I have no idea why anyone is still supporting, let alone listening to Peta.

Their record with respect to dogs and cats is beyond abysmal.  In fact, I'd rather take my chances with an animal control facility than with Peta if my dog needed a new home. That's how bad it is.

Nathan Winograd has a good post up today which nicely details why those of us who love dogs (and cats) are vehemently opposed to Peta's activities.

Here are the first two paragraph's of Nathan's post dated December 15:

In a recent issue of the Houston Chronicle, Daphna Nachminovitch of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) unfairly attacks me and essentially asks Houston to continue its decades-old policy of killing the vast majority of animals in its shelters. For those who are not familiar with PETA, this may seem strange. After all, why would an organization who argues it is wrong to eat animals, experiment on animals, use animals for entertainment, or hunt them for sport, promote the killing of animals in U.S. shelters? But PETA does promote it and has for some time.

In Seattle, Washington, PETA sided with a shelter even after a 15-member citizen advisory committee, local veterinarians, outside consultants (including myself) and a team of veterinarians from the Veterinary College at the University of California at Davis found animals left for days with no food or water, animals left bleeding in their kennels with no medical attention, deplorable conditions and mismanagement at all levels. The King County council ignored PETA.

I'm glad people are starting to ignore Peta - let's hope that becomes a growing trend.