Humane Society faces lawsuit - Hawaii News

I support Mr. Pang and what he is trying to do. I feel for him and I cannot believe of how the Humane Society just turned things around and made it as a circus! My opinion him and his wife did nothing wrong but, try to take care of these animals that are just left out in the community! Hawaiian Humane Society does not go and rescue the animals that are left at the beach, dropped off by there owners because they no longer want them...This is so not right for what they are doing to Mr. Pang and I hope they do get what they deserve! I am so happy for Mr. Pang that he is stepping up to the plate and fighting back it's just so sad that it has to result to this, especially after his wife passing...Shame on the Humane Society for not being more understanding and resolving this issue...Mr. Norman Pang is a nice man only trying to do a good deed....

Ther seems to be some confusion in this article. Mr. Pang called upon the Humane Society of the United States for help, not the Hawaiian Humane Society. The Humane Society of the United States which flew people over to take custody of the animals are the ones that made the video, not the Hawaiian Humane Society.

Mr. Pang had stated previously, as reported in the Star Bulletin, that he didn't trust the Hawaiian Humane Society and that was the reason he contacted the Humane Society of the United States for help.

So, which is it, is the Humane Society of the United States being sued or the Hawaiian Humane Society, or are both?

I remember reading about this at the time and thought it was pretty cheeky of the H.S. to do this. Mr. Pang had called them for help and they made him look like the criminal. Even tho I have always been a supportive of the H.S. and our local SPCA but I hope Mr. Pang wins his case.

I think this clealy demonstrates that Mr. Pang had reasonable cause to distrust the Hawaiian Humane Society when he decided to call the Humane Society of the United States. His fears were apparently justified.
But the HSUS also sold him down the river. They set up a "transfer" but they later characterized it as a "rescue". He should include HSUS in the suit as well.

I'm glad that a lawsuit has been filed on the Humane society. Bonnie passed away and the husband did what was best for the animals at the time. He called the animal shelter to take animals he could no longer care for. As a result, he became the victim in this ordeal. If I were in his shoes, I would sue the humane society and have the directors all replaced with better individuals.

From my perspective, the person who came up with the idea to defame Mr. Pang including the person or persons who was taking the video should be personally held accountable. Sue them.

So much defaming on the part of the humane society is a shame on a non profit organization.

He called for help and was scamed. He wanted help. Best wishes for a successful civil suit.

Mr. Pang should prevail; any charity or cause has its wackos.

Mr Pang did NOT call the HSUS or the Hawaiian Humane society. and I really wish people would stop running on their raw emotions and pity and really educate themselves about what hoarding is! It is cruel to neglect an animals medical needs, to cram that many animals into a small space, to not spay or neuter, to allow animals to live with all kinds of horrible infections and diseases and then call is "care".

So many of those animals that lived like that would never have even been BORN to had HHS won the case years ago, but the judge didn't seem to think think much of animal welfare!

Hoarding goes on al over the country and if we just keep feeling sorry for the people who cannot take care of them yet won't let them go so they CAN be treated and cared for, then nothing will change. I wonder how many of you screaming against HHS and the other groups would feel the same way if YOU had walked on his property and seen the conditions they were in! Would you call it a haven then? Would you want those animals outta there? There is a LOT to this story the public isn't aware of and that is thanks to the media and "left out facts" and then, again, the fact that the people just love to see things in black and white-one side is the victim and pititable, the other is the evil monster who just wants power and doesn't care. THINK, folks, why would HHS bother to pursue a cruelty charge, at risk of time, lots of expense, and a backlash of public anger, if there weren't very just cause? Hoarding IS animal cruelty and not something to pity the owners for.

We let our emtions fool us into seeing things really rationally and the media (and other certain groups) love that!

wacko wrote:

I'm glad that a lawsuit has been filed on the Humane society. Bonnie passed away and the husband did what was best for the animals at the time. He called the animal shelter to take animals he could no longer care for. As a result, he became the victim in this ordeal. If I were in his shoes, I would sue the humane society and have the directors all replaced with better individuals.
From my perspective, the person who came up with the idea to defame Mr. Pang including the person or persons who was taking the video should be personally held accountable. Sue them.
So much defaming on the part of the humane society is a shame on a non profit organization.

Bravo! Bravo!! On the ball my friend, on the ball.

It would be good if he wins big takes the "Humane Society" over and initiates a no-kill policy.

Bonnie Pang was not a hoarder in my book. She accepted animals who were brought to her and did as best as she could. The mistrust of the HHS was probably justified beacuse she knew they would euthanize them. After her passing Norman contacted the National Humane Society because he believed that they would be more humane. Wrong these two organizations are tied together. They saw a oppurtunity and utilized the Pangs animal shelters as a means to get donations. Now for their stupidity they are facing a lawsuit and claim that the money they have to spend to secure a laywer will waste resources (money). I'm willing to bet that most of these animals have been euthanized as I write this post, exactly why Bonnie kept them at her shelter. I remember my oldest son who found a abandon poi dog once so skinny and sick. He nursed that dog for two weeks in his apartment till she was healty and then took her to the recieving area at HHS. He said they acted like he was bothering them. The next week he went to see how she was, he was tolded that she was not there.????Probably euthanized how sad. Rest in peace Bonnie you were special.

