ASPCA

Status
Not open for further replies.

MRH

Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
179
Location
Colorado Springs, CO
Both Fox News and CNN (and maybe others) are running ads for the ASPCA. While the organization works to prevent cruelty to domestic animals, they are also Totally Anti-Hunting. A portion of all the donations they collect goes toward their efforts to stop all hunting. Might want to let those networks know you are not pleased and may stop watching their shows.

Mike
 
Mike, I am aware of the anti-gun activity of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). However, I have not seen indications of such activity by the ASPCA. Just to be sure we are not confusing the two organizations, can you please point to news or PR activities on ASPCA that demonstrate their anti-gun or anti-hunting work? Given the similarity of purpose of the two groups, it woud be easy to confuse them.

Thanks.
 
I think he's confusing the two. Common mistake when people don't recognize the difference.
 
ASPCA is anti-hunting, but not as militantly so as HSUS. From their own website:


Hunting

The ASPCA is opposed to hunting animals for sport, even if the animals killed in this way are subsequently consumed. The ASPCA does recognize that wildlife management may be necessary in situations where animal and human interests collide, but urges that management strategies be nonlethal wherever possible and never include avoidable suffering or distress.

http://www.aspca.org/about-us/aspca-policy-and-position-statements/hunting

They at least recognize that it might be necessary for wildlife management, but prefer nonlethal means. Maybe that means that we can hunt deer with bean-bag rounds. :p I can't imagine trapping or tranquilizing a thousand or so deer every hear to move them out of an overpopulated area instead of having hunters voluntarily take care of the problem.

Matt
 
The ASPCA along with the HSUS were very active in preventing Michigan from having a permanent dove season. They also put a lot of money into trying to de-rail other Michigan pro-hunting legislation.
 
Might want to let those networks know you are not pleased and may stop watching their shows.

This is naïve and unwarranted, and won’t change the organizations’ policies.
 
I was made aware of both groups stance on hunting years ago by ex-girlfriends. They just didn't understand why my .22 needed to go hiking on a regular basis....

"We should consider donating directly to our local animal shelters."

What Dog Soldier said is best. Drop off a 50# bag of dog food at the local shelter. You'll know it goes to the right place that way.
 
Only 4% of their 129, Million dollar budget goes to help pets and local shelters. They spend 52 Million on these expensive promotions and TV ads. The President is paid $614,000 PY. We should consider donating directly to our local animal shelters. :thumbup:

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/local-6-investigates-donations-to-national-animal-charities
Oh my goodness. I have donated to them from time to time when they send an email about a soldier who can't afford to bring his or her dog home, do you know another organization that helps with that?
 
Oh my goodness. I have donated to them from time to time when they send an email about a soldier who can't afford to bring his or her dog home, do you know another organization that helps with that?
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=organizations+to+help+former+military+and+police+dogs
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=organizations+to+help+former+military+and+police+dogs
All kinds of 'em out there -- see if my link to a Google page works.

When I'm looking for organizations to donate to, I look for those that spend 20% or less for administrative costs and staff salaries (ASPCA's president making a salary of more than half a million is absurd) -- most of the donations should actually go to the destination groups that are housing, feeding and placing the animals.
 
Only 4% of their 129, Million dollar budget goes to help pets and local shelters. They spend 52 Million on these expensive promotions and TV ads. The President is paid $614,000 PY. We should consider donating directly to our local animal shelters. :thumbup:

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/local-6-investigates-donations-to-national-animal-charities

+1

If you want to support "pets" donate to your local shelters.....there are also a few good people on line that do great work....Vet Ranch for one....there is another in AZ but the name escapes me at the moment. Any "national"...and I will use that word ANY the money is not going to go where you want it to....in helping the dogs, cats, rabbits....pets. Put your money to good work.....and you don't have to give money....they always need little things....paper towels,food, toys.....support those shelters....and no kill shelters....many of the no kill shelters work with animal control agencies and will try to keep as many pets from being put down as possible.
 
fpg, I agree with you. These big commercial Animal Orgs. spend millions in wages and advertising. The money needed for helping the animals is being used for other things.
 
Charity in this country is something we need to check out carefully before donating. Look at the 990 and see where the money goes. The thing to look for is "grants." Charity ABC takes your dollar, keeps 15 cents for administration, and gives the rest to Charity XYZ as a "grant." Charity XYZ takes another 15 cents for administration, and gives the rest to Charity PDQ, and so on. It's like a lump of ice passing from one red-hot hand to another -- by the time it gets to the ultimate recipient, there's nothing left but a wisp of steam.
 
