Why give the bad guys the chance to tell the truth about animal advocacy?

Steve Hindi

“In today’s movement, it is easier to name organizations rife with incompetence,  laziness and in many cases outright fraud,  than not”

by Steve Hindi

A commenter on the recent ANIMALS 24-7 article New SHARK CharityCops site exposes Animal Charity Evaluators,  about our campaign to improve the truthfulness,  transparency,  efficiency and effectiveness of the animal rights movement,  concluded that “It would be wise to be extremely careful how we publicly criticize well-known [animal advocacy] organizations lest we shoot ourselves in the foot, align ourselves with the likes of Richard Berman (Humane Watch) and end up fracturing the movement beyond repair.”

Read Steve's full guest post at Animals 24-7 by clicking here.

Merritt Clifton on Animal Charity Evaluators

For nearly 45 years I have done accountability reporting and donor education about nonprofit organizations.  For more than 30 years I have done accountability reporting specifically focused on animal charities, including 25 years as editor of a series of annual reports initially titled “Who gets the money?”  

The first edition covered two dozen major animal charities.  Within five years it covered about 100.  Retitled "The Watchdog Report on Animal Charities" in 1999,  the report expanded up to the production of 15 editions of a handbook which reviewed the budgets,  assets,  spending patterns,  programs,  policies,  leadership transitions,  and any other controversial issues associated with more than 170 animal charities.

Producing such a comprehensive volume annually eventually became economically unviable,  even with my wife Beth having done much of the preliminary research to produce an electronic edition that we could not complete.  

Bluntly put, insufficient numbers of animal charity donors seemed to give enough of a damn where they throw their money to spend $25 a year making sure it really goes where their donations are most likely to achieve whatever it is they want most to accomplish.


PETA Co-Founder Alex Pacheco is Scamming Donors!

SHARK has asked Alex Pacheco questions about his organization, 600 Million Stray Dogs Need You. Pacheco and 600 Million are raising money for a cookie that they claim will sterilize stray dogs. There are questions regarding the validity of the campaign, and Mr. Pacheco has refused to respond to these questions. Please politely contact Mr. Pacheco and ask that he answer these questions: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

SHARK's letter to Alex Pacheco.

HSUS Endorses a Pro-Puppy Mill Bill in Vermont!

HSUS has endorsed Vermont House bill 218, which will reduce cage sizes for dogs and cats. In this video we offer the evidence that proves this. Only those who treat dogs like commodities, such as puppy mills, will benefit from this bad legislation.

Please pass the following to everyone you know in Vermont. Ask them to immediately contact VT Governor Phil Scott and ask him to veto H.218. Please be polite and respectful. Leave a message at 1-802-828-3333 or email:governor.vermont.gov/contact-us/message

Please also contact Wayne Pacelle and tell him if this bill passes, it will be because he didn’t have the courage to stand up and do what’s right: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Will Potter - What Happened to More Than $90,000?

Self-described investigative journalist Will Potter raised more than $90,000 for a drone project. Mr. Potter said the drones would investigate factory farms. More than two years later, there is apparently no drone footage, no drones, and no investigation. SHARK asks - what happened to the money?