You're viewing a single thread.
As awful as PETA is, that's savage.
Why'd you think PETA are awful?
Where to begin...
Let's start with their high euthanasia rates. Multiple sources state that PETA euthanises upwards of 80% of the animals it takes in. There's also the 2014 incident where PETA workers took a pet Chihuahua from its porch and euthanized it the same day.
Then there was the "Got Autism?" campaign in the late 2000s and early 2010s. This campaign stated that "Studies have shown a link between cow's milk and autism." PETA also claimed that consuming milk was strongly linked to cancer, Crohn's disease, and other diseases. This has been proven repeatedly to be disinformation. The campaign also received backlash from the autism community. A 2008 PETA billboard was taken down by the Autistic Self Advocacy Network. In 2017, British food writer, journalist and hunger relief activist Jack Monroe, demanded PETA remove their recipes from their website "with immediate effect coz I wrote them with my autism". PETA removed their recipes, but did not remove the "Got Autism?" article from their website until 2021. It has been argued that the frowny face in the campaign image negatively stereotypes autistic people.
In 2009, PETA members dressed up in Ku Klux Klan robes and protested at the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show where they passed out brochures implying the Klan and American Kennel Club have the same goal of "pure bloodlines".
PETA has been critical of Australian wildlife expert and zookeeper Steve Irwin. In 2006, when Irwin died, PETA Vice President Dan Mathews said Irwin had made a career out of antagonizing frightened wild animals.
In 2019, PETA criticized Google for creating a slideshow Google Doodle of Steve Irwin posthumously honoring his 57th birthday. PETA started a Twitter campaign against Irwin, with several tweets criticizing Google for forwarding a dangerous message, and wrote that Irwin was killed while harassing a ray and that he forced animals to perform.
And that is why I think PETA are awful. Don't get me wrong: I still stand for animal welfare; just not with this particular group.
I dislike a lot of the shock advertising they do, but most of what you point out is anecdotal and mostly spread as a laster campaign, because they actually do have an impact on animal welfare and that's not in the best interest of the ppl behind these laster campaigns.
About the shelters, what should happen with all the excess pets that are bought and then dumped? At least peta tries to take down bad kennels and does something about the stray population. It's all nice having a no-kill shelter, but these either don't take all pets or get to big that it's just unhygienic and sad. If the shelter refuse any ill or old pet they can't place, these pets either end up on the street or in a shelter that takes any pet and does euthanize.
Peta also gets called for stray pets in terrible condition or that are aggressive that probably always have to be put down.
Their kill rate will probably be quite high, but I have no idea who made up the 80% and what would be included in that number.
I have had the opportunity to be friends with shelter owners and rescue owners, kill and no-kill. I let their opinions be my guide. They all hate PETA because PETA euthenizises, as you say, way too aggressively.
The ones at no-kill shelters will often overfill to rescue an animal from a shelter they know is going to euthenize it. They often have lists of foster families who will take in animals with most "terrible conditions". I have a family member who fosters Feline Leukemia cats exclusively (it's contageious) and gives them a good life. Properly cared for, they have a solid chance to live well almost their entire natural span. And she always has room for more. So PETA putting down a cat with Feline Leukemia instead of finding people like her? Unacceptable.
The kill shelters I know people from? Last resort. Their kill rate is virtually zero because they start bugging their friends if they know they're getting overfull and have a hard animal to home, and that animal usually gets homed with one of the people who works there.
Both of them have relationships with larger-scale rescues. The larger rescues have aggressive foster farms that usually has openings for high risk dogs, and often have Animal Behaviorists volunteering that can help to find homes for animals with unique behavioral issues.
It's a lie to say that no rescue animal EVER has to go down. But the consensus of the people who matter is that PETA simply has never shown evidence of trying hard enough to save the ones that should be saved.
I hear you. However, here are two sources for their high euthanasia rate:
USA Today (Archived): https://web.archive.org/web/20120304103715/http://yourlife.usatoday.com/parenting-family/pets/story/2012-03-01/PETA-says-exploiters-raise-euthanasia-issue/53315476/
Washington Post (Archived): https://web.archive.org/web/20150315024559/https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/at-petas-shelter-most-animals-are-put-down-peta-calls-them-mercy-killings/2015/03/12/e84e9af2-c8fa-11e4-bea5-b893e7ac3fb3_story.html
I would also like to say that I prefer to support other charities, such as the RSPCA, IFAW, Cruelty Free International, and the RSPB.