Muck Boot fund raises for HSUS

[cowboy_nyk]

Who says I'm a conservative? (FYI my degree is Environmental Science so it's not like I'm a climate change denier)

I take issue with their thinly veiled goal of removing animal products from the food supply chain, thus putting us all out of business.  They don't want to just make us produce beef more sustainably, they want to, "replace meat and other animal-based foods in the diet with plant-based foods."  That is their end goal.

 

[Dozer45]

This was posted on the I Am Agriculture Blog from the director of footwear at Muck:

"Thanks for your post Ryan. Needless to say, yesterday was not a good day for us and certainly not our social media team. We made a mistake — ok several — and for that we’re really, really sorry.
Truth be told, here’s what happened…we suffered the loss of a colleague from cancer. As you can surely understand, that’s never easy. Employees got together, and, based on his family’s wishes, decided to contribute funds to our local humane society in lieu of flowers. We know that’s what he would have wanted. Honestly, here in Smithfield, Rhode Island, we were thinking of “rescue” puppies and kittens and never a broader agenda. It was not the intent to capitalize on a contribution or a death, but rather, we wanted to share the good will embraced by our employees with our community. We do realize that posting content on this on our branded Muck channels was a major mistake, one we won’t make again. We’re sickened by the fact that wearers of Muck feel as is we’ve let them down. It was never our intention"

Its nice to know that they know who their customers are, and also know how big of a deal this would be if they were to give to a criminal organization like HSUS.

Obviously some of the people on this page need to do a little more research on who the true HSUS is! It is not your local animal shelter, although they would like to you think by donating to them it helps the local shelters out, but in fact it is far from the truth!

As a very popular company in my neck of the woods I hope for them that this was all a big misunderstanding and it be a lesson to them and other companies of how quickly a decision like this would affect sales. As was stated the stories still are not jiving and I plan to sit back and keep an eye on it before giving them any further business. If the employees were donating money in lieu of flower why did the original fb post not say something about that instead of using the phrase " Fund raiser"? In my book employees donating in remembrance of a friend and fund raiser are two pretty different things. Why was the picture not one of the diseased employee or something more fitting a memorial? And until the shelter they claimed to be the receiver of funds confirms a donation from a memorial of a former Muck employee I will continue to be very skeptical 

 

[Doc]

This was posted on the I Am Agriculture Blog from the director of footwear at Muck:

"Thanks for your post Ryan. Needless to say, yesterday was not a good day for us and certainly not our social media team. We made a mistake — ok several — and for that we’re really, really sorry.
Truth be told, here’s what happened…we suffered the loss of a colleague from cancer. As you can surely understand, that’s never easy. Employees got together, and, based on his family’s wishes, decided to contribute funds to our local humane society in lieu of flowers. We know that’s what he would have wanted. Honestly, here in Smithfield, Rhode Island, we were thinking of “rescue” puppies and kittens and never a broader agenda. It was not the intent to capitalize on a contribution or a death, but rather, we wanted to share the good will embraced by our employees with our community. We do realize that posting content on this on our branded Muck channels was a major mistake, one we won’t make again. We’re sickened by the fact that wearers of Muck feel as is we’ve let them down. It was never our intention"

Its nice to know that they know who their customers are, and also know how big of a deal this would be if they were to give to a criminal organization like HSUS.

Obviously some of the people on this page need to do a little more research on who the true HSUS is! It is not your local animal shelter, although they would like to you think by donating to them it helps the local shelters out, but in fact it is far from the truth!

As a very popular company in my neck of the woods I hope for them that this was all a big misunderstanding and it be a lesson to them and other companies of how quickly a decision like this would affect sales. As was stated the stories still are not jiving and I plan to sit back and keep an eye on it before giving them any further business. If the employees were donating money in lieu of flower why did the original fb post not say something about that instead of using the phrase " Fund raiser"? In my book employees donating in remembrance of a friend and fund raiser are two pretty different things. Why was the picture not one of the diseased employee or something more fitting a memorial? And until the shelter they claimed to be the receiver of funds confirms a donation from a memorial of a former Muck employee I will continue to be very skeptical

That's what I'm saying Dozer. Major difference in the way you perceive between a "fundraiser" and in lieu of flowers. The end results for HSUS may be the same as far as money raised. If what they say is true then it is almost like Muck was trying to get some free "good" PR when in the end it backfired on them so they are now backing up.

 

[knabe]

Why are conservatives so opposed to conserving?

Why are liberals so liberal with other peoples money and conservative with their own?

