PETA’s Kill Stats–2012
According to their report to the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, PETA took 1,958 animals into their care at their “shelter” last year, and killed 1,747 of them.
PETA is required by law to submit their shelter figures to the state each year.
The animals they took in were mostly dogs and cats. Of these, 5 were retrieved by their guardians, 23 were adopted, 130 were transferred to other agencies, the fate of 43 were listed as “miscellaneous”, and one was still at the “shelter” at the end of the year.
The figures also included 81 wild animals, of whom 9 were returned to the wild, and the others were killed.
In total PETA killed 89.2 percent of the animals they “rescued”.
This, believe it or not, is an improvement over 2011, when PETA took in a total of 2,190 animals and killed 2,090 of them. The 2011 report is here. And earlier reports can be accessed here.
PETA continues to insist that killing homeless pets is the kindest thing to do. By way of a good example of how deranged their thinking is, Washoe County (Reno), Nevada, which has been one of the most economically depressed regions of the country, has reached a save rate of 94 percent.
PETA, with its national reach and large financial and publicity budget, kills almost 90 percent of the animals they take in. Reno, which operates on a shoestring and welcomes all the unwanted and stray animals of the county, saves more than 90 percent of the animals they take in.
The No-Kill News blog has a listing of other communities that have reached a 90 percent save rate. PETA could learn quite a lot from them.
So much fail here, Joseph. There is no pet overpopulation. We don't have an overpopulation problem, we have a lazy shelter problem. PETA could drop their horrendous euthanasia rate overnight with almost zero effort; they kill because they want to and because it's part of one of their goals of eliminating domesticated animals. They don't do it for reasons of mercy or overcrowding or lack of funds to shelter effectively; they do it because they want them dead.
Sorry, LucyP, but most people who read your comment will instantly recognize it as being straight from the PETA party line. The animals that organization takes in to its "shelter" are no different from any others in cities around the country. The specific example I quoted - Reno, NV - is an open admission shelter in one of the most economically depressed regions in the country. And if you go to the link - NoKill News - in the last para of my post, you'll see the many others that are comparable.
If PETA wants to argue that the "vast majority" of the animals they take in and kill were "suffering terribly", then they have to document this. They don't because they can't. And there is plenty of documentation of the opposite.
PETA does some things well. In some areas they have made a difference. This is not one of them.
@michaelmountain You are so right, Michael. I wish I could share the email they sent me in reply to one of my emails explaining to them I could not contribute at this time because I have been caring for my (now 5) special needs pets--"special needs" , not suffering, or dying or being eaten by maggots; just getting medication like insulin and such and special diets. I guess human diabetics should be killed and people who need heart medication should be killed and of course, any human with cancer should be euthanized immediately upon diagnosis. Their email to me implied I was keeping my pets alive and suffering because it's hard "to let go" and the best gift I could give them is euthanasia. I gave them an earful by email and phone. How dare they?! My pets are seniors who have been with me their whole lives and they still run and play and walk four miles a day, etc., etc. They apologized but I made it clear to them that they are not the ultimate authority on animals and their opinions are simply opinions; opinions which contrast sharply with the majority of every other animal advocacy organization around today.
Lisa M.
@sophiesgarden @michaelmountain Lisa M: can you please get in touch with me? I'd like very much to see that letter, and perhaps quote from it. (I've been writing about PETA's abuses for the Huffington Post.) You can contact me on Twitter: @dysmedia
@dysmedia @michaelmountain Hi dysmedia, Unfortunately, I deleted the emails, including my response and their reply to my response. I don't have a copy. I wish I did now, but I clean my email out very regularly. If I had it, I would share it with you without hesitation! People need to be aware of what they are funding or sponsoring when they are involved with PETA. It's unfortunate so many wonderful celebrities, such as my beloved Paul McCartney is such a dedicated member. Do all these people believe PETA is "all knowing"? Do they agree with PETA's barbaric policies? I sure hope not. I will always sign their petitions and take action on legislative animal protection issues presented by them. I just won't give them any money because I will not fund the killing of just about every animal they get their hands on. It's the same reason I do not donate to any cancer or disease related charities because the funds are going to the very research that tortures animals. Now, of course if I had the money, I would donate a wheelchair or wigs, toys, etc., to people and children who are ill.
This post fails to mention two crucial points:
1) The vast majority of the animals PETA euthanizes are suffering terribly. They are ravaged by disease, crippled, vicious because of a lifetime of abuse, being eaten alive by maggots, and more. See some of these animals here: http://www.peta.org/b/thepetafiles/archive/2009/03/30/Why-We-Euthanize.aspx. Euthanasia is a mercy for these suffering souls.
2) “No-kill” shelters like to boast that they don’t euthanize, but what most people don’t know is that most of these facilities deny help to animals in need on a daily basis. They turn animals away when their cages fill up. This puts animals in danger of fates far crueler than euthanasia. Many rejected animals are dumped on the streets to starve or be run over; relegated to a lonely life on a chain; cruelly killed by people who are desperate to be rid of them; and more.
I thank PETA and all open-admission shelters for never turning their backs on needy animals just to make their statistics more appealing.
This infuriates me. What would we have PETA do? Of course there euthanasia rate is high. We overbreed animals, specifically cats and dogs. This is an issue if quality of life. Sanctuaries aren't the answer. A lot of times sanctuaries are horrendous keeping social animals sequestered which is a fate worse than death. A lot of farm sanctuaries also practice euthanasia but because there numbers are lower they aren't subject to scrutiny. You want to stop the euthanasia rate? Then all you have to do is stop breeders (both legal and non), have people adopt shelter dogs and cats instead of buy them, have pet stores sell shelter dogs and cats only, and spay and neuter pets. This happens then there won't be animals to euthanize. The alternative for the critics of euthanasia is to shelter all these homeless animals which if you look at the numbers is a practical impossibility. Criticizing euthanasia is treating the symptom not the disease. Lets focus attention on where these poor souls come from ad root out the problem at its core. It's easy to blame the hangman for carrying out the sentence but the hangman isn't the reason why the man is hanged in the first place
this is not the first time i have heard something about this.. interesting.