|
On my Links
page, there are several links to avian and other animal welfare sites,
as well as conservation sites.
There are several animal rights/welfare organizations I have left off that site, for many reasons. The main reason is because I honestly don't feel many of them care as much about animal welfare or saving animals as they do about pushing their own agendas. In my opinion, the worst offender is PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. I'll cite some very good examples of why I will not support this organization as it currently operates. 1. THEY USE MISINFORMATION & FEAR-MONGERING TO GAIN SUPPORT PETA stoops to using half-truths, innuendo and sometimes outright lies to push their own agenda. They do not properly accredit information in all of their press releases. In their Feb. 19, 2003 Weekly E-News, they took aim at the Iditarod Sled Dog Races, stating that it results in the deaths and suffering of many dogs. The story went on to state - and this is a direct quote - "Not every puppy is born a fast runner, and those who do not make the grade are usually killed - by bludgeoning or drowning - for not possessing monumental stamina and speed. Manuals and articles written by top mushers blatantly recommend killing dogs who do not measure up. One musher equates it with 'weeding a garden.' " Note the use of "manuals and articles" and the term "written by top mushers". THEY NEVER NAME THE PUBLICATIONS IN WHICH THESE ARTICLES WERE PUBLISHED. AND THEY NEVER NAME WHO THAT "One musher" IS. As a professional journalist, if I wrote an article like that, I would never work for that editor again. It's one thing to protect a source who would rather not be named by stating, "one musher, who asked not to be identified," i.e., an "unidentified source;" it's another thing altogether to credit some unknown, unidentified person without even that qualifier. And if it was published in an article, why not say WHERE it was published, so we can all read it for ourselves? I think you can draw the same conclusions as I did as to their reasons for keeping the statements that general and what it says about the veracity and accuracy of their statements in this instance. It's so bad, it does not even qualify as "yellow" journalism. I also know some mushers personally, and I know how well they care for their dogs. There probably are some mushers who mistreat dogs; but PETA has used a very broad brush to paint all mushers as vile, despicable dog abusers, and they've done so without providing any real or tangible evidence that can be checked. I contacted PETA about these concerns and they never bothered to reply. 2. PETA PROMOTES CELLPHONES THAT MAY KILL GORILLAS, BIRDS In their Aug. 22, 2003 Weekly E-news, PETA encourages people to buy a cellular phone through the organization in order to help save animals. I guess they didn't do their homework on this one, on two counts. One of the metals used in some cellphones is coltan. It's mined in the Democratic Republic of Congo. In a World Heritage Site - Kahuzi Biega National Park, the home of one of the last remaining populations of eastern lowland gorillas. Not only is the environment being devastated, gorillas and other primates are being killed for "bush meat" to feed workers. If you want to read more about it, visit www.ecoworld.com/Trees/articles/articles2.cfm?TID=263 This PETA cellphone promotion was featured prominently in the same issue as PETA's call to arms against the capture and importation of elephants from Swaziland to an American zoo. Although I don't necessarily disagree with their stance on the elephant issue, it does seem to me they are demonstrating the worst kind of hypocrisy to urge this with the one hand, while indirectly contributing to the harm of other animals with the other. I would think they would at least have tried to inform their members and others about this situation, in order to educate them and make people aware that buying a cellphone may contribute to the death and misery of animals. Of course, that would mean they would have to have the facts to begin with. Another fact of which I guess they also are also not aware is the fact that cellphone towers in North America result in the deaths of countless birds annually. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimates at least five million birds and as many as 50 million birds are killed annually in collisions with communications towers in the U.S. alone. (For more info about this, see www.abcbirds.org/policy/towerkill.htm and www.braudubon.org/conservation.asp ) Again, I contacted PETA about this situation. The response from Jill Bacchieri-Jones, manager of corporate gifts and affinity programs, included the following sentences: "As you may know, PETA does not focus on endangered species or even conservation. Our primary goal is to get people who live in a primarily materialistic world to take as many significant steps as possible to reduce the most egregious forms of animal suffering and abuse on factory farms, in testing labs, and at a variety of forms of so-called "entertainment" such as circuses." Even