this is real . . . I couldn't possibly make this chit up . . .


"Legislation would require pet to be included in evacuations
More would leave if pets allowed, lawmakers say


Thursday, September 22, 2005; Posted: 2:36 p.m. EDT (18:36 GMT)


WASHINGTON (AP) -- Federal disaster grants to state and local governments should be conditioned on how they accommodate pets in their evacuation plans, say lawmakers disturbed that some Hurricane Katrina victims refused to leave home because they couldn't take their animals with them.

"I cannot help but wonder how many more people could have been saved had they been able to take their pets," Rep. Tom Lantos, D-California, said Thursday.

Lantos and Reps. Christopher Shays, R-Connecticut, and Barney Frank, D-Massaschusetts, are sponsoring a bill that would require that state and local disaster preparedness plans required for Federal Emergency Management Agency funding include provisions for household pets and service animals.

More than 6,000 pets have been saved in Mississippi and Louisiana, said Michael Markarian, executive vice president of the Humane Society of the United States, but tens of thousands more could still be in New Orleans alone. Texas, he said, has been better at allowing people to take their pets with them ahead of Hurricane Rita but a formal policy is still needed.

"We cannot rely on individual acts of compassion," Markarian said.

Holly Hazard, executive director of the Doris Day Animal League, said there are 4,000 outstanding requests to rescue pets more than three weeks after Katrina hit.

While the legislation may draw attention to the issue, it doesn't "have any real meat in it," said Sara Spaulding, a spokeswoman for the American Humane Association. She said uniform protocols on rescuing and sheltering animals, for example, should be formulated at the federal level with consultation from animal welfare groups.

 

Muhahahaha

We have not even figured how to effectively accommodate all the people during an evacuation yet!

 

Frigging liberals, they have nothing better to do than to try and legislate every waking moment, every thought and every action of every single human being every second of every day, 365 days a year.

And Shays is from Connecticut, so he's not a conservative. Can you say 'RINO'?

SOMEBODY please stop these morons from imposing their stupid whims on everybody else!!

 

There is just too much legislation going on here about something that would not be an issue if it were not for all of the people evacuating without their pets. There would not be this problem if it were not for PETA.

Burgers anyone

 

Don't you mean Chinese anyone? Muhaha

 

PETA = People Eating Tasty Animals

 

All I will say is that "There are too many cats and not enough receipes."

 

 

I personally see nothing wrong with allowing people to take their pets with them when they are evacuated. I have a dog and a cat; if by some chance I were to be told to leave my home you can be sure they will be going with me. They may be just a dog and a cat to y'all but to me they are part of my family. I would not dream of leaving them behind to fend for themselves and probably die from starvation or worse. I know a lot of you on these boards have pets too, would you agree to leaving them behind in the hands of fate or would you insist on taking them with you?? If you say you'd leave them behind then you have no compassion and I feel sorry for your pets.

 

There may be a plus to it in that if you get hungry from no one coming to rescue you you can fry one up and not go hungry!!!!

 

I agree with you. I think the legislation, misguided or not, stems from a lot of people staying behind in New Orleans BECAUSE of their pets.

 

I absolutely see your point, and yes, pets are a part of the family, but I feel that if you have pet(s), then YOU should provide the means to take care of them, including evacuation. If you can afford the pet, the pet should be a luxury, meaning you should be able to afford hauling your own butt out of danger. If you are depending on tax dollars to move you, it's difficult to demand space for a pet when there are still people that need to be moved. When your life is in danger, the only thing that would come first is the life of a child or another loved one. I have to say, if it was me or my pet, my pet would be on the losing end every time. If you can't bear to leave your pet behind when your life is in danger, I respect that, but it is your choice and I don't feel I should have any responsibility for it.

Does that mean if your from the south, your mom didn't have to change her last name when she married your dad? Burt's from California and lives in New England and he's conservative. Ignorant, hateful comments only inspire ignorant, hateful people, they never help your cause.

 

I agree 100% I would not leave my dog if i was evacuated. In my family our pets are part of the family we would not leave them behind for anything. They do not take that much of a toll on your pocket and they can be comforting in a time of loss.

 

howdy, just lending my 2cents.

I see both sides to this topic and both are right with their views. On one hand you have to make a choice whether there is enough room for your pet or another person, in most cases it would probably go to save a person's life. Leaving the pet SOL. On the other hand a pet is part of the family and can help when in time of distress.

My opinion might not matter since I dont have a pet. But if I were to have one, I would just have to go with my gut instinct and let my dog/cat loose. Unlike humans, animals (from what I have gather from reading books and seeing animal shows) can sense a storm or natural disaster coming their way. They instictively will run to safer ground. So at least he will have a fighting chance to make it to safety, if i couldnt take him with me.

~Q
ps. just wanted to say hi, havent been on in awhile so figured i'd jump into the first thread that caught my attention and say something!

 

Yea I love my dog but when did his life become more important than another human being? If I had to load up on an evacuation bus and it comes between him or another human being having a seat on the bus..... Then my compassion for humanity would win beyond a shadow of a doubt. I would cry at the loss and feel real bad. But I would feel 10x's worse if I thought for a second that I sentenced a human baby to die because I wanted my dog to have a place that they could have used.

You have to remember there wasn't spare seats on these busses. They were packing them in like sardines. You were lucky to ge ta seat or a place to stand yourself. I'm old fashioned so I would likely even give up my own place for a woman or child. I'd probably send my wife and kids then catch the last bus after I knew that all women and children were on thier way to safety!
If I didn't make it before the flood water came and I couldnt make it back to my house to get my boat... Ohh wait I dont have a truck that's why I was loading up on an evacuation bus so guess I probably wouldn't own a boat either. Then I would find and "borrow" somebodies boat. It'd be me and my dog floating around picking people up as we found them. Whlie we were looking for high ground.

I "as well as most of us on here" are fortunate enough to have the means to load up our 150's and remove our families, pets and a few belongings from danger if we needed to as soon as they told us it was coming. But the majority of those that suffered were the remainders of the ones that did not own a single vehicle and did not have a means to remove themselfs. Much less any belongings. It's easy for us to get caught up in our way of life and forget that there are others that dont have the same luxaries that we consider standard living. (Like having atleast one vehicle in the garage or drive way.) I mean come on, just having a driveway to park a vehicle in would be nice for most of them down there.