A Little Sunshine

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is a vital federal law that gives citizens access to a huge number of government documents. It’s hard to imagine a true democracy functioning without open access to records.

And thankfully, the FOIA law can also give us a window into what animal rights groups are up to. Sometimes FOIA requests are a prelude to other things—lawsuits, press releases, even whole campaigns.

Late in 2010 we submitted our own FOIA letter to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Our request? We wanted to see what documents the Humane Society of the United States asked the agency for all year. (Pretty nifty, huh?)

We got back 17 FOIA requests; 75 pages in all. And two things jumped out at us:

1. HSUS is sniffing around for documents about wildlife predator control and “puppy mills”; and
2. HSUS is claiming that it’s exempt from FOIA fees because it’s a “news organization.”

Let’s take a closer look.

Rats!

Last week the A&E Network show “Hoarders” showed Humane Society of the United States personnel rescuing 2,000 rats. Yes, rats.

We think keeping rats in your house on purpose is weird, to say the least. But to each his own. And for the record, the real Pied Piper led troublesome rats to their death in a German river, not into a “rescue” van.

But the show, and Wayne Pacelle's blogging about the “Rescue of 2,000 Pet Rats,” made us think.

We asked ourselves: “Wait a second—are rats now pets? Really?” And then a few philosophical pieces fell into place.

Lots of people (most notably pet breeders) have suggested that Pacelle and his cohorts at the Humane Society of the United States secretly want to eliminate the whole institution of pet ownership.

Maybe—just for the sake of argument—we need to turn that idea on its head and look at it a little bit differently. Instead of getting rid of pets, perhaps HSUS wants to elevate as many species as possible to “pet” status. Could that explain what we're seeing?

“Change Agenda” Report Card: HSUS’s Ambitions Flounder

Our national mood was quite different after the 2008 elections—different enough, in fact, that HSUS confidently issued a 100-point “Change Agenda for Animals” to challenge the incoming White House and Congress to do its bidding.

One year later, HSUS issued the Obama Administration a "B-minus" grade; (which is far better than the "D" grade HSUS itself was recently awarded by a respected charity watchdog). The B-minus was widely seen as a practical nod to the difficulties of getting anything approved by the proverbial sausage factory (sorry, Wayne) that is the U.S. Congress. 

Two years in, the sun is setting on the 111th Congress, and on the first half of President Obama's first term. HSUS has spent millions of dollars lobbying for its agenda. How did it do?

Got a Pest Problem? Call the HSUS Man!

In Washington, DC there are three unavoidable things: death, taxes, and lobbying. Practically every proposal involves a host of special-interest groups that want to plunge their fingers deep into the proverbial pie.

But if British Petroleum wrote a new law covering oil-drilling policy in the Gulf of Mexico, would it pass the smell test? How about if a body-imaging x-ray machine company tried to dictate TSA equipment purchases for airport security?

Okay, that's a example. (It might not be a hypothetical.) But you get the idea.

We may soon be hearing the same sort of outrage about why the Humane Society of the United States is molding legislation from which it stands to gain financially.

Welcome to Wayne Pacelle's America.

Oklahoma and the Rest of the HSUS Election Roundup

If you’re reading this, chances are you already know Election Day is tomorrow. And you're probably also hyper-aware that the “Humane Society” of the United States has a stake in oodles of outcomes, including the re-elections of four Members of Congress (1 | 2 | 3 | 4) and a U.S. Senator.

There’s been an insane amount of media coverage focused on four HSUS-related ballot questions—which isn’t really fair, since there are actually five biggies in play for Team HSUS out of the 160 state-level questions on tomorrow’s ballots.

Easily half of the HSUS-related ballot stories out there have been about the animal rights group's favored ballot measure in Missouri. Most "animal people" also know HSUS is writing six-figure checks to influence outcomes in Arizona and North Dakota. And HSUS is also backing a Proposition in California this year.

That’s four.

Everyone’s forgetting about Oklahoma.

Tweezerman Creates Another Lather

A few weeks ago we told you about the Tweezerman company's pledge to support the Humane Society of the United States with money from the sale of every “paw print” nail file and pair of tweezers it sells.

But thanks to the vigilance of an eagle-eyed HumaneWatcher, there's more to this story than meets the eye. Tweezerman sells all sorts of grooming products, including this one that's sure to make someone in the HSUS executive suite cringe:

Deluxe Shaving Brush
This high quality shaving brush is made of 100% badger hair, the preferred bristle for creating a rich lather. The densely filled brush head is ideal for holding and distributing lather. Helps soften and raise beard while gently exfoliating the skin in preparation for a close, comfortable shave.

Badger hair? Sounds like a marvelous shave.

Don't the fine folks at Tweezerman know that there are 13 different kinds of badger on the IUCN's "Red List" of Threatened Species? That Wisconsin's emblematic rodent is so difficult to find in the wild that a biology professor in Milwaukee is conducting a state-wide "badger census"? That the disappearing Prairie Dog is robbing badgers of an important food source?

OK, that last one was from an HSUS press statement. (Why are we "saving" the prairie dog, anyway, if not to restore its place in the wildlife food chain?)

But still, you'd think a company that's already diverting its profits into the animal rights movement would be a little more alert. And you'd think that HSUS would promptly turn Tweezerman's bloody money down.

But you'd be wrong, of course.

Animals > People: An HSUS Legal Fantasy

Remember Carter Dillard? Until last year he was a lawyer in HSUS’s Farm Animal Litigation department (also known as the “Sue the Hand that Feeds Us” campaign).

In 2008 Dillard took a position at Loyola University’s (New Orleans) law school while remaining “Of Counsel” to HSUS. He has since become Director of Litigation at the Animal Legal Defense Fund, a California-based animal rights group that (surprise!) sues a lot of people.

Along with his animal rights focus (or perhaps because of it), Dillard has worked extensively on the subject of human population control. Dillard doesn’t believe Americans should have the unlimited right to have children. Really. We're not making this up. He argues that this right should be balanced against the “rights” of other things—like the wilderness and “non-human species.” We can safely say that the “Octomom” isn't on his Christmas card list.

Dillard’s most recent academic papers are a fascinating read, because his already bizarre philosophy of thinning the human herd to save animals has taken a turn toward even greater absurdity. And because the animal rights movement apparently thinks he's on to something.