snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Non-UL Chat > Wild Kingdom

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 01 February 2018, 06:35 PM
Little Pink Pill's Avatar
Little Pink Pill Little Pink Pill is offline
 
Join Date: 03 September 2005
Location: California
Posts: 7,040
Default

I think part of the problem when it comes to air travel may also be that many people are afraid to check their larger animals into cargo. There are horror stories about mishandling and annoying regulations, like these from Delta:
Quote:
-A pet shipped domestically via Delta Cargo cannot be booked until 14 days prior to departure.
-Pets are not guaranteed to be shipped on a customer’s same flight or flight schedule.
-Shipping a pet requires dropping it off at a Delta Cargo location at least three hours before departure time at a location separate from passenger check-in.
-Picking up a pet would also occur at a Delta Cargo location.
The possibility that your animal won’t fly with you, get stuck on a tarmac, or end up at a cargo location for pick up is something many owners wouldn’t feel uncomfortable with. It makes the option to skip all these regulations and fly your pet as an emotional support animal pretty tempting.

A peacock, for example, is going to be hard to fit into any kennel I know of without seriously damaging its tail and flight feathers. A broken flight feather can bleed profusely. Birds are fragile and quickly dehydrate, so shipping one on an unknown flight in an unknown time frame could be a genuine risk to the bird’s health. As unreasonable as it seems to try to bring a bird that size one a flight, I also understand why the owner wouldn’t want to ship him, even if he wasn’t an emotional support animal.

If airlines offered better large pet options, maybe so many people wouldn’t try to cheat the system.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 01 February 2018, 06:40 PM
Lainie's Avatar
Lainie Lainie is offline
 
Join Date: 29 August 2005
Location: Suburban Columbus, OH
Posts: 74,310
Default

When I moved to Columbus from Seattle, I entrusted my animals to a company that allegedly specialized in coordinating air transport for pets. They charged me a not-inconsiderable fee for this service. My cats arrived terrified and covered in their own filth.

No animal of mine will ever fly cargo again.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 01 February 2018, 06:43 PM
Sue's Avatar
Sue Sue is offline
 
Join Date: 26 December 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 8,813
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Pink Pill View Post

If airlines offered better large pet options, maybe so many people wouldn’t try to cheat the system.
Obviously this made the news because, well, peacock. But is this a real problem for airlines? People trying to bring large animals onto the plane with them? And how large is considered too large? Do dogs have to be small enough to be considered a lap dog for instance?
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 01 February 2018, 06:47 PM
Seaboe Muffinchucker's Avatar
Seaboe Muffinchucker Seaboe Muffinchucker is offline
 
Join Date: 30 June 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 18,169
Glasses

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellestar View Post
I think if there were more legitimate ways to travel with animals, people would be less likely to try to game the system.
I don't share your optimism, if those more legitimate ways cost money.

I would never fly with Ferdinand if it could possibly be avoided, not because I think we would disturb the other passengers, but because it would stress him out unbearably. I don't think even being able to sit on my lap during the flight would ease his stress (not that I think I'd be able to have him sitting on my lap under current law/rules). I'm cautious about drugging him due to his epilepsy.

Seaboe
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 01 February 2018, 06:49 PM
Little Pink Pill's Avatar
Little Pink Pill Little Pink Pill is offline
 
Join Date: 03 September 2005
Location: California
Posts: 7,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lainie View Post
No animal of mine will ever fly cargo again.
I don’t blame you. We travel enough that we choose small breeds so we don’t need to use cargo.

I love that at the top of the Delta page it says they treat animals the same way they treat humans. Seeing the way airlines have been treating humans lately does not make this statement a particularly comforting one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sue View Post
Do dogs have to be small enough to be considered a lap dog for instance?
IME they usually have to be able to fit, in their kennel, under the seat in front of you to qualify for cabin travel as a companion animal. My 11 pound Jack Russell just barely met this qualification. So practically speaking, small lap animals only. Everybody else goes in cargo.

ETA from Delta:

Quote:
-Your pet must be small enough to fit comfortably in a kennel without touching or protruding from the sides of the kennel and with the ability to move around.
-The kennel must fit under the seat directly in front of you.
-Your pet must remain inside the kennel (with door secured) while in a Delta boarding area (during boarding and deplaning), a Delta airport lounge and while onboard the aircraft.
-Your pet counts as one piece of carry-on baggage. Pet in Cabin fees still apply.

