spay/neuter ordinances, and adopt animals from shelters instead of buying them from breeders or pet stores.
Read the original article from the Center for Consumer Freedom, PETA Killed 95% if Adoptable Pets in Its Care in 2008.
POST YOUR COMMENTS BELOW
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
The internet has changed the way multi-billion dollar businesses do their public relations and guerilla marketing.
Billions of dollars are spent by the animal exploitation industries, part of that budget no doubt goes to CCF.
If I was marketing for the animal exploitation industry my strategy would be to divide and conquer.
I would pose as a vegan and I would condemn the best known most effective animal welfare organisations that I believe threaten the legitimacy and public relations efforts of the businesses I actually represent.
For my money , I'm betting that many of the " vegans " who criticise PETA are exactly in those positions.
I'm sure that they are not always making the perfect "best outcome maximum happiness for all" decision in each case, but I just can't imagine PETA being anything but noble in all that it does.
It certainly benefits CCF and the animal cruelty based industries that CCF represents to undermine PETA.
My tip to animal welfare advocates is not to be caught up in the nasty bitchy emotive techniques employed. Stand confident in your beliefs in supporting animals . And align yourself with and support and sponsor the most vocal organisations. Do not let these quite brilliant (sadly) divide and conquer efforts dilute the effectiveness that help reduce global cruelty to animals.
We need to raise awareness, and to fight big businesses that rely on animal cruelty for their profits we need to be able to afford to match their budgets so as to be able to afford to get the messages out.
Despite the dream that in a democracy Freedom of Speech occurs, Freedom of Speech (as for example the cost of Presidential election campaigns demonstrate) costs a lot of money if you want to get a message out there.
Do not let these vegan impostors sway you.
PETA is obviously a fabulous and well-intentioned organisation and more often than not an effective one. Until you can establish a better one with that kind of message muscle, I suggest you back PETA. There are a few other large ones too, but don't let these people divide us and conquer the message.
Good luck.
Loved this quote,
"What I like the most about the PETA hypocrisy...
Is how killing an animal for any reason is " murder " except when PETA does it. Then, it's "humane euthanasia " and ethically justifiable."
They have spent millions of dollars on absolute crap. Don't eat fish, because it's inhumane, and fish are really smart. A baseball player throws a fast ball the same time an idiotic bird swoops down, and dies, so they try to have the baseball player suspended, because he must have known the bird would swoop down at that exact moment.
They waste so much money , not educating the public, but for stupid propaganda, that benefits no one.
I grew up in Chicago, and have volunteered at a large shelter, and there kill rate was no where near what this multi-million dollar company does,(and was definitely not 100 a day) with a lot less money to work with.
A dog that is sweet tempered, but "who was starved until she was severely emaciated" would have been lovingly brought back to full health and adopted out. It takes some time and money, but nothing that couldn't have been fixed.
A cat whose leg had been caught on something, and had to be amputated, found a home with little problem.
If they are incapable of giving real love to these animals , financially support ones that do, and keep out of the actual handling.
PETA is a lousy joke. And a bunch of hypocrites. If they truly believed that animals were as precious as they claim, no way would they kill so many. If they had true compassion, they would put forth more effort to save them. To rehabilitate them.
They would use the money they get to feed them, and house them, and nurture them back to full health. Take the extra steps.
Instead, they "Humanely" kill them at there earliest convenience. And the only logically conclusion is because they want to focus on more idiocy. I don't think they're pocketing it as a whole, but they are definitely wasting it.
"PETA works tirelessly to reach the day when every animal has a loving home"
Obviously not EVERY animal if they're killing off 95% of them. Even in their rebuttal article they full of crap.
People are outraged by the numbers, not by the fact they do it. We all understand some animals are a lost cause.
If you honestly believe that %95 of the animals they kill meet the specified no hope criteria, I've got a piece of the Brooklyn Bridge to sell you too.
