Start Your Own Humane Education Organization

being and social interaction. Although many of the health benefitspeople get from their pets can be attributed to the power of touch, thepractical benefit of taking a dog for a walk encourages owners to get upand exercise.According to a 1996 study by the American Veterinary MedicalAssociation, only 10% of older singles owned cats and 20% owned dogs.Among retired couples, 16% owned cats and 20% owned dogs. Onereason for these low numbers is that seniors generally have lessdiscretionary income than other groups.Mindful of these facts and studies, the Pasadena Humane Society istaking another step to reduce euthanasia and increase the adoptions ofolder animals through our Seniors for Seniors program. Like all dogs andcats from PHS, each animal will receive an initial health check,vaccinations and will be spayed or neutered. 151

LESSON PLAN OUTLINEOBJECTIVE: This information will clearly teach the students that there areso many aspects to providing pets with the proper thoughts, care andtreatment. It outlines all major points of why so many pets arerelinquished or lost each year as well as proving that this can beSTOPPED if only people have the correct information to work from.Throughout this program, it will also instill within the students, thatcompassion and understanding for 'other than themselves' is critical inthinking and acting throughout life and provides many benefits towardscharacter development. TIME: 3-4 class periods per school year (averageclass period 45 min each)MATERIALS NEEDED: Are listed throughout this outline. A Completelisting of materials that are applicable would be difficult to calculatesince each presentation is customizable for each of you and your areaand regional needs.Everyone must recognize that I am not a teacher by trade. I've beenasked for a Lesson Plan by many and I didn't even know what that wasfor the longest time. The reason I am so comfortable and do such a goodjob with students, regardless of age, is that I know I'm sharinginformation with them that they have not heard before and that willchange their lives.Humane Education, as it is known to be, is the whole idea ofenvironment, compassion for all animals and so forth. I am only dealingwith responsibility and education regarding our companion animals. Forthose who provide me with an audience, I believe they will be more likelyto look into some form of further humane education later on. It's myopinion, but I feel that trying to discuss more angles or topics involved,152

would dilute the message and the students would not retain the info wehope regarding the animals. The entire package is for those who have anactual curriculum where time allows this.You can visit any grade level you choose. I never go to those below 5thgrade as I don't feel they can quite grasp what they should in order tofollow the program. You must realize that the high school students aresometimes more difficult to speak to, but they are also the ones who willbe out on their own in 1-3 years and NEED to hear this at least oncebefore they begin to make the same mistakes so many others havebefore them.So, do everything possible to see that the higher grades are included inyour efforts. (not unlike drunk driving and criminal activities, themajority of abuse and neglect cases are from males ages 18 - 30)Theaverage class period is approximately 45 minutes. Therefore, that is likelythe time you will be allotted. Of course, you can always take advantageof additional time with questions and answers.Even with the 45 minutes, there are interruptions and the delay instarting by at least 5 min also. I usually begin with some humor orsomething funny or silly to get their attention. I 'apologize' for misleadingthe students with my appearance, but contrary to rumors, I am notBrittany Spears' double. (I'm 50, short, somewhat weighty, practicallybald) and that gets a chuckle from any age group. To let the olderstudents know that I am here to give them information and I expectthem to pay attention, I usually begin by asking 'How many of you feelthat the info I'm about to give you is something you already know?You already know all there is to know about how to keep a pet.\" You'llhave a couple smarties that will raise their hands. I have some chairsavailable and ask them to come up front. I place the chairs right where Iplan to stand and tell them, 'if you know all there is to know, then I'mgoing to ask you to sit here to keep me honest and correct me when Imake mistakes, OK? 153

Personally, I wouldn't dream of visiting a school or group meeting forthis, without having a rescue animal that is safe with everyone, to have areal time visual they can touch and experience during my speaking. Itbrings the presentation's message to a whole different and meaningfullevel. Of the 70+ schools I've visited in 8 western states, I believe all buttwo made it very clear they would not allow any dogs.I took them along anyway, since the van was our daytime home andwithout fail, they were welcomed into each and every school andbecame instant celebrities. It helps that I look confident and do nothingto bring attention to the dogs - they bring enough to themselves bybeing so diversified in size, shape and color, plus being well behavedladies and gentlemen. Mine don't bark, won't leave my side, don't jump,but absolutely can hardly contain their excitement - anticipating all thosehands that want to pet them.I will still only provide suggestions and outlines for those who wish to gointo the schools. I could give you a 'word for word presentation, but, youwould have to re work it to be comfortable with the way you naturallyspeak, plus, what I speak of in my presentations may not be applicable orrelevant in your specific community.OK. I hope you have a list of the pages from my \"icanhelp\" page. I feelstrongly that anyone visiting a school or youth group should read all thepages in the first category listing. It is 36 pages of a wide variety of thingsyou can and should discuss with the audience. As I say in my intro to thatpage, we don't use terms like 'shelters' or euthanasia and putting tosleep.Those are inappropriate for such a horrific and neglectful situation that isoccurring. You will be surprised at the number of people - even adults -who are unaware of the statistics and the irresponsibility of humans withtheir pets. To soften the horror to make it sound nicer is simply doingone thing: it makes the audience see that it's not nearly as bad as it reallyis. They go to dog pounds or county facilities and there, they are killed.Some with injections, some with the gas chamber, and even some with154

bullets from high school boys who are making extra money.The only page that I use in its' entirety is 'spayn.htm' the Spay andNeuter Story for Kids. This is how I begin every presentation. You'll seethat it starts out very blunt, but immediately changes to how they can dotheir part to stop this by listening and then making different decisionsthan previous generations have made. They will do that with knowledgeof the facts.They may or may not do this with a softened and politically correctmeans of using the more accepted words. I just don't see it. If you couldread these pages enough times to be familiar with their content, youcould present a decent program in your own words. After doing rescuefor so many years, the 'pregnancy' and 'allergies' pages have strongsubstantial impacts with those I speak to. It is amazing to realize thenumber of animals which are relinquished due to the woman's firstpregnancy or their unjust fears and incorrect assumptions of allergies.There is no doubt, it will seem overwhelming and frightening at first. Butanyone who has the sense and compassion to recognize the importanceof humane education, certainly has the information through theirexperiences to speak for 45 minutes. MAKE SURE YOU TAKE A WRITTENLIST OF TOPICS. keep them with you and don't be afraid to look at them.I always do.My outline is this:1. The absolute evils of having a litter of puppies or kittens along with theimportance to the health of the pets to provide spaying and neutering ata young age. See Spay and Neuter Story for Kids.2. The need for everyone with a pet to have some form of access toproper training and guidance. It's very clear that most people assumethey have the talent to train a dog, but the likelihood is that they werejust lucky. Most likely is that they won't take the appropriate time to dowhat is necessary to bring the puppy to the level of behavior they wish tohave and will end up getting rid of the dog unfortunately. 155

3. The importance of becoming the 'guardian' of the proper pet for youand your family and the lifestyle you live. Definition of 'owner': One whohas possession of an object, thing or piece of real estate. Definition of'guardian' One who adopts a child or pet for the sole purpose ofproviding necessary care, compassion, guidance, love, exercise, food,water and shelter for a safe healthy existence.4. The benefits of community involvement. Do not stand idly by andallow abuse, neglect or other ignorance by humans. Help the communityto learn to better through information sharing. 'If you don't tell them,who will?\"5. The importance of providing the appropriate needs for your pet, notnecessarily what your ego decides is best for them. Dogs tied to a post,tethered to a fence, kept in a small pen, etc. That is what the humanwants for them and is not at all healthy for the pet.6. How everyone can become involved on an individual basis by helpingsenior citizens and low income families by providing occasional vet tripsor a few bags of dog food to prevent their pets from being relinquishedto the animal facility unnecessarily.7. The benefits of beginning with an adult dog from the dog pound asopposed to 'assuming' that they have the knowledge or understanding ofhow to properly train a new young puppy to meet their needs. (Havingmy five dogs in the classroom that are obviously very lovable andworthwhile, helps bring this point home with some foundation) Each onewas an adult from the pound when I adopted him or her. The fact thatone has kept a puppy, only means they were lucky, not necessarily askilled or knowledgeable trainer. An adult dog from the pound is alreadyspayed and neutered, vaccinated; past it's digging and chewing stage andwill respond with love and affection as it has just come from a family whoobviously didn't care.8. The proven benefits for humans as well as their pets of providing'indoor' sleeping arrangements for their pets. Reduced allergies for156