Last edited by Little Pink Pill; 01 February 2018 at 06:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 01 February 2018, 06:52 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 25,416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Pink Pill View Post
Birds are fragile and quickly dehydrate, so shipping one on an unknown flight in an unknown time frame could be a genuine risk to the bird’s health.
If it is even possible. This was long ago, but when we moved from Arizona to Florida, it was a huge struggle to find an airline that would even allow a parakeet on their aircraft in any form. IMS, we had to take multiple flights as only the small, regional airliners would allow it and their flights were to nearby states, not cross-country.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 01 February 2018, 08:22 PM
Skeptic's Avatar
Skeptic Skeptic is offline
 
Join Date: 16 July 2005
Location: Logan, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 1,781
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellestar View Post
I know I'm probably going to be in the absolute minority with this opinion, but I think it should be easier to travel with pets by air, full stop. I admit, I'm a complete animal lover, so when I see a dog or a cat in the airport or on my plane, I get happy rather than annoyed.
...
Again, I'm an animal lover without allergies so I don't get the rolling eyes or the annoyance of seeing an animal in an airport or on a plane. And I think if there were more legitimate ways to travel with animals, people would be less likely to try to game the system.

*shrug*
It is already possible to bring animals on planes, as cargo where they belong.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 01 February 2018, 08:31 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 25,416
Default

Why is the cargo hold where they belong?
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 01 February 2018, 09:08 PM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,488
Icon07

I'm willing to admit I don't know much about animal support. But it's obvious in situations like this who does and who doesn't. And I haven't yet heard anyone who does have good knowledge disparage or ridicule the practice. Conversely, I haven't heard any actual statistics or facts that would lead me to believe that there's a serious problem with them. (More on what constitutes a serious problem below.)

I do know a little about being on planes. Many of the board members here have travelled a lot more than me but I've flown a plenty in the US and in various places around the world enough that I think I have an informed opinion about flying. In that experience, I've seen a lot of problems on planes, violence and disruptions, dangers and extreme annoyance. The percentage of those incidents related to a totally unnecessary and dangerous "emotional support" with absolutely zero therapeutic value is 100%. In most of those cases, some of that was supplied by the crew on the plane - sometimes for free. I'm talking about alcohol of course. Yet I'm OK with serving alcohol on planes. I'm not so foolish as to blame everyone who uses this "emotional support" for the small percentage (but very large in number) who abuse the privilege. I'm not calling for a breathalyser to be stationed at the gate to keep drunk passengers off etc. even though it would have made practically all of those incidents go away.

So I honestly think people are whining about something they don't understand and don't accept because no one they personally know or love needs (or wants - cf alcohol). I'm willing to hear arguments to the contrary but I haven't yet. All I've heard is some anecdotes and ridicule and so forth, no actual reason that this is such a huge problem that it should be banned entirely or licensed or anything like that. I do see that it has caused some incidents but it seems that they are mostly trivial and in the cases where they aren't still relatively rare and possibly handled through some small rule changes rather than any huge change in the practice. I guess my point in this is that before looking for solutions people have to define exactly what problem they're trying to solve and give some kind of rationale - especially before restricting other people's rights.

Last edited by ganzfeld; 01 February 2018 at 09:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 01 February 2018, 09:18 PM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust thorny locust is offline
 
Join Date: 27 April 2007
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 8,755
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeptic View Post
It is already possible to bring animals on planes, as cargo where they belong.
A living animal is not a suitcase full of clothes; and has drastically different needs.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 01 February 2018, 09:29 PM
Skeptic's Avatar
Skeptic Skeptic is offline
 
Join Date: 16 July 2005
Location: Logan, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 1,781
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thorny locust View Post
A living animal is not a suitcase full of clothes; and has drastically different needs.
And airlines are well able to handle live animals. It's routine.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 01 February 2018, 10:16 PM
crocoduck_hunter's Avatar
crocoduck_hunter crocoduck_hunter is offline
 
Join Date: 27 May 2009
Location: Roseburg, OR
Posts: 12,095
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeptic View Post
And airlines are well able to handle live animals. It's routine.
Evidence suggests that they're not so great at doing so:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lainie View Post
When I moved to Columbus from Seattle, I entrusted my animals to a company that allegedly specialized in coordinating air transport for pets. They charged me a not-inconsiderable fee for this service. My cats arrived terrified and covered in their own filth.