though she has stated they don't focus on endangered species, or conservation, PETA has a program called PETA's Free Bird Campaign that deals specifically with the protection of wild birds through the purchase of shade-grown coffees. While I fully support that kind of program, it certainly sends mixed messages when I get a message from a PETA spokesperson telling me the organization does not involve itself in conservation. It either means (A) their own people do not know their agenda; (B) they are incredibly incompetent; or, (C) they are again displaying blatant hypocrisy by telling two different stories. As far as I am concerned, this adds additional evidence to my accusation of hypocrisy on PETA's part. Anyway you look at it, though, do you really want to give your support or money to an organization that is either that hypocritical and/or that poorly administrated? Need more proof of the inaccuracy of her statement? In that same e-newsletter, PETA urged people to "Save Wild Elephants" in Swaziland, because they were going to be captured and shipped to the San Diego zoo. If this is not "focusing on endangered species," what is? Also, PETA neglected to inform people (or perhaps they neglected to ascertain all the facts again) that the reserve which houses the elephants in question can no longer sustain the existing population humanely. The population has grown too big and if they were not transported, they would be shot. How is THAT saving animals? IN SUMMARY... In the instances cited above, it seems to me PETA is so busy pushing its own agenda, it does not have time to bother with things like "facts." Not only do they appear to engage in hypocrisy, it seems to me when someone like myself engages in a dialogue with them, they tell outright lies. At least it seems to me, Ms. Bacchieri-Jones lied to me in telling me the exact opposite of what PETA is doing. Now, you tell me ... is this an organization that truly has animal welfare as its true priority? And if you've supported them in the past, or have ever thought about supporting them, do you really want to do that, given the situations I've just described? Perhaps you should email Ms. Jill Bacchieri-Jones and tell her your concerns about PETA's self-serving, hypocritical, misinformed practices. BTW, if you have any doubts as to my veracity in these matters, email me and I'll forward to you any of the PETA newsletters which contained this material I'm citing, and you can read it for yourself. Finally, you may wonder what this is doing on a website about parrots? Specifically, it does not deal with parrots - although PETA does have a campaign going to ban parrots as pets. However, the main reason I feel it is important to inform people about this is because I care deeply for the welfare of ALL animals - wild and domestic - and it sickens me to think people are giving hundreds of thousands dollars a year to an organization like this - an organization that often does much more harm than good - rather than to legitimate, well-run organizations like the World Wildlife Fund or the World Parrot Trust. - John Geary Want to read some other articles about PETA and its agendas and other animal rights issues? Read about a recent campaign that compared women to pigs in a B.C. court case:
For more info, visit the following links:
For the record, I do not agree with all of the statements and stances presented by the writers in the above articles; in fact, I disagree with some of their philosophies, some of them very strongly (for example, I see no reason to kill an animal for sport, nor do I seen any reason to wear fur, when synthetics do a much more effective, efficient and economical job of keeping us warm. That is my own personal choice, though.) Frankly, I find things I dislike about both sides in this ongoing argument. (That's the result of being a journalist - I realize the opposing sides in almost any disagreement have some validity, and I find myself quite alone much of the time, not truly agreeing or siding with either faction, but rather aiming for what I consider to be a reasonable, middle ground different from both sides ...) However, the articles at the above links do make some excellent points and back up what I've written about PETA's hypocrisy and misinformation dissemination as well as about the animal rights movement in general. And none of the above writers take the law into their own hands to obtain their goals as do many animal rights activists. One final note: PETA does have its own site devoted to attacking other groups like the WWF, accusing them of "greenwashing," www.meangreenis.com Notice I'm not afraid to post their site here, as I trust intelligent, saner heads will eventually prevail. And given my own experience in any correspondence or exchanges I have initiated with PETA as documented above, I certainly know how little faith we can put into anything this organizations states, since they seem to contradict themselves frequently and (conveniently) change their story when challenged.
|
|
General Information About African Grey Parrots General Information About African Greys
|