- May
- 2
Animal Rights Vs. Conservation
Posted by Chris Anderlik at 5:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (13)
Many organizations have been soliciting people’s support to fight against the Alaskan aerial hunting program. The program is responsible for the shooting and killing of hundreds of wolves, who are cruelly gunned down from helicopters. In fact, a famous celebrity is featured in one organization’s fundraising efforts. So the natural question that arises for us as animal lovers is: Should we contribute?
To make sure that our donations will do the most good for the most animals is a constant challenge for animal lovers. One key word that should always send up a red flag to all of us who care about animals is “conservation.” Conservation is defined in the dictionary as the “preservation, protection, or restoration of the natural environment, natural ecosystems, vegetation and wildlife.” When I hear that word, I know for sure that there is some sort of hunting, fishing, trapping, etc., involved and that there’ll be no mention of animal rights (defined as, “rights believed to belong to animals to live free from use in medical research, hunting, and other services to humans”).
Recently, I received a catalog that sells all kinds of companion animal supplies. On the last page, they offered to send a donation to the National Wildlife Federation (NWF) with the purchase of any of four different stuffed animal toys. A red flag for me! If these people truly cared about animal companions, why would they want to contribute to an organization that advocates hunting and fishing?
I called the store to ask if they promoted hunting and fishing. As I suspected, the woman who answered denied that they did. While on the line, she looked up the NWF Web site and saw that all state hunting (conservation) organizations are affiliates of NWF. She was obviously shocked and said that no one had brought this to her attention. If you suspect that an organization is not truly in it for the animals, you should always look at their Web sites, which are wonderful sources of information, but beware that they need careful scrutiny.
Also, can we assume that because one of our elected senators or representatives has an excellent voting record for environmental issues that he or she is good for animals? Not necessarily. The latest Humane Scorecard gives Senator Max Baucus of Montana a zero rating on animal issues, while the League of Conservation voters rated him 100 on environmental issues over the same period in its “Environmental Scorecard.” Advocates for the environment do not necessarily go hand in hand with advocates for animals.
There are lots of organizations and parties out there that are working for the environment. Because we animal lovers tend to care about nature as well, we might make false assumptions about some of those organizations and parties. The thing we should keep in mind is that many of them have very different perspectives on what it means to help conserve the environment. I think it is important to examine all organizations that we plan to interact with so that we do not end up doing more harm than good, despite our best intentions.
An example of an organization that seems to be in line with my own concerns about the environment and animals is Sea Shepherd. One valuable resource that I use to check on environmental organizations is PETA’s Mean Green Web site, which grades environmental groups on their stance against animal testing.
How about you? Do you have any resources to share to check up on organizations?
Posted to Family & Friends | Posted to Tags: Chris Anderlik, conservation, Environment
- Post this story to:
- Digg
- del.icio.us
- Newsvine
More:
Patty Bowers says...
May 3rd, 2009, 8:06 pm
This was a real eye-opener. Thank you!
Very educational & I passed it on to many others.
Heather says...
May 5th, 2009, 4:16 pm
Two of my other favorite charities that I donate to are Defenders of Wildlife and In Defense of Animals (IDA). Does anyone know if either of these charities has anything questionable going on. I looked on line but didn’t find anything. Thanks.
amber says...
May 8th, 2009, 6:21 pm
anyone know who the celebrity is?
Anne Speakman says...
May 8th, 2009, 7:40 pm
This is off the subject, however I wanted to bring this to the attention of people who care about animals, The FFA had their annual dinner, serving steak of course, and they mentioned that the HSUS was trying to put the agriculture community out of business…………I thought Yea! This came from a teacher in the school. This is rural Alabama, go figure. I am an outcast in the community because fro many years I devoted all of my time to animal rights, as founder and director of a humane society. After 16 years I was fired because I refused to stop leaving Peta magazine in the office and articles in out New letters. It make me proud to know that people like you keep on keeping on. I shall also, one animal at a time we can make a difference, Please accept my heart felt thanks for all you do and for the help a few month ago with some horses in my area.
With every good wish I am
Sincerely
Anne Speakman
montevallo, alabama
Diane says...
May 8th, 2009, 10:09 pm
Animal People News produces a yearly “Watchdog Report” on animal charities that I use extensively to decide on how I will make my donations. They use a varitey of criteria to evaluate animal related charities including how the money is spent, executive pay, and issues such as supporting hunting. See: http://www.animalpeoplenews.org and next to “Essential Destinations” select the “Watchdog Report”. The report costs $25 and is well worth it.
