• We should now be fully online following an overnight outage. Apologies for any inconvenience, we do not expect there to be any further issues.

Many won't go without pets if US evacuation called

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Text

WASHINGTON, June 1 (Reuters) - On the first day of the hurricane season, two high-level U.S. officials said on Thursday pet care must be part of disaster preparations or animal-loving Americans will ignore evacuation orders and stay home with their pets.

"People are not going to leave," said George Foresman, undersecretary for preparedness at the Homeland Security Department, unless they can take their pets with them or be certain of their care.

Some 60 percent of U.S. households have pets -- 358 million animals in all, according to the Humane Society of the United States. In one poll, half of pet owners said they would refuse to evacuate without their pets, said Ron DeHaven, head of the Agriculture Department agency in charge of animal welfare.

Foresman and DeHaven discussed Americans' attachment to pets at an "Animals in Disaster" conference sponsored by the Humane Society. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita stranded thousands of pets as part of vast damage to New Orleans and the Gulf Coast in 2005.

"Animals are an important part of lives every day," Foresman said in urging pet owners to plan how to take their animals with them if disaster strikes. Government also has to take pets into account, said DeHaven.

"Clearly, emergency efforts have to address care of companion animals," said DeHaven. While USDA has no jurisdiction over pets, DeHaven suggested pet shelters should be opened when a crisis develops and be located near shelters for people.

USDA was drafting a regulation that would require commercial animal breeders and dealers, animal exhibitors, and research facilities to have formal plans for care of their animals during emergencies, he said.

Wayne Pacelle, head of the Humane Society, said it was important to realize people are unwilling to abandon their pets, so accommodations must be made.

"It's unthinkable for most people," said Pacelle. "You can't just rescue people."


Good to know people have their priorities set straight in an emergency. I guess though, its easier to jump on the bandwagon and pass the blame onto others rather than many of the idiots where it belongs.

What a waste of tax dollars in an already bloated FEMA program.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
let them ignore it. they get NOTHING from the goverment though.
 

NTB

Diamond Member
Mar 26, 2001
5,179
0
0
Originally posted by: waggy
let them ignore it. they get NOTHING from the goverment though.

Technically I agree with you, but if any politician values their political well-being, you can bet it won't happen.

Nate
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,303
144
106
People love their pets and consider them to be a part of the family.

would you leave a family member behind?

I think it is smart on the part of FEMA to explore ways to accomodate the animal population in the event of an emergency.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: zendari
Good to know people have their priorities set straight in an emergency. I guess though, its easier to jump on the bandwagon and pass the blame onto others rather than many of the idiots where it belongs.

What a waste of tax dollars in an already bloated FEMA program.

Of course.

Old people should just die when they hot whatever age you feel should be the end.

Pets should just die because people shouldn't have pets to begin with.

What else should just die at your will God?
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: OrByte
People love their pets and consider them to be a part of the family.

would you leave a family member behind?

I think it is smart on the part of FEMA to explore ways to accomodate the animal population in the event of an emergency.


A pet is not a human being. A pet does not pay tax dollars.

They can stay behind for all I care. Then the Democrats can cry about the failures of the Bush admin and the NAACP can cry racism.
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: Todd33
I value my pets more than people like Zentroll...

I value my PC more than people like you. The difference is, I'm not asking for the government to save it.
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,303
144
106
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: OrByte
People love their pets and consider them to be a part of the family.

would you leave a family member behind?

I think it is smart on the part of FEMA to explore ways to accomodate the animal population in the event of an emergency.


A pet is not a human being. A pet does not pay tax dollars.

They can stay behind for all I care. Then the Democrats can cry about the failures of the Bush admin and the NAACP can cry racism.
people pay taxes on pet care, people pay licensing fees for pets. People pay lots of money into industries geared for pets and animals. Does that count towards pets generating revenue for the government? Are they
"people" now?
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,839
2,625
136
I've "owned" pets nearly all my life and love them dearly. FEMA should make reasonable plans to evacuate pets (so that the owners evacuate more smoothly) BUT people have to realize human life is a lot more important. In an emergency, no human life should be put at risk because necessary resources are diverted to rescuing pets.

If it comes down to crunch time again, and people knowingly refuse aid because their pets can't be accomadated, so be it-it's their choice to be left behind. The rescuers should move on to the next person who does want to be rescued.
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: OrByte
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: OrByte
People love their pets and consider them to be a part of the family.

would you leave a family member behind?

I think it is smart on the part of FEMA to explore ways to accomodate the animal population in the event of an emergency.


A pet is not a human being. A pet does not pay tax dollars.

They can stay behind for all I care. Then the Democrats can cry about the failures of the Bush admin and the NAACP can cry racism.
people pay taxes on pet care, people pay licensing fees for pets. People pay lots of money into industries geared for pets and animals. Does that count towards pets generating revenue for the government? Are they
"people" now?


