Taxpayer Supported Animal Cruelty

The billions of dollars that our government spends on programs that harm or kill animals could be directed toward better health care, hiring more teachers, police and firemen, overhauling our failing public education system or upgrading our aging infrastructure.

Our leaders need to make some tough economic choices. Perhaps they can start with theNational Park Service, who two weeks ago oversaw an operation to kill 20 deer in D.C.'sRock Creek Park. There was a better option available that the National Park Service chose to ignore -- using a non-lethal immunocontraception vaccine to reduce and stabilize the deer population.

The Humane Society of the United States offered to pay half the cost of this five-year program, saving taxpayers $170,000. But the National Park Service chose to kill the deer even though it had already successfully implemented wildlife contraception programs with The HSUS on Fire Island, N.Y. and on Assateague Island, Md. Then, to add insult to injury, NPS announced that venison would be distributed to food banks and homeless shelters. DidPark Service employees really want to shoot the deer?

Or consider the role of USDA-Wildlife Services. Every year, millions of our taxpayer dollars are used to fund this agency that kills native predators at the request of ranchers and state wildlife management agencies. The methods employed are inhumane and include leghold traps, snares, cage traps, aerial gunning and indiscriminate poisons.

While damage to livestock by predators is a real concern, Wildlife Services also has the authority to kill animals that are simply a nuisance and could be dealt with in a more humane way. The wolf and coyote reduction programs are particularly horrific as often these defenseless animals are shot by sharpshooters in helicopters as they desperately try to escape.

We should also look into animal research and testing funded by the National Institutes of Health and other government agencies. Today, billions of dollars are poured into government research programs that include testing on animals. Technological advances are replacing the use of animals with more cost efficient and effective methods and where we should be investing our resources, yet our government continues to support many studies that provide limited benefit to humans and cause pain and suffering for monkeys, kill rabbits, dogs, guinea pigs, mice, rats and many other animals.

Thankfully, the government did respond to public outrage over using chimpanzees in medical experimentation and is gradually releasing these poor animals to sanctuaries. This is less costly than having them live out their lives in laboratory cages.

We need to look at every government agency that either uses animals or is responsible for animal control to determine if low cost alternatives are available for research experiments or population control. I am certain we could readily identify various programs that could be cut or eliminated, freeing up money to address more pressing needs of the elderly, families and children.

Taxpayer-supported animal cruelty must end.

Correction: An earlier version of this post incorrectly stated the location of Rock Creek Park. The park is located in Washington, D.C.