children, improved allergenic reactions for adults who already havethem, as well as a longer and healthier life for the pets as well. After all, ifa dog is to protect its most important family members, it can't do sofrom the back yard if it has no access to the inside areas. (Reference:Associated Press article by Justin Pritchard in San Francisco) See 'Insideor Outside' pets for full story.9. A 'guard dog' is one who has been properly trained for the job andunderstands its boundaries. It is NOT a dog someone throws into theback yard with no guidance or training. The latter will only prove toannoy your neighbors and cause your family undue troubles withbarking, biting or destruction of property. This is a lazy mans' way ofmaking excuses for not providing the pet with the proper care,socialization and compassion required by all pets.10. Why the perfect family should consider a second compatible dog orcat as a companion for the first one. (Too many deserving and lovinganimals will die if not, and dogs and cats are social animals and enjoy thecompany of other compatible dogs and cats) They play with and traineach other and offer much needed exercise for each other.11. The absolute necessity for having proper identification on your pet atALL TIMES. (I.e. 4th of July, New Years Eve, tornadoes, earthquakes andvarious events that frighten your pet to where they will escape out offear.)12. To discuss the proven links between animal abuse and future criminalactivity as adults. (Reference Houston Chronicle Story Nov 29, 2000 by JoAnn Zuiga: \"Animal Abuse May Be Warning Sign)13. IF you are forced to part with your beloved pet, remember to nevertake it to the local pound, but to a local rescue org. and NEVER place a\"FREE TO GOOD HOME\" ad in the paper. The 'whys' and the options.Rethink your decision to relinquish the pet. It has already giveneverything it has to try and please you and would certainly give it's life toprotect you if need be. Don't dump it off for silly self-centered reasons, 157

which could be rectified through some training tips or a few sacrifices onyour part.14. Make sure you select the appropriate pet for your family's lifestyle. Ifyou live in a large high rise, you don't want a dog that needs to run 20miles a day (Dalmatian) If you are less active family or one who is alwayson the run, you don't want to get a highly active dog. However, a GreatDane, as well as a German shepherd are good dogs for apartment livingas they do not require the high energy exercise nor the volume of walksthat many others do. Smaller dogs are usually NOT best for condo or aptliving due to their excessive barking that disturbs the neighbors.SUGGESTED PROJECTS FOR THOSE INTERESTED1. To hopefully prepare a program in which the members will visit otherschools in and around the local area to share this information andhopefully help others to form these humane education clubs in theirschools as well. ***This helps the students with business planning, publicspeaking, speech preparations and much more. See Forming clubs2. The first several meetings of this group can be enhanced throughadditional speakers from their local humane organizations, vets, dogtrainers and animal control officers who will share their local problemswith the students.3. Offers to assist senior citizens and low income families with donatedfood and vet visits as well as training tips to improve the quality of thepets' lives as well as their own.4. How to convince the public to obtain appropriate identification for allpets either through a simple engraved tag on the collar or micro-chipping. ***The excuse for not having proper I.D. is that their petsnever leave their home. On the fifth of July for example, pounds andother animal control facilities are flooded with pets with no I.D. from fearof the fireworks the previous night. Nearly 150,000 are killed just due tothis one annual event. So, if they had ID or had been placed inside thehome as they should, this would not occur.158

5. To tackle the project of holding an OFF SITE adoption program forthose pets who would otherwise face certain death at the local facility.After all, the public rarely goes to the pound, as it is a very sad anddepressing place. They will, however attend an event at a local city parkwhere each animal is leashed and accompanied by a volunteer with acard containing the autobiography of that given pet. *** People do NOTwant to go to the dog pound or county facility due to it's grusome smells,sights, sounds, etc. This allows people to experience these dogs in ahappy, playful atmosphere of adoptability. For each volunteer, there isone dog on a leash. That volunteer has a 3X5 card with all the details ofsaid pet and will allow prospective adopting families to walk the dog andget to know it. This all takes place with the volunteer right at their side atall times and inside an enclosed, fenced area.6. Try to tackle a project such as opening a local dog park where the dogsand their guardians come to socialize, run and play with each other in asecurely fenced area or help adopt some older 'un adoptable' dogs tosenior citizens who live alone - a win win situation. *** Creative thinkingis the true success story in all this.7. Obtaining much needed coverage in their school newspaper to helpother students to learn proper care-giving procedures andresponsibilities for their pets. Not to mention the benefits to their org. aswell as the local community of having nice coverage within their localpapers and TV. news. *** This will help them see how networking,publicity and the sharing of knowledge can truly make the difference inthis tragedy that is really so very easy to stop.8. The need to speak out and get involved in issues that surround yourfamily and those you care about. To take action and vote on issues andfor candidates who strongly support and stand by ideals that help yourlocal area to grow and improve the quality of life for all souls who residethere. Do not sit idly by while a neighbor neglects or abuses an animal bytying it up to a post or allowing it to go without food or water. Do not sitidly by while an important initiative gets defeated in your local elections.***This will assist students to understand their government. They will 159

learn how their local government works, ways to lobby theirgovernment, and increase awareness and appreciation for how thesystem works in which they live.9. Letter writing campaigns, neighborhood 'reach' programs and othermeans of truly helping the local population as well as local governmentofficials to provide improved care for their pets. ****This will helpstudents' writing abilities, vocabulary, English skills, and grammar.I would strongly advise that you take along a half dozen additionalprinted pages i.e. Jim Willis' written pieces. I have four of them on mysite. \"How Could You?\", ''True Story\" and \"Free Kittenz\" are my twofavorites. Then some additional pages that you will leave with theteacher. Hopefully at a later date, in an effort to re mind them of all theylearned today, they will either discuss one of these - each at differenttimes, or do an essay on them, etc. You really don't' want to just leaveand not have them discuss this topic again or they will not retain theinformation provided. Remember, the compassion and understandingthey will learn from this program can and will change the world in whichwe live.Early Age Spay/Neuterand the benefits accompanying this procedure.It is our goal to disassemble the silly unsubstantiated myths of 'one litteris beneficial to the female' or 'male dogs need to breed' 'the dog willbecome fat and lazy once altered' or ''it's unnatural''.Early-age spaying/neutering is being performed more and morefrequently and the range of benefits provided for both animals andpeople is great. Research has shown that it is safe to spay and neuterkittens and puppies at a much younger age than veterinarians oncethought.160

Many veterinarians are now safely and routinely performing spay andneuter surgery on kittens and puppies at eight weeks of age. The lowbody fat makes these surgeries easier to accomplish and puppies andkittens tolerate the procedures very well and recover more quickly thando older animals. Some veterinarians use the \"two-pound\" guideline. Aslong as a puppy or kitten is healthy and weighs at least two pounds, theymay be spayed or neutered safely. During these surgeries, young animalsneed to be carefully monitored just as older animals do when it comes toanesthesia.What is spay/neuter?Spaying/neutering are safe, inexpensive and permanent procedures thatnot only prevent accidental breeding but also reduce potentialbehavioral and health problems. A female cat does not have to gothrough a heat cycle before being spayed. In fact, multiple heat cyclesincrease her chances of developing mammary cancer. In males,neutering reduces the risk of testicular cancer and enlargement of theprostate and related infections.Many animals adopted from shelters are young in age. Studies haveshown that if these animals are not spayed/neutered before going intotheir new homes, the surgery will never be done and these animals thenproduce more unwanted pets. When these procedures ofspaying/neutering are performed early, the chance for unwanted littersis eliminated. These animals are not going to contribute to the surpluspet population of tomorrow.There is little scientific information to back up the current standard ageof six to eight months for spaying/neutering. This figure seems to havebeen chosen quite arbitrarily and followed down through the yearswithout question. Today, we recognize the safety and many benefits ofearly-age spay/neuter.REASONS TO OPT FOR EARLY-AGE SPAYING/NEUTERING: 161

- Helps to control pet overpopulation - less homeless offspring -- Decreased killing of healthy animals- Decreases the rate of animals returned to shelter- Improves animal's adoptability- Improved health care of pets - pets live 5-7 years longer if altered at 6months or earlier- Surgery less stressful/quick recovery for younger animals- Early spay/neuter can be done in conjunction with other surgeries- Spayed and neutered pets are less aggressive, less likely to roam, lesslikely to fight and therefore less likely to contract contagious diseaseslives a much healthier life, less likely to bite or fightBut remember, it is never too late to spay or neuter your pet. Talk withyour veterinarian. Even older animals benefit from these procedures.THE INFORMATION PROVIDED HERE COULD BE USED TO BUILD YOUROWN EDUCATION PRESENTATION\"Wh is hu a e edu atio eeded? We e e eeded it efo e….\" In nearly 20 years of listening to thousands of adults explain why theyhad to dump their pets, it became so clear that most of them honestlydidn t have a clue as to how easy it would have been for them to havedone the right thing in the first place. Instead, they end up assumingthere are no options. They feel this is an acceptable solution.But most horrifying is the fact they rarely feel true remorse. Many stillthink dog pounds will find their pets a new home. Many feel finding agood home for their pets is merely finding someone with a backyard anda smile promising to love it, with no background check or agreement at162

