Two weeks ago I wrote a column about Yellow Tail wine, the Australian wine that became public enemy No. 1 overnight after donating $100,000 to the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). After a few lame efforts to defend themselves and to ignore the overwhelming criticism the company was receiving, it finally did the right thing and admitted its mistake.

The company promised not to make future donations to the radical animal rights organization. What was especially interesting is that much of the condemnation came from the public and from people outside of agriculture. While farmers and farm groups were a part of the chorus, the depth of dislike for HSUS to - say nothing of the sheer numbers of people enraged by the action - was a major factor in the decision by Yellow Tail to tuck its tail between its legs and run. As I write, history looks to be repeating itself as yet another corporation seems to be committing suicide by donating to HSUS.

In the wake of the Yellow Tail incident, a website was set up to monitor the activities of HSUS. Created by the Center for Consumer Freedom, a long-time foe of animal extremist groups, the site has publicized a great deal of information embarrassing to HSUS.
Last week the website published a list of “corporate supporters” who had contributed money to HSUS. This information was obtained directly from the HSUS website.

On the list were some familiar names including Xerox and Microsoft, companies with a long history of giving money to nutcase causes. One name, however, that has generated a great deal of customer outrage is that of Pilot Travel Centers.

According to its website, “Pilot Travel Centers LLC (PTC) is the nation’s largest operator of travel centers and largest seller of over-the-road diesel fuel. It owns and operates over 300 travel centers in 41 states.”

But within hours of the posting by Humane Watch, the Pilot Facebook fan page was slammed by irate customers.
Common comments were: “So many better ways to help animals than donating to H$U$ (sic) ... guess I’ll have to take my business elsewhere and inform all the truckers that haul my livestock and feed to do the same” and “when is the last time an h$u$ (sic) truck pulled into a pilot versus livestock farmers…” and “I do a lot of interstate traveling and have frequently used Pilot in the past. Those days are over. You folks won’t be giving any of my money away to H$U$ (sic).”

As with the Yellow Tail case, many of those making comments are farmers, but many are not. In the case of Pilot, many of those incensed by Pilot’s support of HSUS are truckers, dog breeders and just plain consumers who are holding companies responsible for the charitable donations they make. In the competitive world of retail fuel sales, Pilot has put itself in a difficult spot.

According to the Pilot website, “Pilot takes seriously its commitment to its customers.” Time will tell if this includes listening to their customers’ dissatisfaction with their corporate donations. Speaking of corporate donations, Pilot states that “Pilot has a history of corporate citizenship and feels strongly that it is important to serve the community philanthropically in time and resources.”

So, if this is its philosophy, why did Pilot donate to a group that spends less than one half of 1 percent of their funds actually helping animals but instead engages in lobbying and litigation?
Ignorance - Pilot had no idea what HSUS was really all about. So they were caught totally unaware by the backlash of their customers. Late Friday afternoon the company issued this statement: “We sincerely regret any actions that led to the misperception of our support of this organization. Pilot Travel Centers is a strong supporter of agriculture interests in our home state of Tennessee and across the country.”

According to Pilot, the money they sent to HSUS was not a corporate donation, but rather funds from a collection box placed in their stores. “Since 2007, less than $52,000 in voluntary donations from customers and employees were collected in stores as part of an employee-driven charity event. The money went to three specific areas: rural animal veterinary care services, disaster relief, and a foreclosure fund to help rescue animals left behind in homes during the foreclosure crisis.”

According to the statement, this program has been canceled, “In order to avoid any further misunderstandings, employees will immediately cease collections of donations to HSUS. Pilot corporate has never matched a single dollar of these donations and will not support any organization that has an agenda that works against agriculture interests.”

For the second time in as many weeks, shining the spotlight of publicity on who gives money to HSUS has resulted in a change in policy by supporters of this anti-animal agriculture group. Again, the rapid dissemination of information via the social media networks has played a role.

These small victories are not going to put HSUS out of business, but it has shown how HSUS can be hurt and how individuals can have an impact. I truly hope this becomes a trend and that people, both inside and outside of agriculture, will take an interest in who supports radical activist groups.

I cannot say it enough: stay informed and get involved. You can make a difference.

The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and not necessarily those of Farm World. Readers with questions or comments for Gary Truitt may write to him in care of this publication.