People spend money on taking care of DVDs. People pay lots of money into industries geared around using DVDs. People pay rental fees to Blockbuster to watch DVDs.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: OrByte
People love their pets and consider them to be a part of the family.

would you leave a family member behind?

I think it is smart on the part of FEMA to explore ways to accomodate the animal population in the event of an emergency.
A pet is not a human being. A pet does not pay tax dollars.

They can stay behind for all I care. Then the Democrats can cry about the failures of the Bush admin and the NAACP can cry racism.
How do you fit so much hatred into such a small mind? That you would not only react to this article with such bile, but also spin it into something so pointlessly partisan demonstrates you have a real problem. Get help. Seriously.
 

AnitaPeterson

Diamond Member
Apr 24, 2001
6,021
547
126
Originally posted by: zendari
A pet is not a human being. A pet does not pay tax dollars.


DING! DING! DING!

WE HAVE A WINNER!

After centuries of attempts to legally define a human being, our resident individualist has succeeded to provide a clear-cut definition of the term!

Bravo!

Now I understand why "illegal immigrants" are also animals who have to be hunted down.

Perfect!
 

rickn

Diamond Member
Oct 15, 1999
7,064
0
0
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: OrByte
People love their pets and consider them to be a part of the family.

would you leave a family member behind?

I think it is smart on the part of FEMA to explore ways to accomodate the animal population in the event of an emergency.


A pet is not a human being. A pet does not pay tax dollars.

They can stay behind for all I care. Then the Democrats can cry about the failures of the Bush admin and the NAACP can cry racism.


I pay tax dollars into public school system, yet I don't have any kids. So your arguement really it not all that valid. We pay taxes into all sorts of useless things, just look at your cellphone bill sometime
 

Lazy8s

Golden Member
Jun 23, 2004
1,503
0
0
I don't understand how the pet is the government's problem. If the people want the luxury of owning a pet they should have the responsability of getting them out.

To me this says having a pet is a "right" and it's certainly not otherwise ferrets wouldn't be illegal in California etc etc.

We pay more tax dollars on our cars but we aren't telling the government to send in trucks to tow all our cars out when a hurricane comes, we get in them and gtfo of town.

I understand pets are living creatures but we don't evacuate all the squirrels do we? I have a pet and I would be heart broken if I had to leave it behind, so I would get in my car and bring it with me. I wouldn't skip town and tell the gov't to grab my dog.


EDIT: What I find hilarious is how people are arguing about whether we should evacuate them based on taxes etc. Watching you guys argue is worth the time on this forum because none of the arguments make sense. Especially rickn. You realize your argment has NOTHING to do with what he posted, right? this is why people laugh at P&N
 

rickn

Diamond Member
Oct 15, 1999
7,064
0
0
Originally posted by: Lazy8s
I don't understand how the pet is the government's problem. If the people want the luxury of owning a pet they should have the responsability of getting them out.

To me this says having a pet is a "right" and it's certainly not otherwise ferrets wouldn't be illegal in California etc etc.

We pay more tax dollars on our cars but we aren't telling the government to send in trucks to tow all our cars out when a hurricane comes, we get in them and gtfo of town.

I understand pets are living creatures but we don't evacuate all the squirrels do we? I have a pet and I would be heart broken if I had to leave it behind, so I would get in my car and bring it with me. I wouldn't skip town and tell the gov't to grab my dog.

schools are evacuation centers, and they do not allow pets in during evacuations. my dogs are like my kids, we should be allowed to bring them. course it is the owners responsibility to care for them and to make sure the animal is properly secured and have the proper paperwork (pet carriers, providing up-to-date vaccinations tags etc). But things like snakes and ******, forget it.

 

laketrout

Senior member
Mar 1, 2005
672
0
0
Originally posted by: Thump553
I've "owned" pets nearly all my life and love them dearly. FEMA should make reasonable plans to evacuate pets (so that the owners evacuate more smoothly) BUT people have to realize human life is a lot more important. In an emergency, no human life should be put at risk because necessary resources are diverted to rescuing pets.

If it comes down to crunch time again, and people knowingly refuse aid because their pets can't be accomadated, so be it-it's their choice to be left behind. The rescuers should move on to the next person who does want to be rescued.



Couldn't have said it better myself.
 

rickn

Diamond Member
Oct 15, 1999
7,064
0
0
Originally posted by: Lazy8s
I don't understand how the pet is the government's problem. If the people want the luxury of owning a pet they should have the responsability of getting them out.

To me this says having a pet is a "right" and it's certainly not otherwise ferrets wouldn't be illegal in California etc etc.

We pay more tax dollars on our cars but we aren't telling the government to send in trucks to tow all our cars out when a hurricane comes, we get in them and gtfo of town.

I understand pets are living creatures but we don't evacuate all the squirrels do we? I have a pet and I would be heart broken if I had to leave it behind, so I would get in my car and bring it with me. I wouldn't skip town and tell the gov't to grab my dog.


