Doing a google search about pet travel last weekend (because it’s really just about the only thing I think about now), I ran across a website that had the following statement: “Air travel is as safe for pets as it is for people.”   And again, I was back to my new favorite question:  REALLY?!?!?  Are you KIDDING me??

From the beginning of 2005 through the end of  2010 (72 months), 122 people were killed on commercial airlines in the United States.  In three of those years (2007, 2008, and 2010), there were NO human airline fatalities.  Obviously this is very  good news!!  During the period from May 2005 through April 2011 (72 months), according to DoT Pet Incident Reports, 188 animals were killed.  THAT MEANS 50% more PETS than humans died on planes!!  AND,of course that doesn’t even really tell the whole story.  Over 100 more animals were reported lost or injured during the same period.  And even that is not the whole story… as I wrote about earlier, this only covers the very narrow class of “pets” that the DoT is willing to recognize!!

The website where I found this erroneous statement about pet safety has a relationship with IPATA – The International Pet and Animal Transportation Association.  Now, as we all know, animals transported through IPATA members are not going to be covered by DoT Pet Incident reporting.  But, maybe these folks know something we don’t know… maybe their members (professional pet shippers) are able to create some form of safety for our fur-kids that we as pet parents are not able create because we are just “amateurs.”  Maybe Jack would have been safer if Karen had used an IPATA-affiliated shipping service instead of just caring for Jack and Barry herself??  I decided to read more about what IPATA is and see what they do.

This dog probably isn't having much fun, but is it better than flying as checked baggage?

And here’s what I found: IPATA is nothing more than an association for pet shippers.  They do not maintain specific “standards” for pet shippers beyond those required in the shippers’ country of origin for licensure and insurance purposes and completion of a webinar that they provide (which they call Pet Shipping 101).  If an individual is looking to transport a pet and wants to be reassured about the safety of this process, they direct the person to their FAQs page.  And this is where things get truly bizarre.

In answer to the questions “Are cargo holds safe for pets? Is it safe to ship my pets as cargo?”, IPATA replies “An Ann Landers column and comments in subsequent editorials, pretty well covers the subject.” That seemed a little strange to me – a professional organization presents not their own viewpoint, not academic research, but AN ANN LANDERS COLUMN to answer the most basic question a pet parent might have about their service????  Very strange.  But let’s see what Ann Landers had to say about the subject.

The columns they provide begin with a letter from “Animal Lover in Memphis,” who is defending the actions of a woman who snuck her cat onto the plane, saying “I wouldn’t send a cockroach by air cargo.”  The column was titled “Airline Cargo Hold is No Place for an Animal.”  IPATA then prints the response their past-president had to the column (Ann Landers does not print this).  Then they show the Ann Landers column that was responding to the first column, headlined “Cargo Hold Is OK for Pets.” In that column, Ms. Landers prints several readers who respond to the original writer, including “Pilot in Bainbridge Island, Wash.” who says “I am a pilot for a major airline. At least one cargo hold in every plane is insulated, and the temperature and pressure controlled. In most aircraft, that cargo compartment has the same ventilating system as the passenger compartment… Most of us have pets of our own, and so we take good care of those in our charge. I’ve never had to take a pet off the airplane for drunkenness or unruly behavior, which is more than I can say for some passengers.”

Wow.  That’s really great.  Some unidentified “pilot” (who could be just an airline shill) is reassuring Ann Landers that he takes good care of the pets in his charge.  That’s great!!  Now how do I make sure this guy is piloting my plane, and not some uncaring pilot??

And more importantly, how do I get this guy to go do baggage handling so I can make sure my pet makes it onto the plane?? It’s true – Barry was fine ON THE PLANE.  Too bad Jack never made it that far.

As you can read for yourself, Ms. Landers goes on to quote several more readers who wrote in to protest the idea that animals may not be safe in cargo.  But again, we have NO IDEA who these people are, or what their motive is for taking the time to write to Ms. Landers.

