Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Major (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/)
-   -   Feds to ban emotional support animals (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/131781-feds-ban-emotional-support-animals.html)

rickair7777 12-03-2020 08:15 AM

https://i.imgur.com/0RP52cd.gif?noredirect

Left Handed 12-03-2020 08:15 AM

Guys, read the whole rule. It doesn’t say anything about disallowing pets in the cabin. All it says is you can’t call an animal an “emotional support animal” (ie:free) any more unless it specifically has been trained as a service animal, and even that is limited to non-violent dogs. The airline’s pet carriage policies are not changed. You can still pay to have pets in the cabin.

rickair7777 12-03-2020 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Left Handed (Post 3166157)
Guys, read the whole rule. It doesn’t say anything about disallowing pets in the cabin. All it says is you can’t call an animal an “emotional support animal” (ie:free) any more unless it specifically has been trained as a service animal, and even that is limited to non-violent dogs. The airline’s pet carriage policies are not changed. You can still pay to have pets in the cabin.

Yes, and this is GREAT.

It lets the airlines set reasonable rules for pets in the cabin, without the ESA loophole that you could drive a supertanker through.

Most airlines allow only small pets that fit (and stay) in a carry-on size pet carrier. I don't really care if they bring a tasmanian devil as long as it's in a container.

JamesNoBrakes 12-03-2020 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Left Handed (Post 3166157)
Guys, read the whole rule. It doesn’t say anything about disallowing pets in the cabin. All it says is you can’t call an animal an “emotional support animal” (ie:free) any more unless it specifically has been trained as a service animal, and even that is limited to non-violent dogs. The airline’s pet carriage policies are not changed. You can still pay to have pets in the cabin.

The FAA doesn't tell certificate holders what they can't carry, except for the rules surrounding hazmat. If airline A wants to make money transporting snakes on a plane, more power to them.

The new DOT rule aligns Part 382 with 121 and 135 cargo carrying regulations. Previously, although airlines didn't have to carry cargo that could not be secured, they didn't equip check in and gate agents or flight attendants to deal with all the animals people tried to bring onto the plane. All to often they would bend over (the airlines) for fear of being sued or because they let an animal and person get on board that should never have gotten that far. Then you have to remove someone from a flight that never should have gotten there, because their animal can't be secured. Now with 382 aligning with FAA cargo carrying requirements, the airlines have the backing to enforce the cargo-carrying rules on the passengers.

highfarfast 12-05-2020 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo (Post 3166126)
So?

Sorry to be so direct but, So? The airline doesn’t want to accept the liability of transporting your dog in the cargo bin and pets don’t belong in the airline cabin.

People don’t pretend it’s an emotional support animal because of the lack of “cargo” option, they did it to not pay to bring the animal as a carry on pet and because putting an animal in the cargo compartment is borderline cruel.

There are airlines who will transport a pet in cargo, people can use them. I doubt Frontier wants to spend the money to have someone driving around the ramp collecting dogs in crates on the ramp, once DGS puts them down on the ramp, in the sun, under the loud APU.

I agree with this except the borderline cruel part. It IS absolutely cruel.

People, don’t put your pets in cargo.

Additionally, taking pets to airport terminal is extremely rude. It’s one thing if it’s really necessary because you need an SERVICE animal. Service animals are not pets. We aren’t talking about that. But emotional support? Common. Not only are there people that don’t like animals (and even fear them) but there are people with real allergen issues. You’re requiring those people to tolerate your pet. And the pet itself? Where is it going to relieve itself? Even not considering that, you don’t think it’s stressed?

People, don’t put your pets on airplanes.

Drive if you really must take your pets with you.

Yes. The rest of us are judging you.

PS: We’ve had pets all our lives. We love animals. Almost all of the ones we’ve had have been rescue and they make up an important part of our family. They do not travel with us by air.


OK. Off soap box.

Dougdrvr 12-05-2020 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickair7777 (Post 3166158)
Yes, and this is GREAT.

It lets the airlines set reasonable rules for pets in the cabin, without the ESA loophole that you could drive a supertanker through.

Most airlines allow only small pets that fit (and stay) in a carry-on size pet carrier. I don't really care if they bring a tasmanian devil as long as it's in a container.

I had a Tasmanian devil and, good lord, I went through a lot of pet carriers.

TransWorld 12-05-2020 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dougdrvr (Post 3167313)
I had a Tasmanian devil and, good lord, I went through a lot of pet carriers.

I went through a lot of band aids when people have asked if they could pet my emotional support porcupine.

CA1900 12-05-2020 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes (Post 3166154)
It probably won't win, but I'd expect the miniature-horse service-animal community to put forth some lawsuits...

No doubt. The feds decided we needed to rubber-band our logbooks to the plane so they wouldn't somehow become a projectile, but an unsecured horse in the cabin is (well, was) totally fine.

arizatonya 12-06-2020 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firefighterplt (Post 3166114)
Just sneak it on the plane. In your stomach.

Here comes the Chinese dude

rickair7777 12-06-2020 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CA1900 (Post 3167368)
No doubt. The feds decided we needed to rubber-band our logbooks to the plane so they wouldn't somehow become a projectile, but an unsecured horse in the cabin is (well, was) totally fine.

In fairness, the part of the fed that allowed horses was not the FAA. ADA should never have been allowed to intrude on the FAA's turf. If OSHA jurisdiction ends at the jetway, why do random, ill-conceived ADA edicts apply?


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:36 PM.


User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2021 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands