Inside today's Times: the Humane Society, salmon, wolves and animal rights

In today's L.A. Times:

Carla Hall profiles Wayne Pacelle, chief executive of the Humane Society of the United States:

In the four years since the 42-year-old vegan -- he neither eats nor wears animal products -- ascended to the top spot at the Humane Society, Pacelle has retooled a venerable organization seen as a mild-mannered protector of dogs and cats into an aggressive interest group flexing muscle in state legislatures and courtrooms.

Eric Bailey reports on vindication but no relief for imperiled steelhead salmon, steelhead:

A federal judge struck a largely symbolic blow for imperiled salmon and steelhead Friday, declaring that the state's vast water-export system is putting the fish at risk but rejecting environmentalists' key demands for change.

Tami Abdollah reports that protections for wolves have been reinstated:

Gray wolves in the northern Rockies regained endangered-species protections Friday when a federal judge in Montana granted a preliminary injunction to environmentalists, who had challenged the wolves' delisting.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife officials announced in February that gray wolves would be removed from the endangered species list after what they termed a successful 20-year effort to reestablish the wolves in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. Environmentalists sued.

The judge's ruling nullifies plans by Montana, Wyoming and Idaho to hold wolf hunts this fall.

And finally, David Savage reports on a setback for the animal rights movement.

Comments

[Brien Comerford]

Wayne Pacelle is an exemplary leader for the Humane Society of The United States. He's an animal loving vegan who has reverence for the lives of all creatures great and small. Pacelle is compelling and articulate when he speaks and when he's interviewed. He's a fervent animal rights advocate but he respects those that wrongfully diisagree with him. Wayne Pacelle embodies compassion in action.

[Rochelle]

David Savage's report reinforces how just because they don't happen to possess a voice that we can understand, US courts still support the inhumane and barbaric treatment of animals. How can these lawmakers sleep at night knowing that they could easily sign a piece of paper and legally end all animal suffering, yet, it's just 'too hard'. It is proven that acts of cruelty and violence towards pets and animals leads to violence and abuse of people - it is extremely disappointing that this is still 'allowed' to continue. I am pleased that in-roads are being made into pet and animal legislation, it is only a shame that this couldn't have been supported sooner. When laws and rights for animals are passed into legislation, the punishments for crimes against animals had better fit the crime/s committed.

[MM]

I can understand Ms. Hall's desire to give a voice to those who feel Mr. Pacelle is too radical. But I am disappointed to see that she chose the Center for Consumer Freedom as that voice. This group was funded with Big Tobacco money (Philip Morris, to be exact) and they are merely a front for the restaurant, tobacco and alcohol industries. They are NOT looking out for the consumer's best interest, and they have the track record to show it.

Mr. Pacelle is right to dismiss Mr. Martosko as a pimp for the meat industry, and I don't understand why Ms. Hall would characterize that comment as an "uncharacteristic flash of rancor." If she researched the CCF before talking to Mr. Martosko — which I have to assume she did — then she'd know why he chose such strong words.

I'm sure there are legitimate reasons why someone could take issue with Mr. Pacelle's stewardship of the Humane Society, and I think it's perfectly reasonable to include such objections in a profile of the man. But Ms. Hall did her readers a disservice by not choosing a more moderate, credible voice.