My initial reaction to this was, "That's ridiculous" but after thinking about it, if even one person can have a severe reaction to a pet on board, it makes sense to ban them.

Ooh, this is going to open a can of worms that will surprise everybody! People with service animals vs people with allergies. People with life-threatening allergies who are not taking any meds should not fly, ride on public transportation or basically leave their houses.

Your allergy is not my problem. My allergy is not your problem. Take a benadryl for pete's sake and stop making a fuss or I'll let my cat sit on your lap!

I am allergic to a particular men's cologne. It makes me sneeze and gives me a moderate attack of respirator distress. I wonder if the airlines would screen for that ;)

Scribble Nerd said it better than I could, lol

-R-

let the pets fly... ban the babies! (just kidding)

1) Leave your pet at home, with family, a neighbor or at a boarding facility--and this includes other public places like restaurants, malls, etc. 2) Put it in a carrier and check it in the baggage compartment, 3) don't go on the trip.

I was just thinking about one memorable business trip. I got off the plane and walked through the terminal to the baggage area. I went outside, as was my habit for a cigarette, and put my computer case on the ground next to me. While standing next to the ash tray smoking, a lady came out with a little "foo-foo" dog she had just removed from the carrier it had been in on the airplane. I looked down and "Fido" had it's leg up and was peeing on my computer case. I nudged the dog with my foot and looked at the lady and said something like "Geez, lady!" Her reply was, well you'd do that too if you'd been in that carrier for 10 hours. "Well, how about going over there to that grassy area?" I asked. She sniffed and said, "It's too far." (about 50 feet). Grrrrrrrrr.

I am very allergic to Cats. I carry my inhaler with me at all times. I have very mixed feelings about this. If I'm forking out big bucks for a five hour flight, I shouldn't have to ride in fear of an asthma attack, not should I have to have allergy symptoms just because it's Fluffy wants to fly.

I hate it but I agree with Karin. I've traveled in cabin with my birds. At the time I had Senegals who had been born in my kitchen and when i went back home, they went with me. Long trip. Anyone with a bird allergy would have been in trouble. As it was, we were because the miserable ones because they refused to give me a bottle of water for them, those fuckwads. Nasty stews. nasty nasty to my little birdies. And the ticket was VERY pricey for them too.

anyway, I am an animal lover but I agree. I know Delta runs flights JUST for animals. i'm not sure how good they are, but I think it's got to be better than stuffing an animal in a cargo hold, where temperatures can drop pretty low. I'm surprised more animals don't die there. Maybe they do. I don't have any stats on that. As it is, I'm sure they're not pumping O2 in there either. I would never put an animal in a crate in a hold.

the truth is I'm getting to the point where I don't want to get on a plane unless I'm going somewhere I can't drive to. And even then, I'm pausing like crazy. Besides, I like driving. I hate flying. I don't exactly MIND first class, but it's no picnic either. First class is like regular flying used to be. You get a seat that fits and you get food. la de dah.

fuck flying. drive. take your animals on the road. they like it. it's an adventure. if you have to go to europe, they're going to quarantine your little Precious anyway. So leave em with a sitter. Like the kids. Kids are no better than your animals, IMO.

(how I got from here to there is pretty interesting.)

I'm about to start researching shipping our 2 dogs to the mainland. Please tell me it's not going to be a nightmare.

What LuluandPhoebe said.

I still get peanuts on Southwest.

But if they're going to ban pets because of allergy issues, then they also need to ban cologne of any kind.

Simple, just Overnight Ship your pet with Fedex.

Until pets start paying for their own airfare, I vote with the "people before animals" contingent.

I loved traveling with Mr. Pickles, my rotten little Chihuahua. This is a tough one.

Anaphylaxis causes death. Actual death. They are not talking about someone feeling slightly unwell and being cured by Benadryl. At the very least, stopping imminent death in the event of Anaphylactic shock requires the use of an Epi Pen followed by immediate medical attention. Having experienced this condition myself (not from pet dander), followed by a secondary anaphylactic shock six and a half years ago, I can tell you all that it is extremely frightening and results in extreme illness. I did not fully recover my normal energy, eating habits or health for nearly ten months.

