Animal Advocates vs Animal Extremists

On Thursday, we published a story concerning the City paying for security measures at the homes of various Department of Animal Services staff members, in the light of increasingly upticked rhetoric from animal activist groups, such as the Animal Defense League, headed up by former child actress Pam Ferdin. Today we publish a counter point from Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals who argues that not all animal welfare advocates are extreme wackos and that their mission is to make the lives of animals better.

I live in LA. I run an animal rescue group. I also have a "real" job as a real estate broker and appraiser so I can pay for my animal habit. Whenever I'm out and about meeting new people, they always ask me what I do. I take a deep breath and reluctantly say I am an animal advocate. Immediately they take two steps back. Will I spray paint their fur coats, threaten to kill them for eating chicken, blow up their SUV because it has leather seats or will I just tell their three year old that burgers are actually dead cows? There is a big difference between the sane animal community and the animal extremists though each group has it's share of fruits and nuts.

99% of the animal community in LA just loves animals, plain and simple. Some rescue animals from the shelters, some care for feral cat colonies, some like to educate the public about proper animal care, some try to pass animal friendly legislation and some just like to have a few too many cats and dogs around the house. Some are vegetarians, some are not.

For you non-animal people, diet is a big thing in the animal world. Do you eat or use animal products or not. Vegetarians don't eat meat but do eat dairy. Vegans don't eat meat, dairy or use any animal products at all. They won't wear leather or any product made from animals. They won't buy any product tested on animals or any product associated with animal testing. They have huge lists of products they must boycott for one reason or another. There are degrees among all the schools of thought on diets. For instance, some meat eaters will only eat meat if it's free range, organic, slaughtered humanely and not a threatened species. It gets pretty complex. It gives us animal people something to fight about amongst ourselves when we're not saving animals, getting beaten up by the press or being harassed by the feds.

Then there is the 1% of "animal people" who are extremists. They don't want any animals harmed or even used in any way, either in research, as food or clothing or exhibited in zoos. They feel VERY strongly about this. They are generally all vegans or else they'd be hypocrites. Some don't even agree with euthanasia for dying animals. They don't believe it should be the human's choice. Some believe we humans should stop having babies so we will die out as a species and the earth can revert back to the animals. To each his own.

The extremists truly believe in their hearts that we as in humans are harming and murdering living sentient beings. They believe they must do anything to stop this, even if it means setting off a smoke bomb, setting someone's car on fire or spray painting someone's home with the words "puppy killer." They will quote Ghandi, Malcolm X, Lincoln, equate their cause to freeing slaves in America or saving Jews in the Holocaust. Here you will find groups like ALF, SHAC and some extreme PETA sects.

A quote from Jerry Vlasak of ADL explains their point of view well, "We are fighting for the right of nonhuman sentient beings to not be exploited, taken against their will, imprisoned, and then tortured beyond anyone's comprehension for profit and bad science." They believe they are doing the right thing by being militant, fighting violence against animals with violence against humans even though their "right" thing is against the current penal code. They believe they are following the path of historical revolutionaries who have done even more violent acts to save humans. This is where the extremists start to have problems with others and government. This is also where the rest of us animal people get a bad undeserved reputation.

I was at the LA Zoo commission meeting prepared to speak about elephants in the Zoo. There were three news vans in the parking lot. They came up to me and asked me if I was from ADL or PETA. I said no, but I know the issues well and am prepared to speak. They waved me away while driving off. If I wasn't an outspoken militant extremist, they had no interest in me. The media is only interested in burning buildings, murders and major scandals. They don't want to listen to a sane person speak about the real issues in a calm and polite manner. That's boring and won't help their ratings even though it'd be good journalism. This is why the sane animal voice is rarely heard. You will only hear the extremists. Because you only hear the extremists, the public thinks we're all extremists. We're not all violent kooks!

Now I love animals as much as the next animal person. I am totally against anyone doing anything illegal to animals. I don't like it when people poison ground squirrels but if they do it according to the law, I won't make a case against it. I will try to educate them about humane alternatives and offer my help. I'm also working through the legal process to make some poisons illegal as they are not safe for humans, pets and non-target wildlife. If the public tells me to go pound sand, I will. I don't believe in missionarianism. I don't have to convert everyone to my beliefs. I won't turn around and hit them over the head with a giant Tofu bat if they don't want to listen. I am a law abiding citizen. I also don't feel that I could save very many animals if I were in jail.

I don't like seeing adoptable animals euthanized in the City animal shelters. I want the shelters to do a better job and to become low or no-kill. I am willing to help the shelters accomplish this. But, in the meantime I won't set off a smoke bomb in the General Manager's home. True, he's not doing the best job but I work within the system. I get along with cities and the public. I go through the proper, legal channels to effectuate change. I feel my voice is better received if I'm calm and rational. As I am an "animal person" I have to act 10x more sane than a regular person anyway if I want anyone to listen to me and consider my ideas. Not only am I totally against violence of any type but I don't feel that the militant, violent approach is even effective. In fact, at times it hurts the cause, the animal community and the animals.

Now you know the difference between an animal advocate and an animal extremist, a vegan and a vegetarian, an international terrorist and the crazy cat lady down the street. Just because we love helping animals, doesn't mean we're all violent looney nut cases. The next time you see one of us walking around with a t-shirt that says "I love cats," don't instantly call us a tree-hugging PETA loving wanna-be Osama bin laden. Maybe the person actually just loves cats. Judge us all independently. We're not all "terrorists" who want to blow up your house because you eat bird embryo omelettes with a side of dead pig. If you want to clog your arteries, be my guest. Some of us just like animals, and humans. Humans are of course animals too. Can't we all just get along?