Nathan Winograd Stays on Point as HSUS Flails

This is one of those Winograd posts where I'm tempted to quote the whole thing but I will limit myself to some snippets:

In response to public outcry over their support and participation in the Wilkes County Massacre, in which the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) first championed and then defended the mass slaughter of over 150 dogs and puppies, Wayne Pacelle of HSUS issued an interim new policy of favoring temperament testing of individual dogs seized in dog-fighting cases, and called for “a meeting of leading animal welfare organizations concerning dogs victimized by dog fighting.” That meeting has been called for April in Las Vegas. If history is any guide, there is little reason to celebrate as of yet.

To begin with, HSUS did not adopt a policy that all dogs will be temperament tested to determine if they are aggressive, only that they will recommend that they be, a policy which can be ignored. Second, there has been no discussion over what type of test will be used and how outcomes will be determined, a major flaw in the temperament testing process used by many shelters. Third, there is reason to believe that the outcome in Wilkes County would not have been any different even if this policy were already in place.

Yes, yes, yes.  What he said.  And:

And finally, is such a meeting really necessary? If Pacelle was willing to stand up for what’s right, rather than to defend his clearly wrong colleagues, he would not need the symposium. He would know what HSUS policy needs to be and he would ensure that it is followed.

I'm just a dog loving, pajama blogging, rabble rousing schmuck.  But even I don't need no stinkin' meeting to figger out that every shelter dog deserves a fair evaluation.  So why does a national fundraising group of "experts" like the HSUS need one?  If'n you don't know what the right thing to do is, you ain't gonna be learned it in a Las Vegas hotel is what Ima thinkin'.