According to Marshall Meyers, Chief Executive Officer and General Counsel for the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Committee (PIJAC), their explicit mission is to “Promote responsible pet ownership and animal welfare, foster environmental stewardship, and ensure the availability of pets.” He testified in front of the Subcommittee of Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife, House Natural Resources Committee regarding HR 669. To read this in its entirety, please visit this link:  Marshall Meyers testimony to the Subcommittee in PDF. Yet, if H$U$, PETA and other “animal rights” groups get their way, we will all be vegetarians who are unable to purchase milk, eggs, eat meat of any kind, and will not be able to purchase or own a pet of any kind.  While they do not outright tell you their true agenda, this is their goal, with the ultimate goal being no animals, period. Is it ethical for these groups to use lies to promote their activists agenda? What does this mean to you in the terms of dollars and cents, not to mention the emotional impact that the loss of animals and pets would have? 

The emotional benefits of owning a pet have been studied for a number of years. You have all heard that it helps to reduce blood pressure, relieve stress, reduce cholesterol levels, and increases physical activity levels. Owning a pet also helps improve the human mental being by reducing anxiety levels, fights depression, helps in child development, enhances family life and increases physical exercise and activity levels in pet owners. Research has shown that owning a pet is one of the best anti-depressants; and with no side effects! They increase the release of endorphins and hormones that are tied to the pleasure receptors in our brains. We who have pets already know the unconditional love and attention they offer. They make us laugh, they encourage other human involvement, and divert our attention from the problematic stresses of daily life. For many people, they take away the loneliness, and cause us to get out in the world. After all, there is pet food to be purchased, veterinarian visits, etc. Think about the Pet Therapy animals and how they help a patient in hospitals. Just the touch of a dog or the wag of a tail can bring such joy to a critically ill child or adult. Research also shows that children who grow up in a home with a pet have better self esteem, are more pro-social in skills such as speech, writing and poetry than children who grow up without the benefit of a pet. Ask any teacher the effects on a classroom when a pet is in the classroom and the calming effects it has on the children. Who is the happiest to see you come home after a hard day at work? I’ll bet it is your pet. 

According to Jim Hughes of The Kennel Spotlight, the pet industry contribution to the U.S. economy amounts to over $45 Billion for the year 2009, which is more than the gross domestic product in all but 64 countries in the world. This breaks down into roughly $9 Billion, 80 million dollars for each state.  He breaks this down into the 36,757 voting entities in this country, and $2,470,000.00 each. He says that there are 71.4 million homes in our country that have a pet of some kind, meaning over two thirds of our population. Yet most of these people (99.8%) are not truly aware of the goals of the H$U$, PETA and the other groups. The problem with this is that these caring people contribute to these groups, thinking they are doing the right thing according to the commercials they see on television. They are not aware of the true goals of the HSUS and other groups like them. 

Think about the different states throughout the country. What does each state contribute in livestock production, the hunting industry, fishing, and the beauty of our wildlife? How would the ban on animal production affect different sectors of our economy? A little known fact to many is that the soybean industry would suffer greatly. You see, 98% of soybean meal is consumed by the animal agriculture, livestock and poultry producers. You can see what this would do to the American soybean farmers. 

In California, the dairy industry accounts for more than 70 percent of the animal agriculture income. The animal agriculture output amounted to over $15.3 Billion in 2006. Its earnings amounted to over $2.5 Billion, income taxes paid in the amount of over $590 Million, and property taxes paid in the amount of over $126 Million. It accounted for 89,811 jobs. In Kansas, nearly $3 Billion in production value is generated from 6.6 million cattle and calves. It accounts for nearly 100,000 jobs. In Texas, which leads the country in livestock sales receipts, it accounts for $24.6 Billion in output, earnings of $4.1 Billion, taxes paid of $778 Million, and property taxes paid of $262 Million. It accounts for 228.366 jobs.

The state of Florida alone contributes over $11 Billion to the U.S. economy when combined with crop, livestock, forestry and fishing. Wisconsin has many dairy farms, cattle ranches, ranches that produce animals for fur. (That is a whole other issue.) In the year 2007, Wisconsin dairies contributed over $26 Billion to the economy, and the total agriculture contribution amounted to over $59 Billion. When you compare the figures of cattle production, dairy production and animal production to the figures for grain and produce production in Wisconsin, the contribution to the economy from animals far outweighs grain and produce production contributions. Their agriculture production contributed 353,991 jobs to their economy, and on farm production contributed another 132,000 jobs. Agriculture processing brought in a total of 251,800 jobs. That is a lot of people earning a paycheck, paying their mortgages, car payments, buying groceries, contributing their income taxes, both federal and state, and supporting a lot of businesses. 