No animal of mine will ever fly cargo again.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 01 February 2018, 11:05 PM
UEL's Avatar
UEL UEL is offline
 
Join Date: 01 August 2004
Location: Ottawa/Fredericton, Canada
Posts: 9,034
Baseball

Having put some thought to it, I am of this mind:

- if someone is in absolutely terrible state that they absolutely cannot be separated from their emotional support animal, then they need to be declared incompetent (or whatever the proper term is, handicapped?) and get a service animal. This animal needs to be trained to interact with others on behalf of the person (definition of a service animal vs a support animal).

- service animals need to have documentation. In Canada, I have learned in my readings the other day that it is standard to have documentation. When required, documentation is presented e.g. for booking a flight.

- Not anyone can demand documentation, but where the animal would otherwise be contravening a law and putting someone else in potential legal trouble, it would be allowed. For example, a food establishment can have a manager check a dog's permit, but not a crossing guard for a school.

- people who are caught faking should be treated as those who get caught faking a handicapped placard for parking. Fines and other punishments can match (here it is $380 and losing the placard for a first offence).

- service animals are a must, but support animals are at the behest of the owner for entrance to their business. By definition support animals do not need to be trained, nor do they replace a function for the person they support. That reads to me that they are not absolutely necessary for a person to be able to operate. If the person can't, see my first point.

- I have had problems with animals in the cabin of planes. Last time there was one on a flight with me, I had a dog in the cabin kitty corner across the aisle from me from Tel Aviv to Toronto. The flight attendants kept telling the woman to keep the dog in the case, and she would put her in, until the flight attendant was not looking, then it would come out and be allowed to run around. I sympathise with the dog, but as I have flown animals, it can be done effectively in cargo. I have once seen a service animal in the cabin, and it was a superb thing. I think service animals can be in the cabin as their intense training helps out. But other animals, into the hold they go.

- the creation of a national standard, or even an industry recognised standard will go a long way to helping people recognise a true service or support animal and weed out the fakes (not a lot out there, but the ones that are do make it harder on the legitimate ones).

Those are just my thoughts based upon 2 days of thinking about this issue. Feel free to challenge me on any of them. I'm not married to the idea, so I'm willing to admit I have no qualms about admitting I'm wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 01 February 2018, 11:06 PM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,488
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeptic View Post
And airlines are well able to handle live animals. It's routine.
Exactly. They can handle live animals in the cabin. It's routine.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 01 February 2018, 11:11 PM
Ellestar Ellestar is offline
 
Join Date: 31 July 2008
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,804
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeptic View Post
And airlines are well able to handle live animals. It's routine.
Not in my experience. First, when I had my Labrador, they could not handle a dog of that size on any of the airlines I could find. Further, there are temperature issues. Pets cannot fly as cargo on planes in certain parts of the country during certain times of the year for fear of freezing or cooking to death.

And from personal experience, I've not seen animals treated well. As with Lainie's experience, one dog that had traveled by cargo was covered with feces and vomit when we picked him up. He was also left alone in this condition for three hours in the cargo depot because the people we dealt with kept sending us to the wrong areas of the airport to pick him up.

Also, dogs are not unfeeling cargo. No dog that I've ever had would be okay being crated, then stowed under a plane. A friend of mine's dog had a heart attack and died during a flight as cargo and I have no doubt that the stress my dog would have (based on their personalities and anxieties) would probably result in the same thing.

I've flown round trip once with my very small dog in the cabin. I paid all the extra money and followed all of the rules. I still got dirty looks (although one woman apologized for it after the flight because he stayed where he was supposed to and didn't make a peep). I doubt I'll do it again, but the option to do so would be nice.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 01 February 2018, 11:23 PM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,488
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UEL View Post
Feel free to challenge me on any of them.
Well, since you asked for it, I will, with all due respect to you UEL, which I have plenty.