In Defense of Animals is a good organization which I also support.
Defenders of Wildlife does many good things but according to the 2007 Watchdog Report “Formed as an anti-trapping organization in 1947, Defenders withdrew opposition to trapping and hunting after a 1957 internal coup, and now actively encourages trapping or shooting of “problem” predators. This is combined with efforts to increase rancher acceptance of predators. Defenders in 2006 paid ranchers a record $154,000 for livestock lost to wolves, of which $148,000 was paid in the Yellowstone region”. I personally participate in their various campaigns to save the wolves as well as other animals, but do not make any donations.
Other organizations such as the Sierra Club and the National Audubon Society have embraced hunters and trappers and have active campaigns to bring them into their organizations. I support my local Audubon Society, but refuse to support the National Audubon Society.
Animal People also produces a monthly newspaper with in depth reporting on animal issues.
Jamie Rivet says...
May 9th, 2009, 3:01 am
IDA is animal rights- they’re on our side. Defenders of Wildlife is not a group I would support: consider just their top 3 people:
Pres. and CEO Rodger Schlickeisen:
Prior to joining Defenders, Rodger was Chief of Staff to U.S. Senator Max Baucus. (see Baucus in above story)
VP Jamie Clark:
Jamie came to Defenders after a 20-year career with the federal government, mostly with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
VP for Conservation Robert Irvin:
Before joining Defenders of Wildlife in 2005, Bob served as Director of U.S. Conservation for World Wildlife Fund.
Yikes! The WWF is pure evil! See WWF at MeanGreenies. This group of Wildlife Defenders is in bed with the sportsmen industry (hunting and fishing) and is also pro-experimentation.
Pamela says...
May 9th, 2009, 3:32 am
Thank you for pointing this out. These are matters that should be clicking, but often, the pieces just don’t fall together consciously. Yes, assumptions are dangerous.
Naila M. Sanchez says...
May 9th, 2009, 2:57 pm
Wow! Confirmed what I feared and now I will cancel my membership to NWF!!! Thanks for the information and I will only fight for animal welfare issues!!
ANNE PICKARD says...
May 10th, 2009, 9:08 pm
May 1o, 2009
Good to know about the NWF, I used to donate to them but not anymore.
I will start donating again to IDA and am a supporter of PETA
Diane says...
May 11th, 2009, 1:34 pm
The HSUS Urban Wildlife Sanctuary program is a good alternative to the NWF Backyard Wildlife Sanctuary program. I recently registered my yard with HSUS and got my community homeowners association to register as well.
Katie S says...
May 12th, 2009, 2:14 pm
The resource I most often check is another website I found through the organization, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. PCRM reccommends that people look for the Humane Charity Seal of Approval. The website is http://www.humaneseal.org
Eric says...
June 19th, 2009, 4:00 pm
I think Conservation, Environmentalism, and Animal Rights are tied together and the real solution exists only if those who work in each field work together.
All living beings have a purpose and their continued existence is essential to this earth’s survival, which also means our survival. Even flies and maggots have an importance that we cannot live without.
Those who hunt, fish, and advocate these activities have conservation and environmentalism all wrong. It’s a label they use to justify their actions. Nothing more, nothing less.
To conserve something means “to keep in a safe or sound state or to avoid wasteful or destructive use of”. It also means to protect. As all hunters kill the animals they hunt, they are in fact destroying life around them, and for that fact alone, denies them the right to call themselves “conservationalists” or “environmentalists”.
I can see how one may be confused, due to the fact that they “protect” land from development, but only for the purpose of having a place to hunt their prey. If you look at it that way, you can say that a developer “protects” his or her land so it can be used for development.
The true purpose of environmentalism and conservation is to protect and conserve land (water and air) in places where wildlife and nature can continue to exist (in areas that belonged to them in the first place) without man’s deadly intrusion, encroachment or purposes.
My suggestion is to let these organizations know that you’re interested in supporting their campaigns to save wildlife as long as it’s not for the purpose of hunting and killing at a later time. That is not conservation. That is not environmentalism.
And if they’re so interested in controlling the population of a given species (an excuse they use), how about starting with ours (humans). It is because of us that the eco-system is out of balance.
Thanks
I says...
July 26th, 2009, 7:15 pm
Is Defenders of Wildlife okay?