According to Promar International, an independent research firm, in Missouri, for the year 2002, dairy farms alone employed 3491 hired laborers; spent $1.7 Million on contract labor; spent $6.1 million custom work; and paid over $5 million in property taxes. 

When trying to analyze input-output factors to quantify the relationship between livestock production and its impact on the national economy, the RIMS II model is used in this analysis. RIMS (Regional Industrial Multiplier System) is operated by the Bureau of Economic Analysis in the U.S. Department of Commerce. In effect, it compares the impact of one industry on other industries. Using this multiplier, Promar estimates that the animal agriculture industry contributes upwards of $451 billion to the economy, and provides well over 3.3 million jobs. 

According to the 2009-2010 American Pet Products Association (APPA) National Pet Owner’s Survey, 14,000,000 American households maintain freshwater and saltwater fish; 6,000,000 households maintain pet birds; 4,700,000 maintain reptiles; and 5,300,000 maintain small mammals that are non dog/cat.  This does not account for multi-pet owning households, i.e. a household that owns both dog or cat and maintains fish. In New England alone, veterinary medicine contributed $3.3 Billion to the economy in 2008, according to Tufts University, with the region facing a shortage of 658 veterinarians by the year 2014. 

According to the HSUS’ own website, there are over 77 million owned dogs in the U.S. There are over 93.6 million cats. These numbers reflect companion animals. What about assistance dogs, or rescue dogs, bomb sniffing dogs, drug dogs, and Police dogs? These dogs all save lives, or make life easier to live a little more independently for many people. Just ask anyone who owns one of these very talented dogs, or works with them on a daily basis how willing they are to give up that dog. What about the animals used in research for human life saving medications? If there are no animals, who will the researchers use to test these out on? Ingrid Newkirk, founder of PETA, did not seem to mind the insulin research and development used to help her second-in-command, Mary Beth Sweetland, who is an insulin dependent diabetic. Yet, the HSUS would like to see all of this go away. Per Wayne Pacelle himself: “"We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding ...One generation and out. We have no problems with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding."  — as quoted in Animal People News. 

According to BCC Research, the pet industry, in 2005, saw owners spending about $33 Billion, with 19.3% going to pet supplies, 33.3% in pet services, and 47.4% in pet food. Veterinary services were $8.8 Billion. The export of U.S. produced pet products reached about $1 Billion in 2005. Estimated sales for 2010, according to the American Pet Products Association, or APPA, figure to be $47.7 Billion. These break down as follows: Pet food, $18.28 Billion; Supplies/OTC medicines, $11.01 Billion; Vet care, $12.79 Billion; Live animal purchases, $2.21 Billion; and Pet services (pet grooming and boarding), $3.45 Billion. This does not even account for the growing trend of pet insurance, therapies, whether they be massage or behavioral, nor the trend of natural or holistic nutrition and products for pets. Today, half of all dog owners consider their pet’s comfort when purchasing an automobile. You can purchase jewelry for your pets, and 42% of dogs sleep in the same bed as their owners. Let’s face it, people love their pets. The pet industry is one of the few that is believed to be recession proof. In March of 2009, retail sales in the U.S. rose just 1.4% overall, according to the National Retail Federation. Yet, Pet Smart posted an 8.4% increase, and Del Monte’s pet division posted a 15.1% increase for the third quarter of their fiscal year 2009. Packaged Facts, a division of Market Research Group, expects a continuing trend in sales growth for the pet industry. 

So, how does all of this affect our economy? If we had no pet industry, how many jobs would be lost? The pet food producers would go out of business, the veterinarian’s would go out of business, pet stores, breeders, groomers, pet supplies stores, and so many others. The job losses would be huge. Then this affects the other industries, as the people who have lost their jobs are now NOT spending money, their mortgages are not getting paid, nor the car payments, utilities, and they are not shopping. So this affects those businesses, and the trickle down continues. This does not even touch the pet products that are exported, the tax revenues lost, and the unemployment insurance costs for all of those lost jobs. And the trickle down gets worse! What would life be like without zoos, animals in the circus, Sea World, or National Parks and all of the animal life and splendor, and many other places people go to enjoy animals? The effects are undefined and will have unintended consequences. 

Would it not be wiser for the HSUS, PETA, and other groups like these to spend their monies on supporting current legislation for the education of responsible pet ownership, enforcing current laws regarding responsible pet breeding and the difference between that and a “puppy mill”, supporting local animal shelters who need the funds so badly, and assisting in realistic wildlife conservation for future generations to enjoy.