What's to challenge? You simply said "need to", "not necessary", "not needed", "would", "must"... It's just your opinion not backed up by any scientific facts or really anything that might support your opinion. I mean, like the following for example sounds, frankly (and for lack of a better word because, again, I'm not trying to be insulting), ignorant:
Quote:
if someone is in absolutely terrible state that they absolutely cannot be separated from their emotional support animal, then they need to be declared incompetent (or whatever the proper term is, handicapped?)
Where does this even come from? Replace it with people who need drugs or alcohol, people who need in-flight entertainment, people who need vegetarian or halal meals... It's just your unsupported opinion about a whole group of people.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 01 February 2018, 11:33 PM
Cervus's Avatar
Cervus Cervus is online now
 
Join Date: 21 October 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 21,052
Default

You'd think one of the private animal transport companies that zoos and conservation organizations use for large exotic animals would expand its market to pet owners as well.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 02 February 2018, 12:14 AM
WildaBeast's Avatar
WildaBeast WildaBeast is online now
 
Join Date: 18 July 2002
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 15,185
Default

There is something kind of like that: Pet Airways. Although it looks like they're only offering very expensive privately chartered flights right now, at one time they had a more affordable service that looks to have been essentially a flying kennel with a "flight attendant" who looked after the animals during the flight. They're website says they're running a crowd funding campaign to attempt to bring back that service.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 02 February 2018, 12:21 AM
UEL's Avatar
UEL UEL is offline
 
Join Date: 01 August 2004
Location: Ottawa/Fredericton, Canada
Posts: 9,034
Baseball

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganzfeld View Post
Well, since you asked for it, I will, with all due respect to you UEL, which I have plenty.

What's to challenge? You simply said "need to", "not necessary", "not needed", "would", "must"... It's just your opinion not backed up by any scientific facts or really anything that might support your opinion. I mean, like the following for example sounds, frankly (and for lack of a better word because, again, I'm not trying to be insulting), ignorant:
You aren't insulting me. I think I have a solid grasp of your online personality and I hope you mine.

Your assessment is correct. I have only 2 days of experience thinking about it. I have no expertise. What I've done is drawn, what is to me, a fair line. I am not going to fall on my sword on the issue, because I will admit I don't know the answer. Ignorant is a valid word.

Quote:
Where does this even come from? Replace it with people who need drugs or alcohol, people who need in-flight entertainment, people who need vegetarian or halal meals... It's just your unsupported opinion about a whole group of people.
Now, for my response to your challenge, there is a line. In our charter, there is a definition about disability, and if someone is disabled (I don't know why I chose the word incompetent in my post. It was not the word I was thinking of, but my fingers obviously typed it) then they have a legally defined need. I'm used to dealing with that as I have a secondary duty as an advisor to my commander on Charter issues.

However, legally, there is no legally defined need if it does not fit the definition of disability.

In my post, that was where I drew the line. As for whether I drew the line in the right place when it comes to impact on people.... I can't elaborate much.

Thanks for taking the time to read, and challenge my position. This board has not had a lot of that in the past while, and I miss it.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 02 February 2018, 12:41 AM
Beachlife!'s Avatar
Beachlife! Beachlife! is offline
 
Join Date: 22 June 2001
Location: Lansing, MI
Posts: 28,318
Default

I feel about pets on planes the same way I feel about babies; Its an unpleasant, uncomfortable and even painful process that I would not want to put either through unless absolutely necessary. I don't think it should be banned, but if someone close to me asked for advice on the subject I would advise pursuing other options.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Russian plane crash: Choir members on board, no sign of survivors Psihala Crash and Burn 0 25 December 2016 03:16 PM
Passengers Fall in Love With Emotional Support Duck on Flight Psihala Wild Kingdom 9 19 October 2016 04:45 PM
Woman who struck boys with SUV, killing one, sues families for 'emotional trauma' UEL Moot Court 33 03 March 2015 02:30 PM
Woman Drowned Puppy In Airport Toilet After Not Being Allowed To Board Plane With It A Turtle Named Mack Wild Kingdom 3 27 January 2015 03:43 PM
Police Say Man Sexually Abused His Peacock A Turtle Named Mack Police Blotter 8 06 June 2013 05:37 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.