May 27 2011
Has HSUS’s Lobbying Prowess Been Neutered?
Newton’s Third Law of Motion states that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The Humane Society of the United States just might be learning this one the hard way.
HSUS, which isn’t affiliated with your local pet shelter, spent more than $17 million of its donors’ money on lobbying efforts between 2005 and 2009 while giving far less than that to hands-on pet shelters.
Currently on HSUS’s lobbying agenda are state ballot initiatives in Washington and Oregon to force egg farmers (and consumers) to go “cage-free.” These are sequels to the group’s 2008 “Proposition 2” campaign in California.
Today HSUS lost the support of The Oregonian, the largest newspaper in the Beaver State. This marks the second major Oregon setback for HSUS in a few months’ time.
HSUS’s political credibility is going to the dogs.
Here’s a rundown of events in Oregon.
This year Oregon Senate President Peter Courtney (D) introduced an HSUS-backed bill requiring egg farmers to go “cage-free” by 2019. But once he had a better-founded scientific understanding of the issue, he amended his own bill to require egg farms to adopt American Humane Association-approved “enriched” cages instead (by 2026). These enriched cages are bigger than conventional cages and allow hens to engage in natural behaviors.
Much to HSUS’s chagrin, the Oregon Humane Society supports Courtney’s revised bill.
On April 6, The Oregonian editorialized against the amended legislation, taking HSUS’s side. “Passing this amended bill,” the paper opined, “would be worse than doing nothing at all.”
Today the Oregonian pulled a complete one-eighty. It now rejects HSUS’s ballot initiative.
In a new editorial, the paper says a ballot initiative would be a “messy scramble” and a “crude tool.” More pointedly, the editorial argues that “settling the dimensions of hen cages down to the square inch clearly is a matter for legislators, not voters.” (We would add that it’s also not a matter for animal rights activists who want to “get rid of” egg farming.)
This morning’s Oregonian is causing shock waves in the animal rights movement from Portland to Washington, DC. It’s not often that a newspaper reverses itself in such a short span of time, but there was good reason.
Reality may be catching up with HSUS. In Missouri the group successfully squeezed through the anti-“puppy mill” Proposition B last fall with a very narrow margin of victory. But the state’s lawmakers got together this spring to pass a bipartisan reform bill, removing some of the more egregious parts of Prop B while increasing funding for kennel inspections.
Animal welfare does not come down to a single measure, and there are legitimate welfare arguments against HSUS’s attempts to force “cage-free” on everybody. We’ve noted, for instance, the prevailing scientific consensus that hens housed in enriched cages have a lower rate of death and disease than “cage-free” hens. So it’s heartening to see open-minded journalists looking at more than just one-sided propaganda.
One last detail from today’s Oregonian editorial is worth mentioning. Apparently HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle told a Salem lobbyist that he “would be satisfied” with something like the enriched-cage bill, provided that it were phased in over 10 years instead of 15 (which the bill currently requires).
Really? HSUS would be satisfied with a bill that phases in enriched cages? (Cages of any kind?) That would be news to us.
HSUS has always been “cage-free or bust.” This startling backtracking appears indicative of Pacelle recognizing that he’s about to find himself without a chair when the music stops.
Outmaneuvered in Missouri and outfoxed in Oregon. It’s certainly about time.
Posted on 05/27/2011 at 04:50 PM by the HumaneWatch Team
The Best of HumaneWatch • Animal Agriculture • Eggs • Gov't, Lobbying, Politics • (3) CommentsComments
Interesting enough C Cardozo, any ads on CL for selling of chickens, turkeys, and waterfowl in Ohio around the Columbus, Zanesville areas have been flagged within hours.
20 million animals were euthanized last year. Stop breeding people!
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:
Speaking of the laws involving chickens, I am interested to know if any California [or other states] livestock owners or chicken owners who sell chicks/birds in the spring, have been flagged off of Craigslist when attempting to sell any type of livestock, including chickens.
I plan to petition CL to pony up the data on the flagging over 40 days since that is how long my ads have been taken down. That pretty much has ruined the selling of the birds, they even flagged ads when I said I would give them away [that was done for testing purposes.]
Pretty much what has happened is I got zero revenue from selling any of the birds since my ad was taken down when I put it up.Losing revenue (however small or large) is bad enough, but anyone selling chickens knows that straight run chicks are sold quick because we can’t afford to pile up roosters that continue to consume feed. As an example, 300 grown birds can consume 2 tons of feed in 25-30 days.
The AETA (Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act) was specifically designed so that this type of interference with selling (legal sales of livestock or any business dealing with animal enterprise) has consequences. Such interference amounts to a violation of the AETA, even if NOT nationwide.
Imagine if people were flagging off every rescued dog on CL. They too are protected by AETA since a rescue group is an animal enterprise.
CL saw fit NOT to allow the sales of animals on CL, in particular dogs, but allows “re-homed/rescued” animals to be sold and the legal sale of livestock is allowed. If CL refuses to give me the flagging information then I will attempt to subpoena it. This is not the first time or the first year it has happened, but over 40 days is just overkill.
The goal would be to determine who did the flagging, and to push CL into putting a directive on the farm/garden section that states the general terms of the AETA which places people on notice that taking down legal sales of animals/livestock can potentially trigger the AETA.