People who won't evacuate because of pets.

[FlaGranny]

I think I'm going to make a suggestion to the local SPCA and other anticruelty groups, Red Cross (who run some shelters), and local news. Since people won't leave their pets, and I'm one of them, every shelter should have SPCA/animal care units set up outside the shelters and people should be informed to bring their pets and some pet food with them. The SPCA could then take charge of the animals and take them to animal shelters. Even better, set up human/pet shelters where people with pets can go.

This could save the lives of people AND pets. Then we wouldn't have to see scenes like little dogs being grabbed from the hands of little boys.

[Karmadillo]

1. Imagine a similar catastrophe in Beverly Hills. Would people

be forced to leave their pets to starve?

[Mizmoon]

2. I don't understand why they have to leave them behind

are they not allowed to bring them on rescue boats or something?

[LisaL]

3. Pets are not allowed on buses.

[LostinVA]

21. Some drivers apparently turned a blind eye

To smuggled pets... but only those small enough to be put into purses, etc.

I literally would never leave my fur babies. I would die with them. I mean that. It would be like leaving my partner or my mother to die alone, scared, and starved.

[txindy]

49. Yes, they did, although one Great Dane made it through on a bus! LOL

That must have been the nicest bus driver ever! And check out the story about Lola, the lovebird:

...The Houston SPCA is full of pets of evacuees, and Jim Boller, director of shelter and field services for the organization, estimates that only half a dozen out of hundreds actually came "legally," meaning properly leashed or in crates. While a few of the bus drivers relented on the “no pets” rule—the adult great Dane being held at the shelter “probably drove the bus,” HSPCA volunteer Steve Rundell jokes—the majority of the animals who’ve arrived with the victims were stowaways, brought out of the city by hook or by crook by owners unwilling to leave them behind. The two ferrets arrived in the oversized pockets of a young girl. A parakeet was concealed in a makeup case. Chihuahuas and kittens came in women’s purses.

Then there was Lola. Earlier this week, Boller was helping with pet intake at the Astrodome in the middle of the night when the lovebird arrived. The young woman who brought the bird obviously hadn’t slept for days, and she mentioned having come from the Superdome. All she and her little boy had with them was a small plastic bag of personal items, and Lola—although the bird was not immediately apparent to Boller’s eyes. The woman told him, “I’ve got something for you,” and then pressed her breasts together slightly and rolled her shoulders in a way that might have seemed suggestive in another context. Lola the lovebird popped up out of her cleavage, having spent most of the bus trip tucked inside her owner’s bra.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: That THAT is ingenuity! :applause:

[in_cog_ni_to]

5. They won't let pets go with their families to the shelters.

:cry: Last week a NG soldier took a puppy out of a little boy's arms before he would let him on the bus to Texas. :cry: CRUEL!

[Mairead]

6. Because those in charge see non-humans as 'things', not people

and the relationship as one of ownership, not family. :(

[nickinSTL]

9. do they not let people take OTHER property on the buses?

no backpacks, nothing?

If pets are property, they should be allowed if any other property is.

[Mairead]

19. You know, that's a very good question. I don't know whether they allow

people to take anything more than the clothes on their backs. If they do, then you're right.

[meow2u3]

61. Non-human animals are't the only ones they consider things

These fascist bastards think people are things, too--especially the poor and/or non-white! :grr:

[Mairead]

65. Well caught! You couldn't be more right. (nt)

[Mr_Spock]

10. No pets allowed

Losing a pet is as big a tragedy as loosing one's home to some people.

[Modem Butterfly]

16. There are concerns with allergies and animal bites

I don't know why they can't designate one or two shelters or evac buses to be animal friendly though.

[Mairead]

22. I don't think it's a matter of "can't" but rather "won't"

That has to have occurred to more people than just us, and even to some of those in charge.

[hlthe2b]

29. Yes... Several shelters in MI and AL DID let dogs in...

it apparently worked very well--calm kids and generally happier crowds. To be worried about bites from 99.99999999% of companion dogs is crazy. To be worried about allergies is really stretching it, especially given everything else they have been exposed to(dog allergies are much rarer than with cats; cats could be kept in a separate room in the shelter)

[electropop]

4. I'm one too.

I would rather die with my dogs than let them die alone. Snatching the dog from the boy was to him, just like snatching him from his parents would be, to them. They're not objects, they are family, and the "authorities" who behave so cruelly need to be replaced with human beings.

[Mairead]

8. Right on.

Family is family, no matter what the species.

[OhioChick]

7. This is a very good idea

that you have. Many people view their pets as part of their families. This would help save human lives, as well as that of their beloved pets.

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

11. I posted this last night...

...it's from one of Newsweek's Katrina slide shows, so there is no direct URL (I had to do a screen capture and upload it to my Photobucket account in order to post it here).