But still, even if we believe all these people are just well-meaning readers, look at the date of the column: August, 2000.  Since that time, 16 U.S. airlines have filed for bankruptcy.  And the airlines have been under tremendous pressure to provide increased security because of the effects of the terrorist actions of 9/11/01.  Have these changes affected the safety of pet travel??  I would hazard a guess that maybe they have, but it would be just a guess.  It seems to me IPATA might want to take the time to make its own statement on these issues, rather than just continuing to provide the unverified – and DATED – opinions of people who write in to Ann Landers.

I called the company that owns the website that I referenced in the first paragraph, the one that said “Air travel is as safe for pets as it is for people.”  It’s a small company, and I spoke to someone there about the problems I had with what I had read, about Jack, about how any problem an animal has while in their care is not subject to any DoT reporting requirements.  She was a nice lady, and clearly an animal lover.  And she was shocked.  She said she was going to read the material on our website…but she wasn’t the person who could change the website.  She took my number and said her manager would call me after the first of the year.

I’ll be interested to see if they make changes.  I’ll report back in mid-January, after I talk to her supervisor.  All we can ask for, to continue to honor Jack, is that people have the opportunity to know the truth.  And the truth is this: unless your pet is with you at all times, pets are NOT AS SAFE AS PEOPLE when traveling by air.  In some circumstances, pet parents may have to take that risk.  But let’s not pretend the risk isn’t real.

Since the New York Times published the story about the cocaine smuggling ring that operated out of the American Airlines baggage department at JFK for almost 10 years (and check out the DEA report here), I have been angry.  Very very angry.

It’s not that I think that Jack was lost because of cocaine smugglers.  It’s not that I think that no one looked for Jack in the ceiling because there was cocaine there (indeed, if there had been cocaine in the ceiling during the period Jack was lost, I think there would have been a much higher chance he would have been found).  I don’t even think the problem is that the current baggage handlers were so busy smuggling cocaine that they wouldn’t look for a lost kitty.

Graphic by Broadcast Jones.

I’m angry because, as Adam Hartung at Forbes.com has also pointed out,  AMERICAN AIRLINES JUST DOESN’T GET IT.

American Airlines has been consistently named one of the worst airlines in the U.S., as has its subsidiary, American Eagle.  Parent Corporation AMR recently filed for bankruptcy, and after  2 months of dealing with AA employees in various capacities, it is clear that these folks are beaten down and absolutely dejected.  The fact that AA’s people are overwhelmed and demoralized is (one reason) why a cocaine smuggling ring could go undetected AT A MAJOR AIRPORT for so long.

During the search for Jack, one of the things AA stressed repeatedly is that no outside searchers could go into the baggage area because of security concerns.  Fair enough, I thought at the time – the 3rd weekend that Jack was lost was the 10th anniversary of 9/11, and tensions were understandably high.  And this was New York City, after all.

BUT.  But but but… before, during and after the 9/11 tragedy the smugglers and their cohorts had been running their operation our of JFK airport!!!  Despite the “heightened security” and all the other measures that passengers have had to endure for the last 10 years, nothing substantial changed for the smugglers.  Increased security had NO IMPACT on a group of people’s ability to SMUGGLE COCAINE?? REALLY????

But, in AA’s mind, it would seem it is not the baggage handlers that are the problem.  Clearly, the fact that the baggage handlers got caught is a problem.  But for AA — IT IS THE CUSTOMERS THAT ARE REALLY THE PROBLEM.  And especially problematic is the fact that customers think it is reasonable to have their things — and especially  their animals! – returned to them in the same condition as they were in when travel began.  From AA’s perspective, that seems to be too much to ask.  Indeed, this disregard for passengers and their belongings was (is?) a part of AA’s culture at JFK: according to the Times, “[Baggage handlers] stowed drugs in secret panels inside planes; stole laptops, lobsters and fine clothing flown as freight; and rifled through passengers’ belongings for perfume, liquor and electronics.‘Everybody did it.’ That’s a line that a lot of the witnesses said…”

In my mind, this constitutes MAJOR misconduct among baggage handlers over a 10 year period.  From AA’s perspective, clearly this was not really a big issue.  If this had cost AA money, it would have been fixed.  But because passengers have almost no recourse when checked baggage or cargo is LOST, stolen, or damaged, this really isn’t a problem AA saw as a priority.

