BEEF Daily

How Charity Navigator Knocked HSUS Down A Peg Or Two

RSS

The Humane Society of the United States is in hot water with Charity Navigator, losing its charity rating and getting put on “donor advisory” status.

It took several years and many complaints, but the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is finally getting called out for being a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Maybe it’s the fact the organization spends a mere 1% of its $100+ million annual budget on animal shelters, or perhaps it was the $15.75 million settlement following a racketeering and bribery lawsuit. Whatever the catalyst for this change was, I’m pleased to see that not only did Charity Navigator drop HSUS’ four-star charity ranking to a three, but now they have dropped HSUS’ rating altogether, putting the organization on a donor advisory status.

It’s about time. I’ve written about HSUS many times over the years, and it’s quite clear that the organization is no friend to animal agriculture. Fortunately for us, the organization is losing its squeaky clean reputation, and hopefully consumer donations will slow down as the word spreads.

 

Subscribe now to Cow-Calf Weekly to get the latest industry research and information in your inbox every Friday!


AwesomeOcean.com has a beef with HSUS for the hidden role it played in the inflammatory documentary, “Black Fish,” and recently reported on HSUS’ sins in an article entitled, “Breaking: HSUS Loses Charity Rating.” Here is an excerpt from that article:

Aside from the circus lawsuit, it has come to light that the HSUS diligently moved money to several funds in the Cayman Islands, calling them ‘investments.’ We're pretty sure that moving $26 million to offshore accounts in the Cayman Islands is called stashing money. And it's shady as hell.

“The HSUS has essentially operated under the same donation-guise as PETA, where a large portion of their funding comes from people who are clueless about their real agenda. The time has come for American citizens to open their eyes and stop allowing the HSUS to misuse their hard-earned money.

“In fact, PETA and the HSUS are driving the anti-captivity movement not for the welfare of animals, but to make money for themselves. They use and deceive people to promote corrupt agendas, and the Cayman Island accounts confirm just how rotten this organization has become.

“So if you care about puppies and kittens, as opposed to lobbyists and corrupt organizations, send your donations to local pet shelters instead of the HSUS. The animals will thank you for it.”

Yesterday, I blogged about how agriculture responded to Muck Boot’s apparent donation to HSUS, and while there were some interesting twists to the story, at the end of the day, we must continue to spread the word about HSUS and vote with our dollar. Don’t support organizations, companies, celebrities and entertainers who team up with groups like HSUS. It’s as simple as that.

The opinions of Amanda Radke are not necessarily those of Beefmagazine.com or the Penton Farm Progress Group.

 

Other trending stories at BEEF:

Take A Virtual Tour: World's Largest Vertically Integrated Cattle Operation

9 Tips For Preventing Pasture Bloat In Cattle

Cows Out On Pasture | 80+ Grazing Photos From Readers

5 Trending Headlines: Mobile Shade For Cattle & Animal Ag Wins An Antibiotic Lawsuit

 

Discuss this Blog Entry 20

calfdoc (not verified)
on Aug 7, 2014

Good article. Thank you for the update.
Doug

Ed (not verified)
on Aug 7, 2014

Keep spreading the truth and the word about HSUS. What a fake rip off organization. How much money do the leaders make in salary and benefits?

Dave Nichols (not verified)
on Aug 7, 2014

Amanda, keep telling it "like it is". Don't be discouraged, a lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.

Tunde (not verified)
on Aug 7, 2014

I agree that large corporations such as HSUS and the beef industry are mostly in it for the money. It's all about making money at the expense of the animals. The animals don't have a voice, a choice, and are exploited and manipulated in the cruelest way. Whether it's helping the animals or slaughtering them, the beautiful innocent animals lives are just blood money. The article is correct in saying that your
donations to help those who cannot help themselves are better of given to local shelters, rescue orgainizations, and sanctuarys that are mostly non-profit and run by volunteers.
Dairy industry says milk comes from happy cows...really...?? Cows sure do love being impregnated (raped) and kept on milking machines 24 hours a day for about 4 years then off to the slaughter house - not a happy cow. Large industries are liars and if slaughterhouses had glass walls, most decent moral compassionate people would go vegan!