But by all means, someone taking their dog on an airplane is worth a person going through that.

I think we should be particularly worried about pets with exploding underwear.

I think Amanda Gulledge & LuluandPhoebe got this one right. Perhaps there should be sterile planes for those that are allergic to dust mites.

I don't see why pets should not be banned on flights. After all, as you stated, they banned peanuts for fear of allergic reaction, so why not pets. Air circulation is bad enough in planes without adding unwanted hair and dander from some beloved ankle-biter.

For cryin' out loud! I have SEVERE food allergies - like to die for allergies (read my post on blueberries), and in doubt, I just don't eat and I carry an epi-pen at all times, because I just never know. So if you're worried about pet dander, call ahead and check who else in on the flight, or how about this - charter your own damned plane!

If you need your "therapy animal" to fly, then take the bus.

Service animals exempted, airplanes are for people, regardless of the airline industry's continued attempts to treat people like animals.

First, disclosure. I don't have a car, nor do I drive. I also prefer the company of cats to people. All that aside, the fact is that the ADA leaves it up to the passenger to identify himself as disabled, and also to identify the animal as a service animal, or present a note from a mental health therapist citing that the companion animal is necessary or helpful. ( I was almost going to take back the third sentence as Mauser blocked the keyboard and jammed the mouse so I couldn't write this.) An airline is defined as a common carrier of persons and property by air, and as such has a common carrier obligation to transport on a first come , first serve basis.

We should just ban everyone and everything from airplanes except those with alergies. Problem solved.

this is why http://petairways.com/ exists - trying banning Fido, Mr. Fur Fur Kitty Boy and their friends there ... :)

Canadian wusses.

I am allergic to fat people, especially the ones sitting right next to me, and they kind of hinge over their seat "barriers" into my little private space in the sky rockets ... and then I am allergic to ugly people, man, if I see ugly people I just want to curl up, puke out my lungs and die.

I don't even want to get into the particulars of the allergic reaction that happens when I enter the loo on the sky rocket and see how the old man that went before me splashed the ground or the skid marks at the back of the bowl ... nope, I'll spare you that ...

Heh, it was a funny post, thanks for putting a smile on my dial.

On a serious note, it is a troublesome situation, but I do believe that the first come, first serve policy would be effective to some point. If you are allergic to the little fluffy wonders of our world, then ask the airliner if someone has booked in with a little lapdog that would be in the plane, if not, book your place, and inform them that you are allergic to the little lovely balls of fur. This way I reckon that you should be pretty safe 30 000 feet up in the sky, and you can enjoy your trip without the fear of not making it to terra firma.

Are they kidding? Airlines, all of them in financial trouble, should just charge a lot more. Idiots.
R

If a person is relocating to a new city, what are they supposed to do? Let their pets walk? xox

I don't take my cats on holiday. I have, however, moved them to be with me rather than abandoning them as so many pet owners do. I vote for the status quo, which is that they be allowed on in small numbers with strict rules.

I have such mixed feelings on this. We are losing more and more things and we are paying extra for more and more things. We are so correct and looking out for everybody. When does this madness stop?
R
Confused Bea Spitz

But...but...if they ban them off the airplane, how will Benji get to his next role???

People think about it!!!! :-0( Rated for the pic alone, it just made me giggle!

It's a slippery slope, trying to exclude allergens from the passenger cabin. Are they going to bar people from boarding because they're wearing perfume?

I flew with my cat across the country twice -- both times because I was moving to the other coast to start a new job. It's not fun. At security, you have to take your pet out of the bag, send the bag through the xray, and carry Fluffy or Fido in your arms through the metal detector. Nerve-wracking stuff, but the alternative was driving nearly 3000 miles with the cat in the car.

