JACK THE CAT'S LAW

This is a forum to discuss legislation and legal matters pertaining to the rights and welfare of cats. Please remember to counter ideas and opinions with which you don't agree with friendly and helpful advice and responses.

(Page 2 of 3: Viewing entries 11 to 20)
1 2 3

Harvey

Has been COTD!

Purred: Wed Nov 9, '11 6:12pm PST


	If the airline supplies the GPS devices, that makes sense. But as far as I know, international shipping requires cargo, at least between the US and Japan. That is going to be hard to change. But if NWA allows howling infants (many trips, all miserable), a crying kitty should not be a problem.

[notify]

Ben

I fetch,- therefore I am.

moderator

Purred: Wed Nov 9, '11 9:09pm PST


	The cost of GPS tracking devices is definitely an issue. If the airlines are required to provide them, they will pass the expense back onto their customers, most likely in the form of higher pet fees. On Amazon.com, a GPS pet tracker runs about $300. Would it be more cost effective for travelers with pets to pay double or triple the pet fees to have the airline loan them a GPS tracker, or to just buy the trackers themselves so that they can then keep and use them in other situations? Another issue would be that, if the airline is responsible for putting the GPS tracker on someone's cat or dog, it would mean that airline personnel would have to open the carrier and handle the pet--which seems like the last thing you'd want them doing if you don't want your pet to get lost. Unfortunately, it is often necessary for pets to travel in the luggage compartment. There really isn't any way for large breed dogs to be secured safely in the cabin. (One of the things that really makes me angry about Jack's case is that the "weight limit" that AA invoked to force his mom to check him and his brother as luggage was never meant to be applied to cats, but to keep people from trying to stuff large dogs under the seats.) As Harvey mentioned, too, there are different rules for international flights. Whether a pet can fly in the cabin or must be checked as luggage depends on the quarantine laws in the country you're flying to. If that country requires that pets be quarantined upon arrival, then they must fly in the luggage compartment. Obviously, something needs to change to make air travel safer for pets. The airlines already have pretty strict rules about transporting pets, but it doesn't seem that they're doing enough to enforce their own existing rules. That might be a good place to start before giving them excuses to slap more and higher fees on pet guardians. Just a thought.

Merlin- >PAWS<- [In Loving

713682

Purred: Thu Nov 10, '11 10:41am PST


	You all sound as if you don't favor Jack's Law, and I fail to understand that. The one that should be passed would forbid the carrying of companion animals in cargo. Would you want to ride in the cargo area? Think of the way the animals feel: it's dark and noisy, and very,very frightening, I should think. I remember watching an episode of Dirtiest Jobs, in which Mike Rowe was acting as a baggage handler, and I remember the inside of that cargo area, where Mike couldn't even stand up and could hardly move because it was so cramped. I would certainly be scared to death traveling in there; how much worse it must be for a cat or dog! I cannot imagine subjecting an animal to that trauma; it borders on mental cruelty. Mohandas Gandhi said that the moral worth of a nation can be fairly judged by the way in which it treats its animals - and treating them as cargo certainly doesn't say much about the moral worth of the airlines, does it?

[notify]

Gummi

Destroyer of- Spiders

Purred: Thu Nov 10, '11 11:26am PST


	Actually Merlin, some of us feel as though the law wouldn't necessarily be effective. It's all well and good to require pets not travel in cargo, but once that plane flies out of US airspace, then the law is moot and out of jurisdiction. If the destination country REQUIRES the pet to be in cargo and not the cabin, then the pet will be in cargo - you can't exactly stop a jet in midair and transfer a pet into cargo from the cabin. (As far as I am aware...) Just making laws that aren't effective is what some of us have a problem with, it does NOT mean we WANT our pets to be forced to travel in the cargo hold. I want a real resolution, not just a feel-good law that does potentially does NOTHING. We are merely discussing the actual logistics behind something like this. Also, that Gandhi quote always gives me a chuckle - he sure had a lot of nerve saying that coming from a culture that, up until fairly recently at that point in history, required a new widow to kill herself on her husband's funeral pyre (and in many documented case, forced her to) but yet considered cattle and other animals holy and sacred. The Nazis also had some pretty good animal welfare laws too. Edited by author Thu Nov 10, '11 11:28am PST

[notify]

Merlin- >PAWS<- [In Loving

713682

Purred: Fri Nov 11, '11 1:23pm PST


	I have no idea how many pets travel internationally or nationally; the fact remains that if there had been a "Jack's Law" in place, forbidding the carrying of pets in the damnable cargo hold, Jack would be safely ensconced in his new home with his mom and brother. Just because such a law would not apply to international travel does not mean that it should not be passed to apply to domestic travel. Gandhi was right in his statement because people have a choice and nonhumans do not. The way in which an individual, a family, a town, a city, state, or country treats its animals is an indication of its compassion. I'm glad that you got a laugh out of that.

[notify]

Gummi

Destroyer of- Spiders

Purred: Fri Nov 11, '11 4:35pm PST


	Domestically, such a law would be effective, I agree. I'm not so sure how that would work with large breed dogs, however. Perhaps a "special cabin" of sorts for those situations? Actually, as my examples stated, Gandhi was wrong, the way a nation treats its animals is NOT a good reflection of it's overall compassion. It is but one of MANY contributing factors of such. If you use that logic, the Nazi regime was certainly the pinnacle of human achievement and civilization. The quote make me 'laugh' because it's so ridiculously naive (not you, but the individual quoted). Of course, I'm not really laughing because this is a serious issue.

[notify]

Harvey

Has been COTD!

Purred: Fri Nov 11, '11 10:14pm PST


	Hitler was a vegetarian and loved his dog Blondi. Go figure.

[notify]

Merlin- >PAWS<- [In Loving

713682

Purred: Sat Nov 12, '11 5:39am PST


	Ok, Gummi, understood. Anyway, that part of the discussion of OT. The point is - and on this we all agree - something needs to be done! We know that cats and small dogs (who can be squeezed,literally, under the seat) can travel in the cabin. I see no reason why even a large dog, in a kennel, couldn't be allowed in the cabin. That's what I've envisioned all along: pets in their kennels. They could be carried or wheeled thru the jetway easily; planes could have a an area in the back, separated from coach as coach is separated from first class. There could be a limit on the number of animals allowed on each flight - maybe four? Pets would board first and deplane last. They'd be separated - with their parents - from the rest of the plane. It could be done - if the airlines cared at all.

[notify]

Bumpurr

RESPECT The- Star!

Purred: Sun Nov 13, '11 6:01am PST


	When dealing with anything, in trying to make something safer, or hold an organization responsible, due to a tragedy like this, ya have to start somewhere. Maybe this will pass, maybe it won't, but we have to start somewhere, and most importantly, it brings attention to the situation, and keeps attention on it. I put it on the cat show board.

[notify]

Merlin- >PAWS<- [In Loving

713682

Purred: Sun Nov 13, '11 6:37am PST