 

[knabe]

there's so many people out there willing to engage in despicable production practices that it takes the over-accentuation from a group

Wolf only works so long, then it's counterproductive.  If only the Hsus was equally concerned about abortion. That, to me, is why they have NO CREDIBILITY.  They "care" more about fundraising than they do puppies and kittens which they incinerate at a rate of 80% if not more than they do humans. They need to be as adamant about human adoption as pet adoption.  Since they aren't, they are scum.

 

[knabe]

I'm genuinely curious, what is it about their position that you so adamantly oppose?

Them telling me what to do, but we can't tell them what to do.


For some reason, they hate choice, except when it comes to killing humans.


They like sex without consequence. They like everything without consequence for themselves, but consequence for everyone else.  They are hypocrites.  That is specifically why I oppose them. Additionally, if they are so concerned about global climate change, they should consider that after age 8, we contribute to global warming. So they should either change the data so people reach puberty or they be first in line to provide themselves as food to feed to other Hsus supporters to really step up in the credibility if global warming is so important.  Perhaps reducing server farms would help global warming too. So many tools they could do themselves rather than constantly focusing on the habits of others. And by the way, if they have to focus on others, why not start with Asian countries and the absolute slaughter of animals for tiny pieces of flesh with the rest of the carcass grown away. Again, their aggressive hypocrisy and not going after much higher priority problems is the issue. They have no credibility. I had some black bear gall bladder. Tastes like chicken.

 

[hardenblu2]

Knabe, again I'm with ya, the only choices they care about is theirs and if we don't agree, then we are wrong. I don't think they have taken the time to study the ingredients on the dog and cat food bags.  Xbar I agree that it would be nice to be able to mass produce pork and beef without confinement. You sir would be wealthier than you are now if you could figure out how to fatten out cattle and hogs outside of a confind environment. And not take more time, because more time takes away from your profits.  Also here is something to ponder, in the midwest the EPA is trying to pass a bill that prevents us from having any livestock withen a EPA decided distance from creeks and streams and Even our own ponds if there is any way it can get back to a creek or stream. HELLO, most of the midwest is tiled, meaning every pond here has the chance of making it back to moving water. Now, who do you think is lobbying for this the hardest. The worst part of this is unless you are a produser the city folks don't realise the effects this will have. They will get this past, maybe not this year but our kids will see it. The other problem, theres a lot of pastures that have water running through it, that's why its pasture. Other wise it would have corn and beans on it. Xbar this wasn't all meant for you, I respect your views, I just disagree with your stance. Outside of your local animal shelters there isn't much good that comes from the HSUS, in my opinion. Thanks for letting me ramble. 

 

[knabe]

If only progressives were on the dog and cat food label.

That would be literally stepping up to the plate.

Too bad they don't have any integrity. Global warming could be solved very quickly.

Hamas = hsus.

Here's a typical liberal saying tax me more, tax others more, somewhen they do it, what does he do? Sue. Typical liberal.  Oh and by the way, Robert Redford and all the liberals hate development, bu what do they do in sundance?  Develop, develop, develop and sue others who try.  Typical liberal, wants one set of rules for themselves, another for others.  Reminds me of a dictatorship.

http://hotair.com/archives/2014/08/06/robert-redford-sues-to-get-his-1-6-million-back-from-the-fair-share-pot-in-ny/

"Planned" parenthood and Hsus should at least have the courage and pride to name them selves appropriately, Unplanned Pregnancy Termination Services while Hsus should be renamed Unplanned Puppy and Kitten Incineration. I mean really, why be ashamed of the truth?

Oh I forgot, millions of tax dollars, votes for an increasing government bureaucracy and donations to pay outrageous salaries to incinerate pets.

To bad neither service is really successful at what they should be doing, adoption.

 

[hamburgman]

Never been all that impressed with muck boots.  They allow moisture in during the rain, are heavy and insulated making my feet sweat which then later freezes.  I am a cowboy boots or tennis shoes person and put on pair of rubbers in mud type of person.

 

[knabe]

I agree that it would be nice to be able to mass produce pork and beef without confinement.

Petri dish. But then isn't the Petri dish really confinement as well?

 

[RyanChandler]

there's so many people out there willing to engage in despicable production practices that it takes the over-accentuation from a group

Wolf only works so long, then it's counterproductive.  If only the Hsus was equally concerned about abortion. That, to me, is why they have NO CREDIBILITY.  They "care" more about fundraising than they do puppies and kittens which they incinerate at a rate of 80% if not more than they do humans. They need to be as adamant about human adoption as pet adoption.  Since they aren't, they are scum.

Here you have it folks: according to knabe, if abortion is not at the forefront of your own agenda, you have no credibility.  Support of any other cause is dishonorable and should be abandoned. 

You know who I think has NO CREDIBILITY? 

Empiricist, such as yourself, who dismiss the rationalist view yet claim to be Believers. 