Scott Poock (not verified)
on Aug 8, 2014

Trunde,
You have a right to your opinion and can be vegan if you wish. However, at the very least get your facts correct. There are NO dairy farms, anywhere, that have a single cow attached to a milking machine 24 hours a day. That statement is utterly (or uddderly) ridiculous. Second, cows are not raped on farms. If you knew what the estrous cycle was, when the cow is in estrus, and how animals behave in the wild, once again, you would realize the ignorance of your statement. You obviously have never worked, been on a farm, nor interacted at any length with cattle.
Scott E. Poock, DVM

Tunde (not verified)
on Aug 11, 2014

Cows Used for Their Milk - FACTS

Cows produce milk for the same reason that humans do: to nourish their young. In order to force the animals to continue giving milk, factory farm operators typically impregnate them using artificial insemination every year. Calves are generally taken from their mothers within a day of being born—males are destined for veal crates or barren lots where they will be fattened for beef, and females are sentenced to the same fate as their mothers.

After their calves are taken away from them, mother cows are hooked up, several times a day, to milking machines. These cows are genetically manipulated, artificially inseminated, and often drugged to force them to produce about four and a half times as much milk as they naturally would to feed their calves.
Animals are often dosed with bovine growth hormone (BGH), which contributes to a painful inflammation of the udder known as “mastitis.” (BGH is used widely in the U.S. but has been banned in Europe and Canada because of concerns over human health and animal welfare.)According to the industry’s own figures, between 30 and 50 percent of dairy cows suffer from mastitis, an extremely painful condition.

A cow’s natural lifespan is about 25 years, but cows used by the dairy industry are killed after only four or five years. An industry study reports that by the time they are killed, nearly 40 percent of dairy cows are lame because of the intensive confinement, the filth, and the strain of being almost constantly pregnant and giving milk. Dairy cows’ bodies are turned into soup, companion animal food, or low-grade hamburger meat because their bodies are too “spent” to be used for anything else

Scott Poock (not verified)
on Aug 13, 2014

Tunde,
Once again, if you knew cow biology and her estrous cycle, you would know that if she were allowed to roam free and wild, the bull would impregnate her when she was in estrus. In fact, he would not wait a set period of time, as dairymen do. That period is called the voluntary waiting period, where we do not impregnate the cow. So, in nature, cows would have a calf once year, as well as they do on a dairy farms.
I appreciate you validating the fact that cows are not hooked up to a milk machine 24 hours a day. On the average, the milk machine will be on the cow 6 minutes. The milk machines are designed to comfortably and efficiently milk the cow. Thus, if the cow is milked 2 or 3 times a day, the machine is attached 12-18 minutes out of the day. Using your premise, that would be better than the 10-20 times a day a calf would nurse. Now I think either way is okay but you may be in disagreement.
Define your definition of "drugged," because there are FDA rules on the use of drugs in animals. We are not allowed to use drugs indiscriminately nor would WE want to.
In regard to BGH, there is NO human health concerns. Also, just because you use BGH, does not mean every cow gets mastitis. BGH use by farmers is a technology which can be used effectively to increase the efficiency of the cow with the proper management.
I am unaware of any peer-reviewed journal article or survey that would indicate 40% of cull cows are lame. Does the industry need to work on lameness? Absolutely. Are we making strides for the better welfare of dairy cattle? Absolutely.
Also, the reason dairy cow's end up in low-grade hamburger rather than prime or choice cuts is due more to the makeup of the body type of the dairy cows vs a beef animal. If you were knowledgeable about cattle biology, you would understand the difference.
Finally, from your second post, cows do produce manure. Does some contain E. coli? Yes. Is E. coli found elsewhere in the environment? Yes, it is ubiquitous. Can the world be sterile? No.
The only way to not have cow manure is to not have cows. Is that your point? If yes, what do we do with the ~ 100,000,000 head of cattle now in the USA? Along the same lines, I would assume you are against commercial fertilizer to grow your food. If yes, how will you return the loss of fertility to the soil? Utilizing animal manure is a viable, good, and already utilized alternative. However, if we rid the world of animals, there will be no manure for fertilizer.
Scott E. Poock, DVM,