And Jack was part of the “checked baggage or cargo that was lost, stolen or damaged.”  After 3 days, it was clear AA wasn’t going to look for him.  We told them we would find others who would search… but that still wasn’t enough.  AA fed us the line about “security.”  In their eyes, a bunch of “crazy cat ladies” in their 40s and 50s had the potential to constitute a “terrorist threat.”

And now this cocaine smuggling news breaks.  And all becomes clearer: the real problem was not “security.”  The problem was that AA didn’t want to be bothered.  That was the message that was sent from Dallas-Ft. Worth to everyone in the organization.  And it is the message the corporate bigwigs had sent down long before that.  If it wasn’t, the cocaine smugglers wouldn’t have gotten away with their business for almost 10 years.  And so a beautiful boy named Jack remained lost for 61 days and eventually died from the effects of this ordeal.

IT DIDN’T HAVE TO BE THAT WAY.  Wenty went missing and Alaska Airlines promised to do whatever it would take to find him – they grounded a plane to search it and even offered to disassemble a luggage conveyor.  They notified ALL the employees at SeaTac quickly, and a baggage handler for United – quite a distance away from Alaska Airlines terminal – found Wenty and she was returned to her family within 100 hours.

Of course, it took 66 hours for AA to just call Karen about the situation.

What to do??

First off, don’t fly American Airlines.  Whether or not you’re flying with pets, expensive jewelry and perfume, or with nothing at all – just don’t give them your money.  Protest their negligent, disrespectful corporate philosophy by taking your money somewhere else.

Secondly, tell everyone you know.  Tell them about Jack, tell them about the cocaine smuggling ring, tell them about the fact that pets aren’t safe when they travel in checked baggage or cargo with any airline.  Talk about what has happened to airline travel and its impact on us as people and on our pets.

Third, (if you’re in the U.S.), contact your Senators and your member of the House of Representatives.  Tell them that deregulation of the airlines should not mean that passengers have no recourse when their baggage – and especially when their pets!! – are not treated respectfully.  The airline business has a variety of regulations it must adhere to that insure our safety: why isn’t the safety of our pets (and our stuff) on the priority list as well?!?

Finally: hang tight with us here and on the Facebook page.  We are creating pages that will be posted SOON with information about how to keep pets safe when you travel, and what options are available when you have to travel by air and your fur-kids simply won’t fit under the seat.

My last word: OY. Nothing else even begins to cover how much this upsets me.  Well, nothing else that would have a G-rating.

I’ve spent the last few days and weeks delving deeper into the tragedies BEHIND the tragedy of what happened to Jack:

• the tragedies of other animals being lost and killed while in the airlines’ care;
• the tragedy of our government’s lack of interest in protecting creatures who are traveling by air;
• the tragedy that many commercial businesses will say ANYTHING to make money;
• and finally, the tragedy that many pet owners don’t even know that their pets are in danger when they fly.

Small groups of concerned Friends of Jack (FoJs) have assembled in various forums to discuss the legacy of Jack: what it’s going to take to make sure no other pet is lost by an airline.  But this is a complex goal that involves at least three separate and distinct categories of players:

• animal guardians;
• the airlines; and
• the U.S. government.

Each of these groups must participate in certain ways if a traveling animal is to be safe.

ANIMAL GUARDIANS

The first line of defense against an animal being lost during transportation is that animal’s guardians.  Those guardians include:

• pet parents (a person who has agreed to be the caretaker of a companion animal for its lifetime);
• rescue groups (people/organizations who agree to take care of an animal until it can be placed with a pet parent);
• breeders (anyone who has overseen the conception and birth of an animal and who seeks to sell it to a pet parent);
• anyone else who has agreed to be responsible for an animal’s food and shelter for a specific period of time.

Many pet parents and other responsible parties who often either travel with pets or who have pets traveling alone (e.g., rescue groups who arrange transport of pets to their pet parents in other cities) are aware of the hazards of air travel and take precautions to insure the safety of the animal.  It is relatively rare (though not unheard of – e.g., Vivi) that pet parents who allow their dogs to participate in many dog shows experience difficulty with air travel.  Like all experienced travelers, these pet parents know the “ins and outs” and know how to keep their furry kids safe.