I think the airlines have struck a good balance in restricting the number of animals in the cabin. (When I last flew with the cat, it was two animals in Economy.) With a maximum of two animals, it's much easier to reseat the pet-toting passenger, if necessary.

The first time I flew with my cat, a man two rows back stood up and loudly objected to my cat, citing severe allergies. The flight attendants quickly reseated me about as far from him as they could get in the Economy cabin. And that was that.

Soon they will be banning passengers.

If Poopsie can't go, momma don't go. Besides, some people's spouses should qualify as pets.
r.

You want to ban pets. So tell me in the US and Canada how many people died from being in an airplane with a pet? How about just ending up in the hospital?

I didn't think you could come up many if any. So before we try to ban redheads how about we look at what is really happening in the real world.

The compromise answer would be to either have certain flights that are pet-free, or certain flights where you can take pets. If you need to fly with your pet so you can move cross-country, you can probably rearrange your schedule so you take the 8 am "pets allowed" flight instead of the 3 pm "no pets" flight. Of course, the planes aren't cleaned that well between passengers, but not having a pet actually on the flight would probably be enough in most cases.

i had no idea pets could be carry on luggage. huh. (i don't leave jersey much.) hmm. well, coming from a very allergic family (my brothers and father keel over sneezing if they visit me -- kitty dander), i think it's unfair to have pets aboard with passengers. for many, exposure to pets is as bad as cigarette smoke. sorry fido and fefe -- back with the luggage.

I wrote this as a straight news post. But I could have written it as an editorial. By way of disclaimer, I am a proud, and responsible, pet owner of a Havanese who has flown on many flights, does it well, and loves it. In most cases, he's gone completely unnoticed under the seat. Flight attendants have almost without exception been gracious and accommodating. Sweetie knows the drill, gets excited whenever we go to the airport, knows to go through security in my arms, and generally even charms the TSA people. He is always in good health before traveling and well groomed. Havanese are considered hypoallergenic. Although Sweetie is technically a therapy dog, and always travels with me and my husband (except to Hawaii, where he can't), we have never pushed the issue and tried to include him as a service dog. He has stayed in many hotels and flown on probably thirty flights or more in five years. We gladly pay the pet fee to take him with us (despite the fact that it recently jumped from $80 to $150 each way), follow all the airline regulations regarding taking him, and try to be respectful of other passengers.

If we could not fly with him, it would make our life much more difficult than it already is. We have taken him on long road trips in the car, but this isn't always practical for us. Neither is it practical for us always to leave him behind. Amtrak does not allow pets on their trains, so train travel is not an option.

While I appreciate the allergy concerns, if I read the research correctly, there is already pet dander on all the seats of most aircraft. The attempt to completely remove any possibility of it entering an aircraft seems not well thought--how does one remove pet allergen from the clothing of passengers who have pets or have exposure to them? How does one remove the threat from service animals?

I'm with the camp that believes the airlines have already taken steps to minimize risk to passengers while balancing the desire for others to travel with their pets in cabin. I have yet to be on a flight where I've seen an unruly or disturbing pet. I have, however, seen many unruly and disruptive children and even adults. On my last flight out of Portland, I sat near a young mother with two small boys, and all of them were coughing and sneezing the entire flight, clearly quite sick with something that should have prevented them from traveling. We risk all types of contaminations and health hazards when we take to the air. Pet allergens are just one.

I believe those who are at risk should discuss this frankly with the airlines when booking their flight, and their seat, and take appropriate precautions.

The airlines currently see this as a source of additional revenue, and I expect going forward they will weigh that against other factors.

Walter's story of the dog relieving itself on his briefcase after a long flight is inexcusable. It's no more appropriate for a dog to do that to someone else's luggage than it is for a toddler. People who choose to fly with their pets need to be responsible for them.

If legislation is passed banning pets from planes, our life will be affected negatively in quite significant ways. I'm hopeful that the airlines can find a way to balance the various risks of air travel of some of the passengers with accommodating the needs of others.

I am glad it doesn't apply to service animals. Phew.

But, in that case, it causes the same issue so I'm not sure there is a win. Thanks for the information though.