all. In as much as I ve grown weary and disheartened with today s adults,The benefits derived from pet ownership have been researchedextensively since the 1970s. There is no doubt that a close relationshipwith companion animals is of benefit to the emotional and psychologicaldevelopment of children, provides much needed companionship andsupport to the elderly, assists in the recovery rate of patients sufferingfrom serious illness and decreases the rate of minor illness, and maysubstantially reduce the risk of heart disease.Pets-as-therapy programs around the world have highlighted thebenefits of assistance dogs, horse riding for sufferers of cerebral palsyand other disabilities, and the use of companion animals with mentallydisturbed children and adolescents. With such strong support for thebenefits of pets it could be suggested that pet ownership should in factbe actively encouraged by governments and health authorities, and it isnot inconceivable that pets may be prescribed for the sick or disturbed inthe future.Urban consolidation decreased size of private open space (backyards)and increasing competition for public open space (parks) placesenormous pressures on dog owners in particular. Similarly for the non-pet owner, closer proximity and increased contact with other peoples'pets seems inevitable.Urban planning, education programs for pet owners and non-pet ownersalike, and the development of realistic and enforceable animal controllaws are the key to maintaining the balance between the needs of themajority of our community i.e. the pet owners, and the welfare andrights of othersThere has been a great deal of interest in the dog attack issue over thepast two years. Unfortunately this has not been helped by the media andhighly emotive claims from unsubstantiated sources. Clearly, educationin many forms and on many levels is the only way to correct problemssuch as these. 163

In reality, \"from 65 to 93% of dog attacks occurred in or near the dogowner's home\" (Podberscek & Blackshaw 1990). Despite popularopinion, stray dogs are rarely aggressive towards humans (Beck 1979).Evaluation of SolutionsEDUCATIONChildrenChildren must obtain a basic grounding in the care and management ofcompanion animals. They must be taught to respect all animals and torealize they have a responsibility to care for pets. In schools this can beeffectively achieved through the Pet Pep program which should be inevery Australian primary school by the end of 1993. Younger childrenhowever must also be targeted from as early as possible through theirparents and preschool classes.Adults - pet ownersThe expectations of pet ownership and the associated responsibilitieshave changed rapidly. In the past two decades it has becomeunacceptable to allow a dog to roam the streets or defecate in publicareas. Pet owners often ignore these attitudinal changes in thecommunity. Educational material aimed at pet owners must aim atraising the awareness of these changes and assist them in being able tomeet the more demanding expectations of a far more vocal non-petowning group.This education process can occur through:i. media- advertising- human interest/current affair programs- regular stories in print.164

ii. seminarsHighly successful community seminars can be held at local venues withspeakers like the local vets and the animal control officer (ACO).Incentive to attend such seminars can be generated by pre-publicity, freegift or bonus eg decreased dog registration fee for attendance.iii. information boothsThis popular concept can access the general public in shopping centers,local festivals and other community activities. The booths must beapproachable and staffed by trained personnel who can answer queries.iv. videosThere are a number of pet education videos available for all age groups.Local libraries could stock these as could veterinarysurgeries and council offices.v. signsClear posters and signs indicating acceptable behavior are essential e.g. agraphic depicting dog's droppings with a slash through it (AFIRAC1986:65). This signage must be accompanied by supportive action bycouncils to provide for the disposal of faces.vi. leafletsMultilingual, easy to understand information brochures should beprovided for dissemination at all possible venues. Letter-boxing suchleaflets could be effective.The communityThe status of pets in the community must be promoted. It should beunacceptable to denigrate the importance of the people/pet relationshipor stipulate areas that are exempt to pet owners. The education of the 165

community to accept pet ownership as an integral and important right ofits members must be achieved in conjunction with raising theconsciousness and concern of pet owners for others.================================================== I stand firm in my belief that if they had knowledge of the resultingconsequences of their actions, or been informed of just how simple andeasy it is to do the right thing in the first place, almost all of them wouldhave done the right thing. These options not only save money, but theysave lives. Ignorance and apathy, (the lack of understanding the entirepicture) are undoubtedly the biggest part of the problems nowadays andare overwhelming in today s adults. The good news is, both are easilycorrectable.Randy N. Warner uses his experiences of rescuing abandoned andabused dogs for the past 18 years to show students 'cause and affect'and to teach them compassionate means of avoiding the unnecessarycontinuation of these deadly acts Since his mission is to do whateverpossible to see some form of humane education program in our nation'sschools, it is difficult to walk away from meeting with Mr. Warnerwithout feeling his undying passion to spread his universal message tothe next generation. It is hoped that they will benefit from the love andcompassion that all animals can offer us and stop the abuse andoverpopulation.The more people we can involve in and educate on these matters, themore that they will all understand the seriousness and magnitude of theatrocities being committed every day in this country and around theworld. It can only be a good thing. It is proven that it does NOT takemoney to solve these problems! It takes the sharing of information andcommunity involvement. Adult Americans are currently responsible forthe sad legacy we leave to the younger generation in regards to theanimals - their abuse, overpopulation and subsequent convenient andunnecessary euthanasia. So, it is only logical that if the general public iscausing these problems, then we can't depend on THEM to teach their166

children how to correct the situation. They obviously don't know.Nobody has a litter of puppies or kittens just so they can be abused orlater put to sleep. Most of those directly involved simply do the thingsthey do out of ignorance, over inflated ego and apathy. We adults simplynever had an opportunity to be involved in a comprehensive orsuccessful humane education program.We simply learned a lot of the things we did through talking to our familyat the dinner table, etc. Now that our families are more pseudo-assembled than ever, the topic of how best to care for Spot and Muffy, issimply lost in the shuffle. These things simply need some explaining inorder to correct them. What used to be very simple, still is. We just needto begin where we obviously left off - with the kids. Randy has been given thousands of reasons why the 'owners' had toget rid of their beloved pets. \"They no longer match the interior of myliving room,\" or she gained too much weight and we don't want a fatdog, or it's not housebroken, it barks. All are the fault of the caregiver /guardian, or in this case the pet's 'owner'. In almost all cases, had theperson or family adopting the pet had checked out the given breed'squalities or taken some time in properly caring for the pet, it would havebecome a wonderful addition to the family and it's lifestyle.We provide information obtained from various national animal welfaregroups and show proven means of avoiding he re-occurrences of thesemistakes. They all provide good solid research with variety of solutions toall the big problems. We will discuss various ways in which they canbecome more active in their community by gaining knowledge and actingaccording to what is the best for all souls who surround them.This program, and many others like it, could easily change the way mostpeople today think about their pets as well as how they are cared for.Many people simply begin by adopting the wrong type pet for the familyand lifestyle they have. People will spend more time researching a newautomobile than looking into the type of living soul they wish to spend 167

the next 15 years with. A large number of those will just as easily take apuppy over an adult dog because 'they want to train it to be like theywant it to be\" only to give up on it and take it to the pound.Ignorantly, a lot of people seem to think that their pet will certainly finda good home. The reality is obviously quite different. Then there is thethought that only 'bad' dogs and cats are found at the pound; thereforethey would rather not go there. In reality, the majority of the animalswho are awaiting adoption at the local dog pound are only there due toan ignorant and impatient 'owner'. So, ignorance of the adults, in generalwill also be the main cause of these animals never having a fair shot at asecond chance for life.The most important focus of this program is to teach the youngergeneration that if they have a litter of puppies or kitties, then theyimmediately become the biggest problem we have in solving thesituation of overpopulation. \"But, I found good homes for my litter\" isonly an excuse for ignorance. If you are part of a company who makeswidgets and you have an overstock of more than 8 million widgets thatcan't be sold and must be destroyed, the ONLY solution to preventingadditional and costly losses is to stop manufacturing widgets.When asked why so many normal, well-educated and loving families hada litter of puppies or kittens, two responses kept coming up. \"Oh, wePLAN to have our pets spayed or neutered, but we wanted to have acouple litters first.\" In other words, they just missed the whole point ofthe spay and neuter campaign. The second one is \"we just wanted toshow the children the miracle of birth\" Then the only fair thing to do inthis situation is to take them to the local dog pound to volunteer for acouple days as well. After all, you've just become one of the biggestcontributing factors to the problems we see at our animal facilities!!Overcrowding. BACKYARD BREEDERS are not educated, they are notproviding quality dogs and cats and they DON'T have you or your newpet's best interest at hand. See the page marked \"Backyard Breeders\".168