There are is one HUGE challenge at this level:

Educating Animal Guardians Who Do Not Travel Regularly (or ever) With Their Pet: Jack’s mom, Karen, fell into this group.  She did what she knew how to do: she consulted with her vet and with the airline regulations.  She even went a step further and consulted with a friend who was an airline flight attendant.  But it never occurred to her to do further research on what else she might need to do to keep Jack safe – because she didn’t know that airlines do not place keeping pets safe as a high priority.  She did not know that airlines really do consider pets to be no different from other forms of checked baggage or cargo.  We need to educate pet parents about the hazards of pet travel when a pet must go as checked baggage or cargo (including information about pet carriers!), providing information about other travel options, and precautions to take if being separated from your pet is unavoidable.

THE AIRLINES

Each airline has its own specific rules for pet travel.  Some, like Southwest and Jet Blue, only allow pets to travel under the seat.  This is fine, of course, unless you wish to travel with a pet who does not fit under the seat (I’ll be writing a blog post on non-baggage travel options for these pets soon).  This means your precious fur-baby is now in the care of the airlines for the duration of your travel.  In a reasonable world, what should the airlines be doing to insure your pet’s safety as you go from Point A to Point B?

1. Every airline should have its own secure area where animals wait to be placed on the plane.  The person paying the pet’s way should be allowed to put the animal in that area.  That area then should be viewable by all pet guardians via webcam.
2. Only trained, concerned, pet-friendly handlers should be allowed to handle pets.  As in the story of Lynn Jones,  concerned, educated baggage handlers can save lives.  Ideally, these folks should be paid a little bit more!!
3. Because accidents WILL happen, airlines must have a response plan in place.  Just as on-board airline staff are prepared for emergencies, so too must workers in the cargo and baggage areas be prepared for the worst.  Airlines must drill their employees on what to do if a dog or cat does escape from its crate, and every airlines should have a search team (including search dog) on retainer and ready to respond within 2 hours of a pet going missing on airport grounds.  The closest we have seen to this yet was the case of Wenty – and Alaska Airlines deserves kudos for their cooperation.  Airlines must emulate – and even improve on! – this response.

THE U.S. GOVERNMENT

Finally, because the airline industry is HIGHLY  regulated (especially in the wake of 9/11), the government must also be willing to stand up to commercial interests and stand for the appropriate care of all animals who are being transported by air.  There are two significant initiatives that could make air travel for animals much safer:

1. Treat ALL Traveling Animals with Dignity, Respect, and ACCOUNTABILITY: Right now, in the U.S., animals that are not traveling with their pet parent are not accounted for on the monthly, publicly available, Department of Transportation Pet Incident Reports.  As I wrote in my last blog post, the definition of “animal” only includes those animals being returned to their parent or guardian.  Animals traveling to their new homes or to pet stores are not counted.  This means literally hundreds of thousands (and perhaps millions) of dogs and cats are flying each year and, should something happen to any of them, there only accountability is the airline’s “liability” to the “shipper” – usually about $150 per animal.  Animals are allowed to be lost, injured, suffer and even die — and the U.S. public has no way to find out about how often this happens. And the “guardians” of many of these animals don’t want anyone to know what has happened. This further reinforces the airlines’ stance that  pets are no different from other forms of checked baggage or cargo.   All animals traveling as cargo or checked baggage need to be accounted for by the DoT and the USDA.
2. Impose SERIOUS fines on airlines that do not appropriately care for animals in transit: what if American Airlines had to pay a fee for every day Jack had been lost – let’s say a fine of $1,000 per day.  This would force the airlines to respond in one of three ways:

• Be much more careful in the transport of animals;
• Raise the price of shipping animals to insure that these costs would be covered  (which would force people to find other, safer ways to travel with their pets); and/or
• Get out of the animal shipping business.

I actually could live with any of those outcomes.

So, to anyone that is reading this, I think this covers many of the bases of what it’s going to take to make NEVER AGAIN  a reality.  What do you think???