The slide shows are HERE:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9133972/

...and this photo is from the one called "Chaotic Recovery" (it's photo #14).

[Cooley Hurd]

12. I couldn't/wouldn't leave Chuckiemutt, under ANY circumstances!!!!

...EVEN if it meant my own life!

Call me nuts, I could give a shit. I'd take a bullet for him!

[seabeyond]

13. take the fuckin pet. it isnt a tough one

who the fuck cares. we are talking lives. they won. take the pets. so many moved. they have space now. no reason, no legitimate reason to not take pet.

EXCEPT: it is a fuckin RULE

i am sick and tired of rules that dicxtate our lives, because we are so chicken, such wusses. we dont think we or fellow man can live, without a bunch of fuckin rules

at some point a rule may not make sense

take the pets

[KyndCulture]

14. God I don't know what I'd do faced with that choice.

My kitties are my children....You might as well cut off my arm, but I've never been in that situation. I hope the SPCA can help.

[Cattledog]

15. When will they start shooting the stranded pets?

While listening to NPR this morning a couple of the rescue officers mentioned this as a real possibility.

[Alamom]

17. We wouldn't leave our pets. (cats)

Stupid, maybe, but they breath...... and suffer just like we do.
They are not inanimate and they depend on us to care for them.

I completely understand people not wanting to leave them. It is a heartbreaking thought.

[malta blue]

18. great idea

It would help the decision making process so much easier on people when put in that position. In addition, the SPCA was stating that any persons who abandoned their animals would be charged with animal cruelty. Way to put them between a rock and a hard place.

[FlaGranny]

26. You know, that gives me mixed feelings.

I can't imagine how an owner could abandon a pet, even in a disaster. Then again, if it is a choice between the animal and your kids or other family member, that's a different story. In any case, I guess I don't believe anyone should be charged for animal cruelty in this case.

Animal welfare organizations need to work something out with Red Cross, because Red Cross runs all the shelters for people.

[alarimer]

27. How can the SPCA do that?

Most of these people have no choice but to leave their pets since they are NOT ALLOWED to bring them to shelters. What a fucking asinine thing to do- charge them with cruelty after all the other crap they have to go through. That pisses me off ALMOST as much as FEMA.

[malta blue]

30. On Sunday, before the disaster hit

The SPCA was issuing statements that said, put a tag on your animal to help you find them, but anyone who abandons them is going to be charged. Unbelievable. I would have had no choice but to leave the dog and the cat, I have a kid, and I would have needed to consider her safety above my own.

[Mairead]

68. Many people's minds run on rails. It makes life smooth for them

but they find it very hard to change direction when they need to.

[NNN0LHI]

20. I love dogs I got two but suppose you and your family had been...

...stranded on your roof for a week and no one was coming to help you and you looked and seen a helicopter or a boat packed with peoples dogs and cats pass you by while you and your family where on the verge of dying from lack of water or starvation.

How would you react to that?

Don

[Mairead]

24. Speaking for myself, I'd understand. And hope that my cat and I were next

[NNN0LHI]

33. I am talking about you kids here

Are you saying you would understand someone letting your kids starve to death because the rescuers were busy saving dogs and cats? This is too much for me.

Don

[LostinVA]

46. That;s not what's happening

People are WITH their pets in their homes, etc., and the pets aren't being rescued along WITH them, even though there is plenty of room in the boats, choppers, etc. The won't take the pets along with the kids.

[LostinVA]

25. As I stated up thread, I would die with my kitties

And my partner would, too. We've discussed it. And, I know my mom would stay with her elderly (and awe-inspiringly spoiled) Westie... now my dad, he's be the first on the chopper!

[NNN0LHI]

34. Would you let your children die to save your kitties?

That is what my post was about.

Don

[FlaGranny]

41. You are being

intentionally unpleasant. No one would let their child die to save a pet. Ninety-nine percent of the people we are talking about are elderly singles or couples, or younger single people and couples. Their pets ARE their family. Geez!! Excessive overreaction. You didn't used to be like that. The Neocons are making you bitter. No one ever said to save a dog or cat rather than a child.

Edit: Maybe you can find another thread to argue in. I was trying to find a solution to people dying because they won't leave their pets.

[LostinVA]

50. Thank you, Granny, the poster was being purposely unpleasant

For you info, I have no human children. I have fur children. They are my kids, so you can STFU in any false judgment you have of me.

Further, as I have stated before in this thread, the rescuers would rescue people's pets ALONG with them, even though there has been plenty of room in the boats, choppers, etc. They are being needlessly cruel and obstinate in not understanding how people often feel about their animals. Kind of like you.

Now, go judge someone else in another thread. God.