One thing that is very upsetting is when the school administrators feelthis is NOT a necessary or appropriate educational program for theirstudents. It is very disheartening to hear a superintendent or principaldownplay these programs that affect each and every student and facultymember in their reach. Excuses like \"All of our students already havedogs or cats\" to \"we don't feel that we need an outsider into our schoolsto tell us we need to learn about how to be responsible for our pets andtheir needs'.We are aware that most of their students have or will have pets of theirown. We just don't particularly wish for them to simply follow in thefootsteps of those adults or caregivers they learn live with. After all, it'stoday's adults - all of us, to a certain extent - who are creating thisproblem.Humane Education and Animal Information Recommended ReadingMiddle School StudentsArmstrong, William H., Sounder. HarperCollins Publishers, 1969Bernie Strommen, Judith, Champ Hobarth. Henry Holt and Company,1993Betancourt, Jeanne, Ten True Animal Rescues, Scholastic Inc., 1998Blount Jr., Roy, If Only You Knew How Much I Smell You, Bulfinch Press,2000Clutton-Brock, Juliet, CAT. Dorling Kindersley Limited, 1991Clutton-Brock, Juliet, DOG. Dorling Kindersley Limited, 1991Curtis, Patricia, All Wild Creatures Welcome. Lodestar Books, 1985 169

Danaher, Mary-Anne, Pet Projects For Your Cat. Time-Life Books, 1999Danaher, Mary-Anne, Pet Projects For Your Dog. Time-Life Books, 1999DiCamillo, Kate, Because of Winn-Dixie. Candlewick Press, 2000The Denver Museum of Natural History, Close To Home, Colorado?sUrban Wildlife. Roberts Rinehart Inc., 1990Gray, Samantha and Walker, Sarah, Birds. DK Publishing, 2002Harlow, Joan Hiatt, Star in the Storm. Aladdin Paperbacks, 2000Hinshaw Patent, Dorothy, Where the Wild Horses Roam. Clarion Books,1989The Humane Society of the United States, 52 Simple Things You Can Doto Help End Pet Overpopulation. 1993Jacobs, Shannon K., Healers of the Wild. Coyote Moon Press, 1998Kachanoff, Kim and Weisbord, Merrily, Dogs With Jobs. Pocket Books,2000Kennedy, Patricia Burlin, Bailey Bymyside. Howell Books, 2000Long, Claudia, Encyclopedia of Dogs. Crescent Books, 1991Madsen, Kate (Illustrator), Dog Days, A Scrapbook for My Best Friend.Gibbs Smith, 1999Masson, Jeffrey Moussaieff, Dogs Have the Strangest Friends. DuttonChildren?s Books, 2000.McNamee, Graham, Nothing Wrong With a Three-Legged Dog. DelacortePress, 2000Moorhead, Carol Ann, Colorado?s Backyard Wildlife. Roberts RinehartPublishers, 1992170

Morris, Willie, My Dog Skip. Vintage Books, 1995O'Neill, Amanda, Cats. Larousse Kingfisher Chambers Inc., 1998O'Neil, Amanda, Dogs. Larousse Kingfisher Chambers Inc., 1999Parker, Steve, How Nature Works. Random House, 1992Pasternak, Ceel & Thornburg, Linda, Cool Careers for Girls with Animals.Impact Publications, 1999Reynolds Naylor, Phyllis, Saving Shiloh. Simon and Schuster, 1997Reynolds Naylor, Phyllis, Shiloh. Atheneum Macmillan PublishingCompany, 1991Reynolds Naylor, Phyllis, Shiloh?s Season. Simon and Schuster, 1996Ryden, Hope, Out of the Wild, The Story of Domesticated Animals.Lodestar Books, 1995Saunders, Marshall, Beautiful Joe. Storytellers, Ink., 1990Simpson Smith, Elizabeth, A Service Dog Goes to School. Morrow JuniorBooks, 1988Stretch, Mary Jane, For the Love of Wild Things. StackPole Books, 1995Vincent, Gabrielle, a day, a dog. Front Street, 1982Wright, H. Norman, A Friend Like No Other. Harvest House Publishers,1999Young, Mary Taylor, On the Trail of Colorado Critters. Denver Museum ofNatural History,2000.Humane Education and Animal InformationRecommended ReadingAdults 171

Amory, Cleveland, Ranch of Dreams. Penguin Books, 1997Bailey, Gwen, Adopt the Perfect Dog, Octopus Publishing Group Limited,2000Becker, Marty, The Healing Power of Pets. Hyperion, 2002Binder, Jen, Dog Heroes ?Saving Lives and Protecting America, The LyonsPress, 2002Blount Jr., Roy, If Only You Knew How Much I Smell You, Bulfinch Press,2000Burghoff, Gary, The Wonderful Thing about Pets. Rodale Inc., 2000Canfield, Jack, Chicken Soup for the Pet Lover?s Soul. HealthCommunications Inc.,1998Chadwick, Douglas H & Sartore, Joel, The Company We Keep, America?sEndangeredSpecies. National Geographic Society, 1996Checchi, Mary Jane, Are You The Pet For Me?Clothier, Suzanne, Bones Would Rain from the Sky. Warner Books, 2002Clutton-Brock, Juliet, CAT. Dorling Kindersley Limited, 1991Clutton-Brock, Juliet, DOG. Dorling Kindersley Limited, 1991Cohen, Barbara and Taylor, Louise, Dogs and Their Women. Little Brown& Co., 1989Cohen, Barbara and Taylor, Louise, Women?s Best Friend. Little Brown &Co., 1996Congalton, David and Alexander, Charlotte, When Your Pet Outlives You.NewSage Press, 2002172

Danaher, Mary-Anne, Pet Projects For Your Cat. Time-Life Books, 1999Danaher, Mary-Anne, Pet Projects For Your Dog. Time-Life Books, 1999Esordi, Renee Lamm, You Have A Visitor, Observations on Pet Visitationand Therapy. Blue Lamm Publishing, 2000Fook, Jan and Klein, Renate, A Girl?s Best Friend, The Meaning of Dogs inWomen?s Lives. Spinifex Press Pty Ltd, 2001.Gray, Samantha and Walker, Sarah, Birds. DK Publishing, 2002Hess, Elizabeth, Lost and Found. Harcourt Brace and Company, 1998Hodge, Guy R., Pocket Guide to the Humane Control of Wildlife in Cities& Towns. The Humane Society of the United States, 1990Hoyt, John A., Animals in Peril. Avery Publishing Group, 1994Jacobs, Shannon K., Healers of the Wild. Coyote Moon Press, 1998Kachanoff, Kim and Weisbord, Merrily, Dogs With Jobs. Pocket Books,2000Kennedy, Patricia Burlin, Bailey Bymyside. Howell Books, 2000Madsen, Kate (Illustrator), Dog Days, A Scrapbook for My Best Friend.Gibbs Smith, 1999Masson, Jeffrey Moussaieff, Dogs Have the Strangest Friends. DuttonChildren?s Books, 2000.McElroy, Susan, Animals as Guides for the Soul. The Ballantine PublishingGroup, 1998McElroy, Susan, Animals as Teachers and Healers. Ballantine Books, 1996McElroy, Susan, Heart in the Wild. Ballantine Books, 2002Melson, Gail F., Why the Wild Things Are: Animals in the Lives of 173

Children. Harvard University Press, 2001Moussaieff Masson, Jeffrey, Dogs Never Lie About Love. CrownPublishers, Inc., 1997Moussaieff Masson, Jeffrey, When Elephants Weep. Dell Publishing,1995O?Neill, Amanda, Cats. Larousse Kingfisher Chambers Inc., 1998O?Neil, Amanda, Dogs. Larousse Kingfisher Chambers Inc., 1999Owens, Delia and Mark, The Eye of the Elephant. Houghton Mifflin,Company, 1992Putney, Captain William W., Always Faithful, A Memoir of the MarineDogs of WWII. The Free Press, 2001Rosen, Michael J. (editor), Dog People, What We Love About Our Dogs.Artisan, 1995Ryden, Hope, Out of the Wild, The Story of Domesticated Animals.Lodestar Books, 1995Schoen, Allen M., Kindred Spirits. Broadway Books, 2001Sichel, Elaine (edited by), Circles of Compassion. Voice and VisionPublishing, 1995Singer, Peter, Animal Liberation, Avon Books, 1991Steiger, Brad & Sherry Hansen, Animal Miracles. Adams MediaCorporation, 1999Stevens, Karen Lee, All For Animals, Tips and Inspiration for Living a MoreCompassionate Life. Fithian Press, 2001Vincent, Gabrielle, a day, a dog. Front Street, 1982174

Wright, H. Norman, A Friend Like No Other. Harvest House Publishers,1999Young, Mary Taylor, On the Trail of Colorado Critters. Denver Museum ofNatural History, 2000. 175