EDIT: What I find hilarious is how people are arguing about whether we should evacuate them based on taxes etc. Watching you guys argue is worth the time on this forum because none of the arguments make sense. Especially rickn. You realize your argment has NOTHING to do with what he posted, right? this is why people laugh at P&N

Zendari was the one that brought up the fact that dogs do not pay taxes. Neither to 10yr old kids, I guess parents can leave them behind too, right?
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: zendari
Good to know people have their priorities set straight in an emergency. I guess though, its easier to jump on the bandwagon and pass the blame onto others rather than many of the idiots where it belongs.

What a waste of tax dollars in an already bloated FEMA program.

Of course.

Old people should just die when they hot whatever age you feel should be the end.

Pets should just die because people shouldn't have pets to begin with.

What else should just die at your will God?

So what happens when there isnt any room on the bus, boat, or chopter because pets have taken the place of a "Human" and "Humans" are left behind because of it?

I agree the pet situation is sad and horrible but lets realize they take up resources to deal with, resources that should be put towards saving "humans".


 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: zendari
Good to know people have their priorities set straight in an emergency. I guess though, its easier to jump on the bandwagon and pass the blame onto others rather than many of the idiots where it belongs.

What a waste of tax dollars in an already bloated FEMA program.

Of course.

Old people should just die when they hot whatever age you feel should be the end.

Pets should just die because people shouldn't have pets to begin with.

What else should just die at your will God?

So what happens when there isnt any room on the bus, boat, or chopter because pets have taken the place of a "Human" and "Humans" are left behind because of it?

I agree the pet situation is sad and horrible but lets realize they take up resources to deal with, resources that should be put towards saving "humans".

Well, if corporations before people is the Republican standard, looks like Pets before People is the liberal standard and will be used in Dave's presidency.
 

rickn

Diamond Member
Oct 15, 1999
7,064
0
0
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: zendari
Good to know people have their priorities set straight in an emergency. I guess though, its easier to jump on the bandwagon and pass the blame onto others rather than many of the idiots where it belongs.

What a waste of tax dollars in an already bloated FEMA program.

Of course.

Old people should just die when they hot whatever age you feel should be the end.

Pets should just die because people shouldn't have pets to begin with.

What else should just die at your will God?

So what happens when there isnt any room on the bus, boat, or chopter because pets have taken the place of a "Human" and "Humans" are left behind because of it?

I agree the pet situation is sad and horrible but lets realize they take up resources to deal with, resources that should be put towards saving "humans".

Well, if corporations before people is the Republican standard, looks like Pets before People is the liberal standard and will be used in Dave's presidency.

anyone with an ouce of common sense knows you wouldn't displace a human over an animal

 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
14,935
3,914
136
Originally posted by: rickn
Originally posted by: Lazy8s
I don't understand how the pet is the government's problem. If the people want the luxury of owning a pet they should have the responsability of getting them out.

To me this says having a pet is a "right" and it's certainly not otherwise ferrets wouldn't be illegal in California etc etc.

We pay more tax dollars on our cars but we aren't telling the government to send in trucks to tow all our cars out when a hurricane comes, we get in them and gtfo of town.

I understand pets are living creatures but we don't evacuate all the squirrels do we? I have a pet and I would be heart broken if I had to leave it behind, so I would get in my car and bring it with me. I wouldn't skip town and tell the gov't to grab my dog.


EDIT: What I find hilarious is how people are arguing about whether we should evacuate them based on taxes etc. Watching you guys argue is worth the time on this forum because none of the arguments make sense. Especially rickn. You realize your argment has NOTHING to do with what he posted, right? this is why people laugh at P&N

Zendari was the one that brought up the fact that dogs do not pay taxes. Neither to 10yr old kids, I guess parents can leave them behind too, right?

This makes no sense. It is the government's job to give PEOPLE a place to evacuate in case of life-threatening emergencies

List of things that aren't people:

Cats
Dogs
Birds
Fish
Iguanas
Potted plants
Ferrets
Snakes

The government should absolutely not waste precious emergency management dollars evacuating Billy Bob's rotweiller just because Billy Bob is to stupid to leave his double-wide when a Cat 5 hurricane is getting ready to atomize it.
 

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,296
16
81
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: OrByte
People love their pets and consider them to be a part of the family.

would you leave a family member behind?

I think it is smart on the part of FEMA to explore ways to accomodate the animal population in the event of an emergency.
A pet is not a human being. A pet does not pay tax dollars.

They can stay behind for all I care. Then the Democrats can cry about the failures of the Bush admin and the NAACP can cry racism.
How do you fit so much hatred into such a small mind? That you would not only react to this article with such bile, but also spin it into something so pointlessly partisan demonstrates you have a real problem. Get help. Seriously.

His mind is so small it has room for nothing but hatred.