Realist wrote:

It would be good if he wins big takes the "Humane Society" over and initiates a no-kill policy.

yeah, good luck running a shelter where you never euthanize. Not possible and even more cruel in certain situations when an animal is in such pain or serious aggression issues arise (good luck adopting that one out). These shelters are open, meaning they have to take in every animal and not all animals are save-able. It's sad but true.

Think about how many pet owners have their beloved pets put down for humane reasons. A "no-kill" shelter just isn't realistic. Try working in a shelter and helping out so that animals are spayed/neutered, there's no more senseless over breeding,no more people on Craigslist trying go get rid of their animals and new litters. Try fostering, anything to be a part of a real solution instead of making blanket accusations that the Humane societies are just in the business to kill and have no car for animal welfare. They can't do everything and they can't be perfect, but they save many. Go in and volunteer and see how it relly is. There are many who truly care but they can't be perfect. And NO ONE can claim they never euthanize. That's the cold hard truth about shelter life. read every animal welfacre organizations mission statements and policies and you will see they all know it's just part of the world of trying to save as many animals as possible, but not all can be saved. Let's all pitch in and stop judging what you don;t know unless you've been there.

There whackos on both sides of the fence. Mr. Pang isn't one, but the individual or individuals who initiated the criminal complaint are. The mission of the Humane Society is noble, it's the overzealous whackos within it that ruin it's image.

I thought originally Mr. Pang called the SPCA for help and they subsequently called the Humane Society. The tactic of shooting a "training film" and then following up with using the video for character assassination and fund raising is contemptible.
I think the humane Society and the Hawaii Humane Society should remove the offensive material from their web sites and apologize to Mr. Pang. The alternative is more negative publicity and expenditure of resources that could be put to better use.

The Humane society needs to be more humane!

I have adopted from the HHS and I feel they are doing a great job for the resources they have. The problem starts from irresponsible pet owners who do not spay or neuter, and see the cute little puppy become a large eating, pooping machine that the owners do not take the time to train properly. In difficult economic times the dog food is one of the things that become "optional" to the family. So now you get the folks who are against euthanizing (so am I) who gather the strays and sometimes get overwhelmed like Mr. Pang is. But give the HHS (or whoever he is suing) a break or at least give ALL the money he gets into a spay/neuter program.

i did community service and can see how the hawaian humane society could entrap mr.pang with animal cruelty by filming a video....hopefully he can win compensation from the humane society.....maybe we can have some dog fights and chicken fights at the humane society ...isnt this the mission of the hawaiian human society....JUST JOKING... IM BEING SARCASTIC AND IRONIC...

the thai kid wrote:

i did community service and can see how the hawaian humane society could entrap mr.pang with animal cruelty by filming a video....hopefully he can win compensation from the humane society.....maybe we can have some dog fights and chicken fights at the humane society ...isnt this the mission of the hawaiian human society....JUST JOKING... IM BEING SARCASTIC AND IRONIC...

OK, People, let's get something cleared up here. There are TWO Humane societies and they are not affiliated with each other. One is the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and they are the ones woh came in from the mianland to help set up the emergency shelter. They are also the ones who took the photos and did the filming. NOT the Hawaiian Humane Society (HHS). HHS is the group that brought cruelty charges of hoarding against the Pangs in 1995., So if you wonder why 2 major animal welfare groups are trying to do something about the problem of hoarding and the cruel and disease producing conditions in which these animals live and STILL feel pity for the hoarders, then all I can do is just shake my head and feel that maybe you really aren't thinking about the animals welfare first. And I am also so tired of these blanket statements people make about how they "KNOW" the humane society is just going to kill all the animals. That is NOT TRUE. Do not profess to KNOW something just because that comment has gone around and around for so long that people ASSUME that is going to automatically happen.

Can anyone see things a bit more reasonably and accurately here or is it just all reactive emotionalism without FACT to back it up?

It is my understanding that both USHS and HHS are using video that was acquired under false pretenses to paint a picture of Mr. Pang in a very, very negative perspective.

As you appear to be authoritative in respect to USHS and HHS, it would be informative as to what is the euthanasia policy of HHS, as it appears to be a major point of contention of many of their critics.

My first impression when reading the previous story on this situation was that the Hawaiian and US Humane Societies are threatened by the work that the Pang's were doing. That is there job...so to speak. Instead of working together with the Pangs, the Humane Society sought to destroy the competition and discourage others from infringing on their turf. That was my impression anyway. Am I wrong?