The 'Non musical Version' of OPUS ONEAnd the Problems It HoldsPolitics, agendas, egos and all the things the animal protectionmovement is riddled with. all we need is some unity and intellect.divisiveness is killing our efforts, not to mention all the lives lost. thetime has come.OK. We hope to show that individual as you may be, you are part of asociety that has a HUGE problem. This problem of overpopulation takesevery person to realize this so we are all singing the same song - noexceptions!OK, We have 3,000 people in this conference hall - each to speak abouttheir general views on animal care and their level of responsibility tocorrect the problems that plague our society. NO POLITICS. NO EGOS.NO APATHY.As the microphones are turned on, each one of the 3,000 people beginssinging their own song SIMULTANEOUSLY with no regard for any othersong. Some sing of 'responsible breeding', some sing of ''the otherperson's lack of responsibility' some sing of mandatory spay andneutering' some sing of killing dogs as the only way while others seemany options to the same.The sounds are deafening and just not at all pleasant - most importantlynone are even remotely distinguishable. But the most obvious are thelikes of those who claim \"I'm only one person and can have litters thatwon't make a difference at all.\" (these are the most uninformed andproblematic of all)176

Now, lets' take the same 3,000 people in the same hall an hour later.When someone steps to the front and tries to organize some unity, theyall began to approach and listen. We'll make the animal rightspeople baritones, the animal welfare people sopranos and animalprotection people altos and anyone else who is just there to be goodanimal people the basses.Now, for only one chorus of one little song, we all sing together. Itmay not be the Mormon choir, but is so much more beautiful ANDLEGIBLE than what was done before.Shortly thereafter, people of all walks of life begin to talk about howmuch better it was when everyone at least tried to get along and singthe same song - even if for only one chorus. They now realize that unityis important for most all projects - in order to send a clearer messageand well as accomplish better results. The public now 'gets it' and themedia can finally print a good solid outline of what we all agree needsto be done. We CAN convince those who think ''But I'm only oneperson\" or those who feel ''their way is the only real way'' just howmuch they really do matter. Remember, we can never expect to winthe game unless all the team members play by the same rules.Politics, egos nor apathy have a place in animal protection, animalwelfare or animal rights movement. We should ALL be ashamed ofourselves for all the animals who lost their lives this year that MAYHAVE been saved had we been more adult about our efforts. We onlyneed to convince our society that the results of each persons effortshave far reaching consequences for everyone. THIS IS NOT ROCKETSCIENCE!!Politics are responsible for this report card.** In 20 years, Americans have spent $1billiion annually on communitybased animal control efforts = $20 Billion** In 20 years Americans have spent $1Billion annually on donations to 177

their favorite national or local org dedicated to the same. + $20 billion** In 20 years 3,000 non profit orgs dedicated to helping animals havelogged an absolute minimum of 25 billion man hours.Our report card after 20 years? A lousy 15% reduction in unwanteddeaths. That's about a D- Thanks to our inability to convince so manythat the ''I'm only one person'' is no credible justification, but anignorant persons excuse for lousing things up.178

Pet Limit Laws1. SF SPCA2. GENERAL FINDINGS ACROSS AMERICA3. EXAMPLE: LOUISIANA JUDGE RULES PET LIMITSUNCONSTITUTIONAL4. MERRIT CLIFTON OF ANIIMAL PEOPLE SPEAKS5. ARGUMENTS YOU SHOULD BE AWARE OF BY L J. BARTY ATTORNEY6. ADDITIONAL LINKS AND RESOURCES===============================================Real Estate Investing Experts in commercial real estate, residential landdevelopment, and water procurement / distribution servicesPet Limit Laws:Showing why pet limit laws actually do more harm than good. 179

Closing the Door to Loving HomesProponents of pet limit laws argue that these ordinances are necessaryto stop animal neglect and abuse caused by people who take in moreanimals than they can adequately care for. Others claim that pet limitsare necessary to ensure sanitary conditions, or to maintain safe andpleasant neighborhoods.But are pet limit laws necessary to address abuse, neglect, unreasonablenoise, and lack of sanitation? Or, do they end up limiting the availabilityof loving homes and putting the lives of dogs and cats at risk?The San Francisco SPCA has considered the various claims made for strictpet limit laws and found little in the way of evidence, or common sense,to support them. What we found was that pet limit laws:• a e u e essa to p ote t the ell-being of people and animals• a e a it a a d i t usi e• pe alize espo si le pet o e s• fo e a a egi e s to stop p o idi g a e to ho eless a i als• put the li es of e e ell a ed-for animals at riskAt the same time that household limits discourage responsibleindividuals from providing a good home for more needy animals, they donot prevent an irresponsible one from acquiring unlimited animals.Unfortunately, caring can t be mandated, and a pet limit law will onlyend up punishing those who care.Millions of compassionate people provide dogs and cats with food, love,and shelter in their homes. Others may even put aside their own needsin order to care for beloved pets. Still others work tirelessly to feed,foster, and rehabilitate strays and unwanted abandoned animals, all attheir own expense.180

For every one of these caregivers, a pet limit law may exact a heavy toll.Each of these individuals may face citations, fines, other penalties, andeven confiscation of the animals they love.For these reasons, The San Francisco SPCA opposes legislation arbitrarilylimiting the number of pets a person can care for in their home.PET LIMIT LAWS ARE UNNECESSARYAre pet limit laws necessary to address abuse, neglect, unreasonablenoise, and lack of sanitation? Do pet limit laws protect the well-being ofpeople and animals?In our view, they do not. Whereas one individual may be able toresponsibly care for and nurture several animals, another may be unableto care for even one. And if problems arise, enforcement agenciesalready have ample ammunition at their disposal in terms of animalwelfare, health and property rights laws. In fact, unsanitary conditions,excessive noise, and interference with property are all unlawful invirtually every community—regardless of whether pets inhabit thepremises or not.PET LIMIT LAWS ARE INTRUSIVE AND ARBITRARYJust how are pet limits determined? In one community, the limit mightbe two pets. In others, four, five, eight, even twenty pets might beallowed. More often than not, the number is arbitrarily chosen.Enforcement is also arbitrary. In response to concerns about pet limitlaws, some communities have admitted that these ordinances will beenforced on a complaint basis, and pets which are maintained indoors ordo not raise the ire of neighbors will not generate enforcement. While itmay sound reassuring to some, this justification leaves the door wideopen for pet limit laws to be used as a weapon of retribution in neighbordisputes over concerns totally unrelated to pets.Laws that regulate a person s behavior inside their home should seek an 181

appropriate balance between the public's safety and welfare and theindividual's right to privacy.But while pet limit laws are highly intrusive, there is little, if any,corresponding benefit to public safety. What good is gained from anuncompromising prohibition against more than a limited number of pets,particularly if they are confined to an owner's property and create noproblems? Certainly, if neighbors are totally unaware of their presence,prohibiting pets does not in any way protect or maintain anyone's health,happiness or peace of mind. And what about multi-pet householdswhere neighbors do not mind or even enjoy the presence of theseanimals? In fact, there is no benefit gained from such a prohibition—noris there likely to be any enforcement.Should government pass laws that are not going to be enforced? Shouldcommunities outlaw behavior that does not impact neighbors orinterfere with the rights of others?Local governments have embraced the position that because responsiblemulti-pet households will not generate enforcement, these residentsneed not fear violating the law. In essence, local governments aremaking outlaws out of normally law-abiding citizens and telling them it isOK to break the law as long as they don t get caught!Passing laws that aren t enforced or are enforced sporadically is unfairand counterproductive. Few people are likely to comply with a pet limitlaw that isn t enforced. And those who voluntarily comply can probablybe counted among the most responsible pet owners in the community.There is little equity or sense in enacting a law that only ends uppenalizing the very people whose behavior is already exemplary.And such a view undermines our respect for the law.Needless to say, truly irresponsible pet owners will not be affected. If thelaw is not enforced, they are free to ignore it. If it is selectively enforcedagainst them, they are likely to surrender their animals, adding to thenumbers of dogs and cats killed, or abandon them, adding to some of the182

perceived problems the law was intended to solve.PET LIMIT EXEMPTION PERMITS ARE ALSO INTRUSIVE AND RISKYMany local jurisdictions enacting pet limit laws allow caretakers whohave more than the allowable number of pets to apply for an exemption permit. Therefore, these jurisdictions claim, responsiblepet owners need not fear the law. This view is shortsighted and wouldput multi-pet households in a Catch-22: choosing between not seeking apermit and violating the law on the one hand; or, applying for a permit,but risking exposure and confiscation of their pets if they are denied. Inother words, multi-pet households would fear applying for a permit,because to do so would expose them to penalties and possible loss oftheir beloved companions if denied a permit. And, in some jurisdictions,the exemption permit requires a kennel license—which cannot begranted in many neighborhoods due to zoning restrictions, no matterhow responsible the caretaker. In short, no exemption at all!PET LIMIT LAWS PUT THE LIVES OF ANIMALS AT RISKIt is not uncommon for rescued animals, particularly those who are hard-to-place by virtue of abandonment or abuse, to be in a fosterenvironment for long periods of time. Foster homes are in critically shortsupply in almost every community and it is common for such homes totemporarily house more animals than the average pet owner. Inaddition, there are countless Good Samaritans who feed and care forneighborhood strays and feral cats. Many pet limit laws define theseindividuals as owners for purposes of enforcing local ordinances. It isironic that groups and individuals rescuing and caring for homeless andunwanted dogs and cats (often atpersonal expense) should be targetedfor restrictive and punitive legislation.Of greater concern, caregivers and rescue groups may be forced to stopcaring for foster pets or homeless cats, because to do so would violatethe local pet limit law, resulting in needy animals being denied care, andalso leading to increased euthanasia at taxpayer expense. By contrast, 183