PETA people consider themselves the only ones compassionate enough to own pets ; and do not encourage anyone else to own pets. So - when they say they kill only animals that they cannot find 'good homes' for; that ends up in reality that PETA kills more cats and dogs percentage wise than any humane society .
These are misguided people that will stop at nothing to achieve their goals.
The more money they get the more damage they do - stop sending them money.
The overpopulation crisis isn't overwhelming. If it was, the USA wouldn't be importing small, adoptable dogs from Mexico and Puerto Rico. As a %, fewer cats and dogs are euthanized today than were pts since the 1950's. Many of the dogs pts are owner give ups that are: old, sick or unmanageable. The dog most likely to be pts after that is larger, black male dogs.
I am 100% for animal WELFARE. I am an opponent to animal RIGHTS. As an animal Welfare advocate-- I am against Peta.
Killing animals is bad unless we are the one's doing it . . .
No one forces you to kill them. How come you kill far more than any other shelters do? How come I can find no kill shelters that won't kill them at all?
You guys are a bunch of hacks, do as we say not as we do. . . .
What a joke
Could you please list the no-kill shelters that do not "kill them at all". I have yet to know of a shelter or veterinarian that has not had to euthanize in many situations. They just don't talk about it for obvious reasons that this stream of uneducated judgments towards PETA establishes.
If you do know of such a place, you may want to question their policies concerning the animals they can accept, and those who are beyond their capacity to help. Most are doing the best that they can, but there are always situations –no being lives forever- that have to be addressed. These situations are what many do not want to confront for obvious reasons that your harsh judgment of PETA establishes.
To what point do we let a being suffer? You speak as if you know this answer. I do not, and I will always be grateful to PETA for having the courage to OPENLY address these inhumane situations that we, this obviously uneducated society of humans, have put them in.
They don't do this openly, this just broke on the news. And around here there are two no kill cat shelters, I have gotten cats from both.
I have no problem with putting down a sick and hurting animal, PETA is doing much more than that, they are getting rid of healthy animals they don't want to spend the time and money to get adopted out. . .
This didn't just break on the news.... More accurately, it does make for a good sensational story that brings lots of ratings, and a story that can be recycled every year.
This has been going on for years. The CCF has been spreading disinformation on since, at the very least, 2005 ( http://web.archive.org/web /*/ http://www.petakillsanimals.com ).
The No-kill-shelters you speak of should also be called 'Turn-away-shelters'. What happens to all the animals that nokillshelters can't take? They end up in city shelters where many will be euthanize.
I found it peculiar, but not surprising that the first two paragraphs of this article were the only ones that talked about euthanasia . The rest of the article seemed to turn off topic to what would serve as a distraction from what the real issue here is. Yeah, its great that PETA is hard at work with their ABC campaign and CAP program, but thats not what we are here to discuss. And they didn't even mention how many animals they CHOOSE to euthanize every year!
I'd have to agree with slacker when he says "Oh right... it's because it's more expensive to care for an animal and find a good home for it than it is to just give it a lethal dose of anti-histamines..."
We all know that PETA is a MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR organization... what I'd like to know is why the hell aren't they aren't taking some of this money and putting it towards opening a sanctuary or two..or three... for rescued animals.
I don't believe PETA when they say that the only animals they euthanize are the ones that have no hope! Besides, if you truly care about animals then you will take some of those multi-million dollars to do whatever it takes to provide medical care for them! Look at the rescue efforts of organizations like Farm Sanctuary- I've read horror stories about animals they've rescued... and they do everything they can to save their lives. PETA ought to learn from them.
What a disgrace! Euthanasia should only be an option once you've tried everything else that a few million dollars can achieve! (in which case is A LOT!)
No, this issue of euthanasia is all a drummed up campaign to distract the public away from the work that PETA does to shed light on animal suffering.
Yes, PETA could spend millions of their donations on running a sanctuary and then once they filled it up, nothing would get done to educate the public on the source of these problems that put the animals in the sanctuary in the first place. Meanwhile... all the animals that wouldn't be euthinized by PETA would be euthinized by public shelters instead (some of which use much crueler methods).