Ok, there's been some generally useful information but we're not getting any closer to a plan related to the 2A.

What's the plan of action on behalf of the 2A or RKBA? Remember we're supposed to put forth a plan for coordinated action with specific objectives.

What are the points of contact for the news outlets that we need to contact? What specifically is it we want to do with that information? How are we going to get a lot of people to do the same in a short period of time to have an impact?

Right now we have some information that the ASPCA is begging for money, but is also opposed to the established scientific wildlife management practice of managed hunting. Managed hunting pays for most state wildlife and wildlands recreational programs. Hunters are and have been avowed supporters of wilderness, environmental and wildlife stewardship paying for it not only with the general taxes like every other person sitting on a couch watching these commercials, but with the fees they pay for hunting and fishing (a far more focused and dedicated support). While ASPCA tells the public they need money to protect pets very little of it gets to the ground level where state and local operations actually care for pets and instead the money stays at the executive level far too much. Like their efforts to trick concerned citizens into paying their fat salaries instead of doing actual good these bureaucracies now are working to trick the public into supporting the one currently effective way to keep wildlife herds and flocks healthy though managed hunting.

How's that?
 
Last edited:
old lady new shooter wrote:
I have donated to them from time to time when they send an email about a soldier who can't afford to bring his or her dog home, do you know another organization that helps with that?

The USO.
 
Vern Humprhries wrote:
Charity in this country is something we need to check out carefully before donating. Look at the 990 and see where the money goes.

Vern is correct that grants made to other charities may be part of a "cascade" effect in which each succeeding charity spends a part of the contribution on administraive and overhead expenses and not on relief of the suffering they were chartered to address. But, such "cadcades" are limited in scope and effect and are not the major concern with how charities spend contributions.

When reading a Form 990, what you want to look at is the spending on "Programs" and understand that "Program" spending can include money spent on fundraising. Remember the recent revelations about Wounded Warrior Project spending thousands of dollars just to settle the bar tab of its officers at luxury reorts. If you are thinkiing about contributing to a charity, take the time to contact it and ask them pointed questions about how much of their money is actually spent on advertising, raising funds, donor "conferences" at luxury hotels and paying for staffers' drinking problems as oppsoed to actually alleviating the suffering you are paying them to do on your behalf. If they can't give you good answers, look elsewhere.
 
It`s a double edge sword for me. On the one hand they really look out for animals. The other, as noted, anti gun.
I`m on the fence with this one.
 
It`s a double edge sword for me. On the one hand they really look out for animals. The other, as noted, anti gun.
I`m on the fence with this one.

That is what we are getting at....they really do not look out for animals....unless you are talking about their management.
 
Ok, there's been some generally useful information but we're not getting any closer to a plan related to the 2A.

What's the plan of action on behalf of the 2A or RKBA? Remember we're supposed to put forth a plan for coordinated action with specific objectives.

What are the points of contact for the news outlets that we need to contact? What specifically is it we want to do with that information? How are we going to get a lot of people to do the same in a short period of time to have an impact?

Right now we have some information that the ASPCA is begging for money, but is also opposed to the established scientific wildlife management practice of managed hunting. Managed hunting pays for most state wildlife and wildlands recreational programs. Hunters are and have been avowed supporters of wilderness, environmental and wildlife stewardship paying for it not only with the general taxes like every other person sitting on a couch watching these commercials, but with the fees they pay for hunting and fishing (a far more focused and dedicated support). While ASPCA tells the public they need money to protect pets very little of it gets to the ground level where state and local operations actually care for pets and instead the money stays at the executive level far too much. Like their efforts to trick concerned citizens into paying their fat salaries instead of doing actual good these bureaucracies now are working to trick the public into supporting the one currently effective way to keep wildlife herds and flocks healthy though managed hunting.

How's that?
This past Christmas season, the LGS sponsored a raffle for an AR-15. The cost of a ticket was a $5.00 toy to be contributed to "Toys for Tots". From what I understand, they pulled in a pretty good haul. How about something like this to get locals to contribute to their local animal shelter? Do you think if you can get people accustomed to donating that way for a particular cause, they will soon stop giving to organizations like ASPCA?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top