the maintenance of multi-pet households or the feeding of homelesscats—including sterilization, food, and veterinary care—is uniformlyaccomplished by private citizens at no cost to local government ortaxpayers.And pet owners targeted for enforcement may be forced to surrendertheir well cared for animals to local shelters where they, too, are at riskfor euthanasia and where taxpayers will have to foot the bill.PET LIMIT LAWS CLOSE THE DOOR TO LOVING HOMESA town council on the East Coast recently expanded its animal controllaw to include a provision making it illegal for any resident to own morethan five cats. One resident, a 69-year old woman who cared forhomeless neighborhood cats, was threatened with fines for violating thelaw despite the fact that she had sterilized and vaccinated all the cats.She was given two options by local authorities: turn away the cats whocame to her back door looking for food and water; or trap them and turnthem over to the animal control facility where they would likely be killed.For someone who very much loved animals, this was no choice at all.Distraught by the threat of legal sanctions,however, she was forced tocomply.And in a county neighboring our own, an elderly couple who cared forseveral sterilized and well-cared for cats at their private residence werethreatened with citations and fines because of a pet limit law thatallowed for the caring of only four cats. Under threat, the cats had to berelocated to avoid the risk that they would be impounded and killed atthe local animal control facility. The cats lost the only home andcaregivers they had ever known, and the couple lost their belovedcompanions.Just as pets already in homes may be threatened by limit laws, homelesspets awaiting the chance for a loving new home are also at risk aspotential adopters are discouraged from adopting a stray or visiting thelocal shelter and saving a life.184

Important Arguments you should know.By Lawrence J. Barty Attorney at LawFirst, a decision made by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, forexample, is only binding in Penn., because the decision is based uponPenn. Constitution and statutes. Constitutions and statutes in otherStates will never be identical, so at best this hypothetical Penn. decisionmight be used to persuade courts in another State to follow the sameapproach. Even if a Penn. Court bases a decision on the federalConstitution, that interpretation does not bind other States. Only adecision by the US Supreme Court can do that.Second, the substantive issue of property rights under the federal andState constitutions is indeed in flux to some degree. The current USSupreme Court has issued a series of decisions over the last several yearsthat, taken as a whole, have elevated the rights of property owners to alimited degree versus State power.This trend has typically shown up in cases examining zoning and otherland usage questions. It typically arises when a State imposes userestrictions that have the effect of making a person s property lessvaluable – for example, forbidding property owners in a certain areafrom draining swampy ground, etc. The Court has said that under someextreme circumstances, the restrictions could amount to constructively taking the property away from the owner – which could amount to aviolation of the Fifth Amendment s ban on taking property without dueprocess of law. In other words, if the local government adopted newrules that so restrict the potential use of your property that the propertythereby becomes significantly less valuable, perhaps that governmentwould owe you the difference in value.Please note that this legal development, which is far from set in 185

concrete, does NOT limit States powers to adopt use restrictions. Itsimply might make a particular use restriction too expensive to be worthadopting. Also, this theory would not apply to restrictions that werealready in place when you acquired the property.Rules prohibiting excessive barking, noise, smells, and other types ofnuisances are measured under a different approach. Every Statepossesses police powers that it can use to maintain peace, order andtranquility. I have not heard of rules of that type being overturned asunconstitutional. States have broad authority is this area of the law. Solong as a rule has at least some rational basis, a court must enforce it.The burden is on a citizen to show that a particular rule is arbitrary andcapricious, which historically has been very tough to accomplish.Bottom line is, they are all illegal and should you find yourself in thecross hairs of one, you should fight it. You should win if you do it right. JUST KILL THE DOGS( from LA Times Editorial Section )Throughout every city and state across the country, those whodemonstrate volunteerism and good citizenship are highly valued. Bysupplementing what would otherwise be the full responsibility of localgovernments, these individuals fill the gaps left by skeleton staff. Theywithstand undue pressure to do the impossible, and are threatened bydownsizing and insufficient funds needed to maintain quality services oreven properly execute mandate.The kill rate in most counties across the nation is embarrassingly highand is one of the worst examples we continue to set for our futuregenerations to come. These agencies, along with the county andmunicipal governing bodies, could and should view these volunteersand rescues as 'assistants' who help out for no pay or compensationwhatsoever.186

Instead, when a good citizen steps forward to save the lives of hundredsor even thousands of companion animals, including dogs and cats whowould otherwise become staggering statistics, he/she is met withincredible and very encumbering fees,regulations and rules, legalthreats and more.. This, while over 8 million adoptable pets are to bekilled each year in this country, and backyard breeders choose to have arecreational litter of kittens or puppies with almost no regulation,guidance or structure at all. Yet, they are the people who are clearly thecontributing factor in this problem. Again we see the \"without victims\"theory coming into play; in this case, animal control agencies wouldloose many jobs. This is mainly due to a seriously inadequateunderstanding by Americans as to the results of their actions.Animal control agencies that have a highly questionable record ofhumane performance and fail to 'market' their commodity as a normalbusiness would ,allow this to continue with no thought of anytomorrows. Poor business hours for adoptions and retrievals of lostpets, fall short in reminding their public of the pets who are adoptableon a widespread, regular basis, frequently unwilling to requiremandatory spay neuter to any pet going out the door. Most of theproblems stem from a lack of understanding within the community ofthe restrictions and requirements placed on the underpaid, overworkedand under educated animal control staff. It becomes a viciouscircle. But, it's all becoming much more clear recently. The 'lip service'we hear from everyone else is a cover up for their ignorance and refusalto be responsible caring citizens.Law enforcement agencies, large numbers of elected officials and asurprising majority of our citizens have no respect for the lives of theseinnocent animals or these things would clearly have been looked intoand dealt with accordingly. This also means they refuse to properlyacknowledge the proven impact that conditions and actions have onthe future generations of children who fall victim to having parents withlittle or no patience for the obvious. And the subsequent results areallowed to contaminate our future generations with the same 187

disrespect as many other like situations that were quickly outlawed andstrongly governed.We need to be smart. We need to change the way we view and teachthe world in a very different way. Not similar to what we've done for 60years, but differently - a way that works. We need to prove to thelegislators at all levels that even though animals don't vote or contributeto campaign re-elections, WE DO! And we should do it volume. Ask eachand every person running for office about their views and plans forimprovements, and hold them to it.So, when:- our congressmen and women, senators and assemblymen drag theirfeet and vote no on important animal legislation, - law enforcement continue to claim a lack of time and resourcesis their justification for not making appropriate arrests, - the judges are refusing to uphold current laws by offeringlighter sentencing and dismissing charges completely and - the local governing bodies are giving themselves up to 35% payincreases annually - all this, while cutting the animal control budgets,. they aresending a message that America hears.Until further notice, the general public and lawmakers are sending astrong message, and it is coming through loud and clear – JUST KILL THEDOGS!!Finally, this is info everyone who once respected the HSUS shouldknow.188

Shock and Awe!!!This article explains the truth.Humane Society of the United States2100 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20037,Despite the words \"humane society\" on its letterhead, the HumaneSociety of the United States (HSUS) is not affiliated with your localanimal shelter. Despite the omnipresent dogs and cats in its fundraisingmaterials, it's not an organization that runs spay/neuter programs ortakes in stray, neglected, and abused pets. And despite the commonimage of animal protection agencies as cash-strapped organizationsdedicated to animal welfare, HSUS has become the wealthiest animalrights organization on earth.HSUS is big, rich, and powerful, a \"humane society\" in name only. Thisorganization is literally surviving on the failures of the projects we havepaid them to solve over the past 25 years!!!! And while most localanimal shelters are under-funded and unsung, HSUS has accumulated$113 million in assets and built a recognizable brand by capitalizing onthe confusion its very name provokes. This misdirection results in anirony of which most animal lovers are unaware: HSUS raises enoughmoney to finance animal shelters in every single state, with money tospare, yet it doesn't operate a single one anywhere.Instead, HSUS spends millions on programs that seek to economicallycripple meat and dairy producers; eliminate the use of animals inbiomedical research labs; phase out pet breeding, zoos, and circusanimal acts; and demonize hunters as crazed lunatics. HSUS spends $2million each year on travel expenses alone, just keeping its multi-national agenda going. The HSUS spends almost $35 Million annually onprinting!! Not printing that can help the animals such as humaneeducation materials, but printed materials geared to raise more fundsfor the organization's bottomless pit. They spend millions onadvertising: not advertising that would help the public do a better job 189