Considering how grubby the planes I have flown on in the past ten years have become, I don't think that legislature alone would eliminate pet dander.

**squeak**squeak**

(rated)

I am on two sides of this issue due to the fact that my husband is allergic to cats and dogs and often has to use medication or inhalers. Yet-- we had to relocate back to this country when my youngest was 6 and there was no way I was going to leave our beloved cat Tombo behind. I even tried to think of leaving him with a cat loving friend and my son's heartbreak was so keen he acted as if I was stabbing him to the heart at even the discussion. It was hard enough for him even to leave his beloved room , all his toys , but to leave our kitty that we had known since the day he was born was unthinkable. Sorry, @ Cobalt-ic, but there was no option to take a bus across the Atlantic. The whole discussion is basically moot anyway since you can't very well ban service animals–– and therefore how fair can the exemptions be and where do you draw the line; you have to leave the door open. Otherwise it is moronically only partially the case, eh wot? I sympathize @ cheap bastid, since rude people are enraging, but this could just as easily happened that a maniac had a baby with a soggy or leaking diaper, excuse the details. What is wrong with the US that we are so cranky and messed up that we don't take responsibility personally anymore and have become so insane on regulations and restrictions across the board?

Then my husband, bless him, takes all sorts of personal initiative and somehow manages to love and tolerate our pets. ( I frankly think, along with a few, that if you are liable to go into anaphylactic shock you might be having problems with a lot of possibilities out there–– beyond pets. I have personally known a few people with such sensitivities and the possibilities for a trigger event are pretty endless... Goodness, let's see –– let's outlaw synthetic fibers onboard, eh?

the most disturbance on aircraft is coused by unruly childeren folowed by fat people.
They should ban those first since that will have the biggest effect.

Since 65% of households have at least one pet, exposure to pet dander is nearly universal.

This story is right up there with parents who insist schools offer their little darlings a "peanut-free table" to eat lunch.

A far more meaningful and useful airline policy is to ban all passengers from wearing smelly and offensive perfumes. Anyone with respiratory illness has had to suffer through a five hour flight sitting next to someone who essentially slathered their entire body with some dime store perfume.

It,s amazing to think that we have advanced so far that this is a problem.

We need to pass health care reform and then we can consider smaller issues about health. This one sounds bogus. We could provide air filtration masks for those affected, and work it out, rather than affecting millions of pets and their owners.

I can't go near dogs without one of those full-body radioactive protective suits. Whenever I'm in the terminal waiting for my plane to board and see one of those little airplane doggie carriers, I really start freaking out. What if they're sitting near me? You mean I'm going to have to share a tiny, compressed-air space with a living, breathing dog for several hours? I'm sure pet owners would hate a ban like this, but I'd hate to spend the next 24 hours with hives and rashes and breathing problems because I had to sit strapped in next to a dog on a plane.

I see a pet-friendly airline business plan coming out of this, though...

People with allergies to pet dander so severe that even being in the same plane cabin with an animal threatens them are probably accustomed to taking every precaution they can when in public spaces.

Someone that sensitive would be just as threatened by someone with a little cat or dog saliva on their clothing, but you can't exactly ban people just because they own animals. The airlines can't accommodate everyone with any kind of life-threatening sensitivity. The average person with pet allergies probably wouldn't even be aware of a pet's presence on a plane, because most pet allergies are triggered by pet saliva, not their fur.

Given that cat dander does indeed linger after the animal has left, should we assume that the next step after banning the actual animal from the aircraft is "dander screening" of pet owners as they go through security? Surely it is potentially equally unpleasant for someone who is highly sensitive to cats to sit next to a cat owner as it is to sit 20 rows away from an actual animal. There are so many allergies that can be problematic in the close confines on an aircraft that it's simply impossible to address them with a ban. My mom suffered terribly from an allergy to perfumes, as do many people, but yet the sale of perfume is a big earner in duty free shops and it's not likely we'll see a ban on its use on planes any time soon.