[Mairead]

66. I think you're less perceptive on this issue than on others, Don

The people who feel their pets are family, and who have kids, generally have kids who feel the same way. Our kids would be just as horrified by the idea of abandoning our non-human family members as we adults are. Kids aren't 'things' either; their feelings are just as real and meaningful as those of any adult.

[FlaGranny]

28. I would say it was a shame to let those

people die because they wouldn't leave their dog or cat.

[NNN0LHI]

35. I would say it is criminal to use one drop of fuel or waste one second ...

...saving cats and dogs while there were humans dying.

Don

[FlaGranny]

39. So be it - those people will die

in ADDITION to their pet, because, for some reason, we don't seem to care how people suffer the loss of a family member (their pet) and make arrangements to evacuate them and their pets before it is too late.

There is a whole segment of the population that considers it their duty to protect their pets. We won't make room for them in shelters so they won't evacuate. We won't rescue them afterwards. They die because of their love and commitment. They accept that. I would accept that for myself. But I don't accept the lack of accomodation for those people and their pets, which could save all their lives.

[LostinVA]

51. Great post, you put into words what I've been trying to say

Thanks! Some areas sometimes do have people/pet shelters. I think the Florida Keys has one.

[txindy]

57. Excellent post, but I wouldn't bother, if I were you

Unless my memory is gone, the person you're responding to posted yesterday that a lot of people would eat their dog under these circumstances or that the dog would eat the people. :eyes: If it isn't the same poster, then the two of them should get together. I'm certain they would be great friends.

[Coventina]

60. You know, if I died alone with Sarah, I have NO PROBLEM

with her eating my body to survive.

I'm dead, what do I care? But if my death could keep her alive until rescued, that's great.

[txindy]

67. Yes, but that's not what was meant.

Not the way I read it, anyway. The suggestion was that the people and dogs would go at each other. The winner would eat the other. :eyes:

Adding: I happen to agree with you. :hi:

[Coventina]

69. So that's the only outcome of staying behind with one's dogs?

Unbelievable!

:eyes:

Who would have thought that pro-animal attiudes would come under attack on a liberal board?

:hi:

[Occulus]

58. ...and there's another segment of society,

apparently represented on this thread, that couldn't care less.

[peacebaby3]

56. If they are picking up a person that has a pet, it would not waste

any time or resources if the person holds his or her pets in his or her arms!!!!!!!!!! Any of my pets can sit in my lap. In fact, thay all could so they wouldn't take up anymore room.

They are allowed to bring other things they can grab! I would choose to grab my pets.

Have you ever thought about what a beloved pet means to someone?!?!?! They have already lost almost everything else (some have even lost family members) but you are so willing to let them lose a pet that means the world to them. There is something to be said for quality of life over quanity! You are only promoting more suffering for these people!

I pray to God you never have a pet since you would so easily throw it aside. When you choose to own a pet, their life becomes your responsibility.

Nobody should have to choose between their pet and their child. Instead of being on here bitching about a pet being saved, you should be raising hell that the authorities are forcing anyone into that situation!

[Coventina]

59. Well, it's attitudes like yours that make people stay with their pets

Pets offer unconditional love and loyalty.

[Cattledog]

37. That's one of the stupidest

statements I have ever heard. More like a Freeper generality than reality. The fact is nobody is saving a pet before a person but they need to be saved and not left to die in misery.

[NNN0LHI]

63. ...and your mama wears combat boots... n/t

[justiceischeap]

23. Shedding some light

Urgent: Tell Your Federal Representatives to Demand Animals’ Safe Evacuation From New Orleans!

Dear Friend,

Your immediate attention and response is requested. No animal rescue groups have been allowed into New Orleans to help animals, who have been left stranded on their own. Sending money is not solving the animals’ problem, which is worsening by the hour.

Meanwhile, http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/04/katrina.pets.ap/index.html">federal authorities are forcing everyone—including elderly residents who have stayed in water-logged residences for five days just to safeguard their beloved animals—to leave their animals behind to starve. In some cases, people are told that they must choose between bringing vital medicine and bringing their dog when they are evacuated. This is illegal and it must stop.

PETA has issued a http://www.helpinganimals.com/f-disasterupdate.asp">media advisory stating that we will prosecute any known violators, but that is not stopping federal evacuators from insisting that animals be left to die. Today, http://www.helpinganimals.com/f-disasterletter.asp">Rue McClanahan wrote to President George W. Bush, calling on him to order officials to allow people to evacuate with their animals.

Please, immediately call your member of Congress today to ask that people be allowed to evacuate with their animals. Leave messages for them in Washington and at their home offices and get everyone you know to call. The names of—and contact information for—your http://www.house.gov/writerep/">representative and http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm">senators can be found online. Please http://view.exacttarget.com/ftaf.aspx?ffcc17-fe9515777c66057d73-fe2d15737666057a761d75-ff3516717066">forward this alert to others willing to lend their voices to help with this emergency.