to help the animals, but again, to raise more money while praising theirnon existent humane activities.HSUS president Wayne Pacelle described some of his goals in 2004 forThe Washington Post: \"We will see the end of wild animals in circus acts. [and we're] phasing out animals used in research. Hunting? I think youwill see a steady decline in numbers.\" More recently, in a June 2005interview, Pacelle told Satya magazine that HSUS is working on \"a guideto vegetarian eating, to really make the case for it.\" A strict veganhimself, Pacelle added: \"Reducing meat consumption can be atremendous benefit to animals.\"Shortly after Pacelle joined HSUS in 1994, he told Animal People (aninside-the-movement watchdog newspaper) that his goal was to build\"a National Rifle Association of the animal rights movement.\" And now,as the organization's leader, he's in a position to back up his rhetoricwith action. In 2005 Pacelle announced the formation of a new \"AnimalProtection Litigation Section\" within HSUS, dedicated to \"the process ofresearching, preparing, and prosecuting animal protection lawsuits instate and federal court.\"HSUS's current goals have little to do with animal shelters. The grouphas taken aim at the traditional morning meal of bacon and eggs with atasteless \"Breakfast of Cruelty\" campaign. Its newspaper op-edsdemand that consumers \"help make this a more humane world [by]reducing our consumption of meat and egg products.\" Since itsinception, HSUS has tried to limit the choices of American consumers,opposing dog breeding, conventional livestock and poultry farming,rodeos, circuses, horse racing, marine aquariums, and fur trapping.A True Multinational CorporationHSUS is a multinational conglomerate with ten regional offices in theUnited States and a special Hollywood Office that promotes andmonitors the media's coverage of animal-rights issues. It includes a hugeweb of organizations, affiliates, and subsidiaries. Some are nonprofit,190

tax exempt \"charities,\" while others are for-profit taxable corporations,which don't have to divulge anything about their financial dealings.This unusually complex structure means that HSUS can hide expenseswhere the public would never think to look. For instance, one HSUS-affiliated organization called the HSUS Wildlife Land Trust collected$21.1 million between 1998 and 2003. During the same period, it spent$15.7 million on fundraising expenses, most of which directly benefitedHSUS. This arrangement allowed HSUS to bury millions in direct-mailand other fundraising costs in its affiliate's budget, giving the public (andcharity watchdog groups) the false impression that its own fundraisingcosts were relatively low.HSUS personnel control the board of the British-based World Society forthe Protection of Animals (WSPA), which sells animal-rights-relatedproducts and investment/executor services worldwide. HSUS controlsthe profits.Until 1995 HSUS also controlled the Humane Society of Canada (HSC),which HSUS president Paul Irwin had founded four years earlier. ButIrwin, who claimed to live in Canada when he set up HSC, turned out tobe ineligible to run a Canadian charity (He actually lived in Maryland).Irwin's Canadian passport was ultimately revoked and he was replacedas HSC's executive director.The new leader later hauled HSUS into court to answer charges thatIrwin had transferred over $1 million to HSUS from the Canadian group.HSUS claimed it was to pay for HSC's fundraising, but didn't provide thegroup with the required documentation to back up the expenses. InJanuary 1997 a Canadian judge ordered HSUS to return the money,writing: \"I cannot imagine a more glaring conflict of interest or a moreegregious breach of fiduciary duty. It demonstrates an overweeningarrogance of a type seldom seen.\"From Animal Welfare to Animal RightsThere is an enormous difference between animal \"welfare\" 191

organizations, which work for the humane treatment of animals, andanimal \"rights\" organizations, which aim to completely end the use andownership of animals. The former have been around for centuries; thelatter emerged in the 1980s, with the rise of the radical People for theEthical Treatment of Animals (PETA).The Humane Society of the United States began as an animal welfareorganization. Originally called the National Humane Society, it wasestablished in 1954 as a spin-off of the American Humane Association(AHA). Its founders wanted a slightly more radical group -- the AHA didnot oppose sport hunting or the use of shelter animals for biomedicalresearch.In 1980, HSUS officially began to change its focus from animal welfare toanimal rights. After a vote was taken at the group's San Francisconational conference, it was formally resolved that HSUS would \"pursueon all fronts . the clear articulation and establishment of the rights of allanimals . within the full range of American life and culture.\"In Animal Rights and Human Obligations, the published proceedings ofthis conference, HSUS stated unequivocally that \"there is no rationalbasis for maintaining a moral distinction between the treatment ofhumans and other animals.\" It's no surprise, then, that a 2003 HSUSfundraising mailer boasted that the group has been working toward\"putting an end to killing animals for nearly half a century.\"In 1986 John McArdle, then HSUS's Director of Laboratory AnimalWelfare, told Washingtonian magazine that HSUS was \"definitelyshifting in the direction of animal rights faster than anyone wouldrealize from our literature.\"The group completed its animal-rights transformation during the 1990s,changing its personnel in the process. HSUS assimilated dozens ofstaffers from PETA and other animal-rights groups, even employing John\"J.P.\" Goodwin, a former Animal Liberation Front member andspokesman with a lengthy arrest record and a history of promoting192

arson to accomplish animal liberation.The change brought more money and media attention. Hoyt explainedthe shift in 1991, telling National Journal, \"PETA successfully stole thespotlight . Groups like ours that have plugged along with a larger staff, alarger constituency . have been ignored.\" Hoyt agreed that PETA's neteffect within the animal-rights movement was to spur more moderategroups to take tougher stances in order to attract donations from thepublic. \"Maybe.\" Hoyt mused, \"the time has come to say, 'Since wehaven't been successful in getting half a loaf, let's go for the wholething.'\"HSUS leaders have even expressed their desire to put an end to thelifesaving biomedical research that requires the use of animals. As earlyas 1988 the group's mailings demanded that the U.S. government\"eliminate altogether the use of animals as research subjects.\" In 1986Washingtonian asked then-HSUS Vice-President for Laboratory AnimalsJohn McArdle about his opinion that brain-dead humans should besubstituted for animals in medical research. \"It may take people a whileto get used to the idea,\" McArdle said, \"but once they do the savings inanimal lives will be substantial.\"McArdle realized then what HSUS understands today -- that anuncompromising, vegetarian-only, anti-medical-progress philosophy haslimited appeal. At the 1984 HSUS convention, he gave his group'smembers specific instructions on how to frame the issue mosteffectively. \"Avoid the words 'animal rights' and 'antivivisection',\"McArdle said. \"They are too strange for the public. Never appear to beopposed to animal research. Claim that your only concern is the sourceof animals.\"In a 1993 letter published by the American Society for Microbiology, Dr.Patrick Cleveland of the University of California San Diego spelled out 193

HSUS's place in the animal-rights pantheon. \"What separates the HSUSfrom other animal rights groups,\" Cleveland wrote, \"is not theirphilosophy of animal rights and goal of abolishing the use of animals inresearch, but the tactics and timetable for that abolition.\" Clevelandlikened it to the difference between a mugger and a con man. \"Theyeach will rob you - they use different tactics, have different timetables,but the result is the same. The con man may even criticize the muggerfor using confrontational tactics and giving all thieves a bad name, butyour money is still taken.\"Targeting Meat and DairyIn 2004 HSUS promoted long-time vice president Wayne Pacelle to theposition of President. Along with Pacelle's passionate style and hisexperience navigating the halls of Congress, HSUS got its first strictlyvegan leader.One of Pacelle's first acts as HSUS's new chief executive was to send amemo to all HSUS staffers articulating his vision for the future. HSUS'snew \"campaigns section,\" Pacelle wrote, \"will focus on farm animals.\"For Americans accustomed to eating meat, eggs, and dairy foods, thethought of an animal rights group with a budget three times the size ofPETA's targeting their food choices should be unsettling. And Pacelle hashired other high-profile, unapologetic meat and dairy \"abolitionists\"since taking over.194