Tunde (not verified)
on Aug 13, 2014

no matter how you sugar coat it - murder of an innocent precious life for money is wrong - morally, ethically and people do not need meat to live healthy, long lives. It has been proven over and over again. Be honest, its all about lining your pockets with money - not concern for people or animals.
Taking of life should not be profitable. Your profits are dripping with the blood of the innocent. This world was meant to be for all of us - not just greedy corporations. Compassion over cruelty.

Scott Poock (not verified)
on Aug 13, 2014

Tunde,
In your world, cattle should not be used for food and you are entitled to that opinion. So, where is your farm and how many cows are you taking care of? If you do not have a farm, when will you purchase one and how many cows do you want to start with, 100, 200, or more? If we follow your tenant of compassion, then we need many people of your opinion to pay for the care of the cattle and they should be more than willing because they are not about economics. If you are not willing or believe we should not have any cattle, then you are less compassionate than we are because the animals would not have any life expectancy.
Also, what is your view of animals that are carnivores and omnivores. Are they not taking life that is meant for this world as well?
Scott E. Poock, DVM

on Sep 16, 2014

Where do you stand on planned parenthood and abortion. Since you bring up murder of precious innocent life. Just wondering if you are consistent. Or if you care more for animals than humans.

Terry Ward (not verified)
on Aug 8, 2014

Hee hee..so much for Rick Berman..
Give it up Amanda...

http://www.hoosieragtoday.com/survey-suggests-consumers-get-animal-welfa...

Tunde (not verified)
on Aug 8, 2014

Don’t support organizations, companies, celebrities and entertainers who team up with groups like the Beef and Dairy Industry that makes it's money from exploitation and murder of innocent lives. It’s as simple as that.

on Aug 8, 2014

so true!

on Aug 9, 2014

Nor should you support those that demonstrate willful ignorance, as you have so aptly done.

wynne (not verified)
on Aug 8, 2014

Right on, Amanda!
I am so glad that an unbiased group has published the truth about HSUS and their spending 1% of all donations on shelters and animals. They gave a number to call if abused animals were found by our Sheriff's Dept and when the call was made to the number [appeared to be in Washington DC], the officer was told that they did not have any shelters or any place to take the animals. It was a number, so apparently data could be collected. What a rip off for concerned individuals who make donations in good faith for abused or abandoned animals.

on Aug 8, 2014

Tunde-I agree! I am realizing more and more that big ag companies and similar special interest groups are manipulating people and using propaganda to take HSUS down b/c they are exposing the truths about this cruel and greedy industry and affecting their bottom line.

Rhonda (not verified)
on Aug 10, 2014

As a person who comes from a province where beef production is a major part of the economy, both for local use and for export, I might suggest that Ms. Radke would serve her readers better by attempting to clean up what is wrong in the beef industry rather than by gloating over the difficulties being experienced by HSUS or any other animal welfare group. The beef industry must muck out it's own feedlot before it sends the bobcat over to the other guy's pen to clean it out.
When an industry keeps it's own nose clean then there are no grounds for criticism.
I have respect for the beef industry for providing food to those cultures who rely on meat. Many of these people are friends and acquaintances who do this for their livelihood. The majority of these are in operations that have been passed down for generations and are uncomfortable with the ways in which cattle are both produced and kept before being slaughtered for food. They are appalled by the types of feed being used and the overcrowding that contributes to the spread of horrible diseases and that leads to the increased use of medications. The beef supply is getting more and more dangerous to consume and less nutritious. Big beef, as in most things that attract big money, is being controlled by the big profit motive to the detriment of us all. Clean up your own house! Then you'll have room to slam others. Animal welfare groups aren't needed when animal welfare is the number one priority of us all.