 

[BTDT]

There's as much propaganda against them as there is for them.  That you can be sure of.  I don't support their entire platform but I acknowledge that a world of good has come from many of their initiatives.  That's what extremist groups are good for: granted they do generally blow issues out of proportion, but most importantly, they bring attention to issues that would otherwise just be swept under the rug. Everyday people realize the truth lies somewhere in the middle and, unfortunately, there's so many people out there willing to engage in despicable production practices that it takes the over-accentuation from a group like HSUS, for the people to wake up and move their position on animal welfare back towards the center. 

"Accordingly, The HSUS pursues the reduction of animal suffering in the raising, housing, care, transportation, and slaughter of animals raised or caught for food. Furthermore, we seek to ensure that animal production systems are humane, sustainable, and environmentally sensitive. The HSUS supports those farmers and ranchers who give proper care to their animals, act in accordance with the basic ethic of compassion to sentient creatures under their control, and practice and promote humane and environmentally sustainable agriculture"


I'm genuinely curious, what is it about their position that you so adamantly oppose?

Xbar,
I am adamantly opposed to their definition of "suffering".  I adamantly oppose their definition of "proper".  I also adamantly oppose their definition of "compassion".  I also adamantly oppose their definition of "humane and environmentally sustainable agriculture". 
I suppose you think everyone's definition and interpretation is the same?

Also keep in mind the HSUS and PETA are very closely related. PETA and the ALF are closely related.  I will let you do the conclusion.

 

[RyanChandler]

No I don't think everyone has the same definition.  Your definition is likely one of disregard. 

You feel as if these type of operations are acceptable.  I do not.  And it's the people who support this type of crap that give the entire industry a bad rap.  Until reasonably minded cattle producers separate themselves from these production practices-- distinguishing themselves from those whose definition is one of disregard, then we will continue to be under attack by extremist groups,, and rightfully so. 


Pics taken on Shorthorn University trip--  place was disgusting and reeked of ammonia.  Of course the producer been conditioned to ignore/overlook the blatantly obvious.  Mind you this is an open pole barn and the ammonia levels were still so high I could barely stand to be in there.  There's nothing honorable about this type of production system.  It's unnecessary and uncalled for.

 

[BTDT]

Wow, you are so egotistical I bet your shadow doesn't even like you.
How DARE you say "Your definition is likely one of disregard."  YOU DO NOT KNOW ME.  YOU DO NOT KNOW MY LIVESTOCK OPERATION OR MANAGEMENT.  How DARE you.
But then again, you, and your comrades in the HSUS, PETA and ALF, all do the same.  Just because I MIGHT (or might not) disagree with you, I am the "bad evil ag farmer".  Just jump to conclusions and lump everyone of a group together, because that is what makes their campaign against ag work.  Attack with innuendo's, implications and no facts. 

FYI - I am a strong supporter of livestock producers who raise their livestock that have a happy, humane, ethical, proper and compassionate care.  (I happen to be one of those)
Now, how can YOU disagree with THAT?

 

[RyanChandler]

You clearly said: "I am adamantly opposed to their definition of "suffering".  I adamantly oppose their definition of "proper".  I also adamantly oppose their definition of "compassion".  I also adamantly oppose their definition of "humane and environmentally sustainable agriculture"

When someone states that they oppose definitions which extend regard, then I feel it's implicit that the  alternative opinion is one of disregard.  Perhaps you don't really oppose their definitions,,, You're right, I don't know.. I can only go by what you say.

 

[RyanChandler]

And there is no 'relevant' campaign against ag (in general).  What there IS a campaign against is inhumane, unsustainable, and environmentally reckless production practices.  SO either vocalize the distinction and gain recognition for being above such disdainful practices, OR do nothing and allow your general consent to continue enforcing the 'bad evil ag farmer' stereotype, and be "lumped together with everyone."  The choice is yours. 

 

[knabe]

You are missing the argument on abortion entirely.

Hsus should be videotaping abortion if they are so worried about cruel and inhumane treatment.

They aren't.

I don't see too many hsus proponents volunteering for post birth abortion.

If its so good, society should be able to do it at any age for any reason.

 

[knabe]

There is a relevant campaign against ag, ever since Rachel Carson.

Your denial doesn't remove the facts.

Tax policy is also against ag as is the government by converting land into parks and encouraging development as ag doesn't generate enough tax revenue for social agendas 

 

[knabe]

With the left so fervent to regulate everything, fertility should be regulated.

One Shoukd need a permit to procreate and while we are at it, pre designate their job based on need and discretion of the proletariat. there are always special cases depending upon discreet behavior.

 

[RyanChandler]

Proletariat.  Pretty sweet name for a Vanguard son.