In 2005, former Compassion Over Killing (COK) president Miyun Parkjoined HSUS as a staffer in its new \"farm animals and sustainableagriculture department.\" Around the same time, HSUS hired COK'sother co-founder, Paul Shapiro, as manager of its derogatorily named\"Factory Farming Campaign.\" COK's former general counsel CarterDillard shortly afterward, as did vegan doctor and mad-cow-diseasescaremonger Michael Greger. Like Pacelle, these new HSUS hires are allself-described vegans. Their arrival in the world's richest animal-rightsgroup signals that HSUS is giving anti-meat campaigns a prominentplace.In October, just a few months before he became an HSUS staffer,Shapiro told the 2004 National Student Animal Rights Conference that\"nothing is more important than promoting veganism.\" And Shapironoted during an August 2004 animal-rights seminar (hosted by UnitedPoultry Concerns) that after just 10 weeks at the helm, Pacelle had\"already implemented a 'no animal products in the office' policy ... Youknow, they're going to have actual farmed-animal campaigns now,where they're going to be trying to legislate against gestation crates andall this stuff.\"Americans who enjoy meat, cheese, eggs, and milk may soon come toregard HSUS as a new PETA, with an even broader reach. Shortly aftertaking office, Pacelle announced a merger with the $20 million Fund ForAnimals. The combined group estimated its 2005 budget at \"over $95million\" and also announced the formation of a new \"politicalorganization,\" which will \"allow for a more substantial investment ofresources in political and lobbying activities.\"Domestic DeceptionIt takes tens of millions of dollars to run campaigns against so manydomestic targets, and HSUS consistently misleads Americans with itsfundraising efforts by hinting that it's a \"humane society\" in the moreconventional sense of the term. Buried deep within HSUS's website is adisclaimer noting that the group \"is not affiliated with, nor is it a parent 195

organization for, local humane societies, animal shelters, or animal careand control agencies. These are independent organizations . HSUS doesnot operate or have direct control over any animal shelter.\"For instance, a 2001 member recruitment mailing called those on theHSUS mailing list \"true pet lovers,\" referring to unspecified work onbehalf of \"dogs, puppies, cats, [and] kittens.\" Another recruitmentmailing from that year included \"Thank You,\" \"Happy Birthday,\" and\"Get Well Soon\" greeting cards featuring pets such as dogs, cats, andfish. The business reply envelope lists \"7 Steps to a Happier Pet.\"A 2003 recruitment mailing also included those \"Steps,\" as well as freeaddress labels with pastel pictures of dogs and cats. The fundraisingletter subtly substituted the animal-rights term \"companion animals\"for \"pets.\"\"Our mission is to encourage adoption in your neighborhood andthroughout the country,\" reads another HSUS fundraising appeal. \"Eventhough local shelters are trying their best to save lives, they are simplyoverwhelmed\" That last sentence, at least, is true. But don't count onthe multi-million-dollar conglomerate HSUS to do anything about it.HSUS doesn't operate a single animal shelter and has no hands-oncontact with stray or surplus animals.In 1995 the Washington (DC) Humane Society almost closed its animalshelter due to a budget shortfall. HSUS, which is also based inWashington, DC, ultimately withdrew an offer to build and operate a DCshelter, at its own expense, to serve as a national model.In exchange for running the shelter, HSUS wanted three to five acres ofcity land and tax-exempt status for all its real estate holdings in theDistrict of Columbia. The DC government offered a long-term lease, butthat wasn't good enough. HSUS refused to proceed unless it would\"own absolutely\" the land. The district declined, and what might havebecome the only HSUS-funded animal shelter never materialized.196

So what does HSUS do with the millions it raises using the furry faces ofFido and Fluffy? In 2002, the multi-million-dollar conglomerate gave lessthan $150,000 to hands-on humane societies and animal shelters.Worse, HSUS employees have complained to the press that theirorganization wastes its resources on fundraising expenses and highsalaries for its chief executives. Robert Baker, an HSUS consultant andformer chief investigator, told U.S. News & World Report: \"The HumaneSociety should be worried about protecting animals from cruelty. It'snot doing that. The place is all about power and money.\"Influencing CommunitiesHSUS doesn't save flesh-and-blood animals the way local \"humanesocieties\" do, but it does lobby heavily to change the laws ofcommunities across the country. \"HSUS was the financial clout thatrammed Initiative 713, the anti-trapping measure, down our throats,\"reports Rich Landers of the Spokane (WA) Spokesman-Review. \"Ipleaded [with Wayne Pacelle, then HSUS's government affairs VP] atleast four times for examples of HSUS commitment in Washington[state] other than introducing costly anti-hunting and anti-wildlifemanagement initiatives. He had no immediate answer but promised tosend me the list of good things HSUS does in this state. That was sixmonths ago, and I presume Pacelle is still searching.\"Like other national animal-rights groups, HSUS has learned that pouringhuge sums of money into ballot initiative campaigns can give it resultsnormal public relations and lobbying work never could. Along with otherheavy hitters like the Fund for Animals and Farm Sanctuary, HSUSscored a big victory in Florida in 2002 when a ballot initiative passedthat gave constitutional rights to pregnant pigs. HSUS donated at least$50,000 to the Florida PAC that managed the campaign.Florida farmers were banned from using \"gestation crates,\" usuallynecessary to keep sows healthy during pregnancy and to prevent themfrom accidentally rolling over and crushing their newborn piglets. After 197

this amendment passed, raising pigs became economicallyunsustainable, and farmers were forced to slaughter their animalsrather than comply with the costly new constitutional requirements.Today, Florida is considering a taxpayer-funded bailout of its few porkfarmers.Animal-rights leaders plan to extend their \"pregnant pigs\" win to otherstates, and have organized similar campaigns in California and NewJersey. HSUS's four-year Iowa campaign, misleadingly called\"Care4Iowa,\" has a stated goal of promoting the so-called \"humane\"methods of livestock production which universally result in greater costsfor farmers and higher prices for consumers.And HSUS won't stop at initiatives aimed at livestock farmers andtrappers. At the 1996 HSUS annual meeting, Wayne Pacelle announcedthat the ballot initiative would be used for all manner of legislation inthe future, including \"companion animal issues and laboratory animalissues.\" Pacelle has personally been involved in at least 22 suchcampaigns, 17 of which HSUS scored as victories. These operations, hesaid, \"pay dividends and serve as a training ground for activists.\"HSUS is also a part of the Keep Antibiotics Working (KAW) coalition, aslick Washington-based PR campaign to end the \"inappropriate\" use ofantibiotics in livestock animals. This coalition, comprised largely ofscience-deprived environmental groups, claims to worry deeply aboutantibiotic-resistant bacteria found in people. KAW doesn't, however,devote any attention to the rampant over-prescription of the drugs tohumans.Why doesn't HSUS want animals to receive disease-preventingantibiotics? Raising livestock without antibiotics is much more difficultand costly, and the resulting meat, eggs, and dairy are considerablymore expensive. It's possible that the KAW coalition's goals would giveAmericans an economic incentive to lean toward vegetarianism; HSUSwould, of course, not object.198

School Activism 101Despite a radical animal-rights agenda similar to PETA's, the HumaneSociety of the United States has gained entry to countless segments ofpolite society. One of the more worrisome consequences of this is thegroup's relatively unfettered access to U.S. schools.Through its National Association for Humane and EnvironmentalEducation, as well as a series of animal-rights-oriented publications,HSUS spreads animal-rights propaganda to schoolchildren as young asfive. THEY HAVE NOBODY ACTUALLY TEACHING THE STUDENTS HOWTO IMPROVE THE COMPANION ANIMAL PROBLEMS OF ABUSE ANDOVERPOPULATION - THE LARGEST SINGLE CAUSE FOR DONATIONS SENTTO THEM!!!!One package, titled People and Animals -- A Humane Education Guide,suggests films and books for teachers to present to their students. Inthese recommended teaching tools, sport hunters are called \"selectiveexterminators\" and \"drunken slobs\" who participate in a \"blood sport\"and a \"war on wildlife\" with \"maniacal attitudes toward killing.\" Anotherteachers' guide contains anti-circus stories in which animals arerepeatedly depicted as overworked and abused.At the same time, HSUS hypocritically complains that it is inappropriatefor the federal government to distribute educational materials aboutthe need for laboratory research animals, complaining: \"These materialsinappropriately target young people, who do not possess the cognitiveability to make meaningful decisions regarding highly controversial andcomplex issues.\"The \"Humane\" WebIn addition to the HSUS flagship offices in Maryland and DC, theorganization's global network includes control over the following legalcorporations (this list is evolving as new information becomesavailable): 199

Nonprofit affiliates:a.. Alice Morgan Wright-Edith Goode Fund (DC);b.. Alternative Congress Trust (DC);c.. Animal Channel (DC);d.. Association Humanataria De Costa Rica;e.. Center for the Respect of Life and Environment (DC);f.. Charlotte and William Parks Foundation for Animal Welfare (DC);g.. Conservation Endowment Fund (see ICEC) (CA);h.. Earth Restoration Corps. (DC);i.. Earthkind Inc. (DC);j.. Earthkind International Inc. (DC);k.. Earthkind USA (DC);l.. Earthkind USA (MT);m.. Earthkind UK [ also affiliated with the International Fund for AnimalWelfare];n.. Earthvoice (DC);o.. Earthvoice International (DC);p.. Eating with a Conscience Campaign (DC);q.. HSUS Hollywood Office (formerly The Ark Trust Inc.) (CA);r.. Humane Society International (DC), which also operatesa.. the International Center for Earth Concerns (ICEC) in Ojai, California,b.. the Center for Earth Concerns in Costa Rica, and200