This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Micky D on 18 February 2009 - 15:02
by wuzzup on 18 February 2009 - 16:02
by Davren on 18 February 2009 - 16:02
by Micky D on 18 February 2009 - 16:02
by vomlandholz on 18 February 2009 - 16:02
by SitasMom on 18 February 2009 - 16:02
Measures by U.S. majors to adopt policies to improve the transportation of pets are failing to placate animal rights groups, which remain critical of the air transport of animals as commercial cargo.
Activists have applauded the latest move to end the practice of pets traveling as checked luggage which many U.S. carriers have, or soon will be implementing. However, skepticism still surrounds airlines' plans to transport animals in cargo holds, a significant revenue generator for many airlines.
"In 1993 United Airlines [UAL] made over US$10 million transporting animals both commercially and privately," said Caitlin Hills, legislative specialist for the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). "Whether animals are shipped as baggage or cargo they still go to the same place, into the cargo holds which are not properly ventilated and are not temperature controlled."
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) echoed the concerns of the HSUS. "On one hand we're thrilled," said Jennifer O'Connor, a cruelty caseworker for the organization. "But it's almost unbelievable as long as airlines make a ton of money (transporting pets as cargo)." She added: "It seems contradictory that it is too dangerous for some animals to fly if it's not dangerous for all animals." O'Connor said there is too much money to be made to stop carrying animals completely.
Commercial pet transport is so lucrative that some airlines place a significant value on their pet cargo customers. In an internal memo obtained by World Airline News dated June 1998, American Airlines [AMR] identified two of the pet companies it worked with as "premium cargo customers."
Hills said she hoped the summer embargoes by the airlines were not a tactic to manipulate the government's enforcement of recent regulations passed in FAIR 21 (Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reauthorization bill) which mandated U.S. carriers report pet accidents and train their baggage staff to handle animals properly. Diana Cronin of the Air Transport Association (ATA) said the embargoes were "absolutely not" a method for the airlines to placate federal regulators. "These policies have been in place for many years. Extra precaution in transporting pets has always been taken."
Airlines' claim their proactive nature by maintaining that they will not ship animals commercially if the temperature reaches 85 degrees Fahrenheit or above for over 45 minutes. However, they neglect to mention that this policy decision is mandated by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the government agency responsible for establishing rules governing pet transport.
Continental Airlines [CAL] has taken a proactive move and announced earlier this month its plans to stop accepting pets as baggage permanently. Instead, the animals are to be transported as cargo through a new program called Quickpak, which will include a 24-hour live animal help desk, transporting the animals in climate controlled vehicles for connections in the carrier's Newark and Houston hubs and tracking and tracing capabilities. The airline said the added expense of the specialized services was not an issue. "It definitely pays off in the end," said an airline spokesperson.
Hills balked at Continental's program. "What is a 24-hour live animal help desk? When we called the number there was a recording," she said. The HSUS said there was the automated system offered personal contact with an airline representative only after multiple options were presented to the caller.
Perhaps some of the
by vomlandholz on 18 February 2009 - 16:02
by SitasMom on 18 February 2009 - 16:02
Perhaps some of the confusion revolving around pet transport will be resolved once the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) issues guidelines for the airlines to comply with the new pet regulations. But the agency is dragging its feet. The DOT told WAN it was working with the USDA and FAA to draft the guidelines, but said no firm time commitment for issuance had been established.
According to O'Connor, the government's lack of attention to pet regulations is no surprise. "No one in the FAA or DOT is unaware, but frankly they've done nothing to intervene," she said. "It's business as usual and issues involving animals are low priority."
Still, the increased government enforcement could lead airlines to eliminate pet transport completely if the cost of transporting pets rises above the revenues. "If it came to the point where it was costing industry large sums of money we would have to stop," said Cronin. O'Connor, however, disagreed. "There's just too much money to be made. If they were going to stop transporting pets they would have done so by now."
Text of a June 1998 American Airlines Internal Memo to Customer Service Managers, Ramp Services and Field Services
"Premium PPS customers - Pet Destinations and Grand Pet/Pet Air/ will be exempt from the June 5-September 15 live embargo at all locations. Pet shipments from these two premium cargo customers will be accepted for transport during the embargo period provided exposure to temperatures above 85 degrees Fahrenheit does not exceed 45 minutes."
U.S. Carriers instituting summer embargoes on pets as checked baggage.
United Airlines
Trans World Airlines
American Airlines
Delta Airlines
by Ceph on 18 February 2009 - 16:02
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/animal/dogs.htm
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/animals/animal_import/animal_imports_pets.shtml
This is the restricted list :
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/animal/restricted.htm
Dogs arent on them.
~Cate
by SitasMom on 18 February 2009 - 16:02
USDA EXTENDS COMMENT PERIOD
FOR TRANSPORT RULEMAKING
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top