Diane (not verified)
on Aug 11, 2014

The "difficulties" HSUS is having are a result of decades of mismanagement, deception, and even criminal activities. Animal agricultural abuses are certainly real and need to be addressed - by legitimate animal organizations including the Humane Farming Association. HSUS is in no position to pontificate about - and legislate - ethical standards regarding farming or anything else. Credibility counts, whether in business, politics, or advocacy. HSUS lost theirs long ago and in 2014, their (soy) chickens are coming home to roost.

Tunde (not verified)
on Aug 11, 2014

you want truth -Cows are often genetically manipulated, artificially inseminated, and drugged in order to force them to produce about four and a half times as much milk as they naturally would to feed their calves.Cows are often genetically manipulated, artificially inseminated, and drugged in order to force them to produce about four and a half times as much milk as they naturally would to feed their calves. Now for cow meat:
On Friday, Valley Meat Co. of Modesto, California, recalled approximately 1 million pounds of ground beef because of possible E. coli contamination. Frightening? Yes. Shocking? Not if you take a look at the numbers.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), a typical steer will yield about 450 pounds of edible meat. Let’s do a little math:
1 million pounds of ground beef ÷ 450 pounds per cow = approximately 2,222 cows
Also according to the USDA, cattle are usually slaughtered when they are around 2 years old. According to a New York Times article from 2008, a cow who is raised for beef can produce about 14.6 tons of manure each year.
14.6 tons of manure per year × 2 years = 29.2 tons of manure in a lifetime
29.2 tons of manure × 2,222 cows = 64,882 tons of manure

Take a minute and process that—64,882 tons of waste! All of it carrying E. coli, a fecal bacteria. It seems inevitable that some of this nastiness would end up in the food supply at some point, doesn’t it? Factory farming and the microorganisms it breeds are deadly to humans and animals

People who have been eating meat have become so insensitive to the plights of other living beings around them I doubt any of these facts will actually affect them!

maxine jones (not verified)
on Aug 14, 2014

The old adage "figures can lie, and liars can figure" comes to mind when reading comments from the vegan 'lurkers' on this website for cattle producers!

Would those who speak hate against the use of artificial insemination for cows prefer the 'natural' way where male calves can and will inseminate their mothers and sisters? Or that a 2500 pound bull jump onto a 600 pound heifer, injuring her in the attempt to breed her? If cattle are not managed properly, those things can and do happen 'in nature' as the females will accept any male when in estrus. They will not accept any breeding, natural or artificial when not in estrus, thus CANNOT be 'forced' to breed more often than their own bodies wish to. Also, there are current milking systems when cows can choose when they want to be milked, and some will do so more often than the three to four times previously used daily, just guessing that it is a relief to have the udder which fills as the body determines, emptied more frequently.

Apparently, the desire to force all people to a meatless diet is stronger than the desire to speak only truth and to ask for professional (animal scientist?) help to interpret 'facts' which one does not truly understand about animal science.

Irrefutable fact: more than 98% of farms in the USA are FAMILY OWNED. Get over it. Corporations do NOT rule farmers or farming in the USA! However, some families raising our food probably could live more comfortably and in ease by walking away from our work and living on welfare! Fortunately for 'cheap food' advocates, most are too stubborn to do that. Really, most farmer/ranchers love the animals and caring for them.

Post new comment
or to use your BEEF Magazine ID
What's BEEF Daily?

BEEF Daily Blog is produced by rancher Amanda Radke, one of the U.S. beef industry’s top social media “agvocates.”

Contributors

Amanda Radke

A fifth-generation rancher from Mitchell, SD, Amanda grew up on a purebred Limousin cattle operation in which she and husband Tyler are active. She graduated with a degree in agriculture journalism...

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×