Thank you for your compassion for animals and for your willingness to act today.

Sincerely,

Daniel Paden
Domestic Animal and Wildlife Rescue & Information Department
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals

[Lorien]

31. I've been thinking along the same lines

I work for a pet rescue here in Florida, and we'll soon be headed out to the Gulf to deliver supplies and bring back pets. The government needs to start getting honest with itself about how people regard their animals; the law considers them "property" with little (or no) monetary value and that's all. But in an increasingly less social and more transient society, pets are regarded as best friends and even substitute children by an ever growing segment of the population. Many psychologists understand that grief from the loss of a pet can equal and sometimes exceed the grief felt from the loss of other family members-but our laws don't reflect this in the least. I understand the concern by officials over the spread of disease (still far greater between humans than between humans and animals, BTW) and aggressive behavior by animals-but that's what muzzles and pet crates are for!

Perhaps a push needs to be made by all of us to do as you've suggested; encourage cooperation between the Red Cross/ local governments and animal shelters/ rescue groups. Far less suffering (and expense) would result in the end if people could feel confident that leaving their homes did not need to mean leaving behind their best friends.

[Lecky]

32. I couldn't handle leaving my 2 dogs behind...

they are family.

I'm glad that there are some organizations out there who are stepping up to the plate to help some of the pets who have been displaced because of Katrina. I worried about them as well!

[tedoll78]

36. Neither could I.

My Akita, Jacob Japonica Roux, is my baby (I got him from the Japonica Street animal shelter in New Orleans.) Had the choice been between leaving him behind or staying with him, I would've found some way out of town on my own. I would've packed a bag full of people food & dog food, grabbed a wagon for when he gets tired of walking/swimming, and I would've went out on my own. I know New Orleans well; we would've made it.

[Kindigger]

38. Emotional support animals

Designated as such under the Americans with Disabilities act, right alongside seeing eye dogs.

As far as I'm concerned, every one of these people are disabled right now!

[Lorien]

44. That's a good way of putting it. n/t

[Mairead]

71. That's an EXCELLENT way of putting it! Kudos to you!

:hug:

[soothsayer]

40. Florida is starting pet-friendly shelters finally

[FlaGranny]

42. More info? Link?

I'd be extremely interested in knowing about this. I haven't read about it. Of course I can't keep up with everything.

Thanks.

[Lorien]

43. They've had them for years

but they always fill up before other shelters. The local news always announces their locations several days before a storm.

[FlaGranny]

54. I have never heard it on the news in my area,

so I guess we don't have one here - Palm Beach County. They always repeat the mantra "no pets allowed." Then they tell you about ONE animal shelter run by the Humane Society, that's about 20 miles from where I live, that takes in evacuated pets. Some people take their pets to the vet, but they fill up very fast. The rest are told to leave food and water in their homes for the pets and then evacuate. There are many, many people here that live in mobile home parks and they need to evacuate, but some won't without their pets.

[lonestarnot]

48. YEAH FLORIDA!

[OneGrassRoot]

45. Great idea!!!!

[lonestarnot]

47. SOMEONE NEEDS TO SET UP A PLACE FOR THESE PEOPLE!

FAMILIES WITH PET CENTER EVACUATION! I WOULD NEVER LEAVE MY ANIMALS EITHER. EVER!

[theHandpuppet]

52. I wouldn't leave without my furkids

Not at the point of a gun. SOMEONE involved with disaster relief HAS to come up with a solution.

[Catchawave]

62. I wouldn't leave my property.....

furkids, well, maybe my teens (joke!), but who will protect my property, what little I have? All I have, and I'm freakin' middle class!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Roxy66]

53. UMMMM...Yeah. I wish these peole would pull their heads out!!!

I couldnt think of a more simple solution to this problem. If they are worried about aggressive dogs and disease, the Humane Society would be able to handle that. All I can say is DUH! I hate these people and talk of "RED TAPE". Bullshit! is what I say!

[Catchawave]

55. I remember a Disneyland visit in the 70's....

Disney provided kennels for tourists, because pets aren't allowed in the park. Great marketing tool for those families traveling with pets, and we used it, otherwise, we would have never spent our tourist dollars there.

Hey, if we're going to live under corporate rule, maybe the clue to survival is attracting the "whole family", which pets are a very important part of.

[flvegan]

64. Florida Pet-Friendly emergency shelters

http://www.floridapets.net/petfriendlyshelters.html

Bookmark it, as it also lists pet-friendly hotels, etc in other counties to which you might be evacuating.

[demo dutch]

70. They're already doing that visit www.hsus.org to read the stories