I was quoted yesterday in a Fox News article commenting on the latest crummy decision by United Airlines with regards to dog transport. While I’m happy with the article, I thought it was worth breaking the United policy down in a little more detail because it is confusing.
When United merged with Continental, they adopted Continental’s PetSafe program, lauded by many for its regard for animal welfare. And on most counts, it’s a good program, save the one inexplicable part where they ban nine breeds of dogs from travel on the airline with no explanation as to why.
So let’s look at PetSafe a little more closely:
First, the health issues.
As a veterinarian I’m often asked to write health certificates for pets traveling as baggage (in the cabin) or as cargo, in the cargo hold. And despite the outraged responses from the occasional person who wants to ship a pet in cargo under conditions I don’t think are safe and gets angry when I say so, I will refuse to write the health certificate in those cases. Because the truth of the matter is, airline travel can be dangerous for dogs and cats. There are risk factors that we know make a pet more likely to suffer a problem during flights:
1. Age of the pet. The very young and the very old can react more strongly to the stress of travel.
2. The weather. Though cargo holds are temperature controlled, the tarmac is not. During delays, pets may be left outside in inclement weather for long periods of time.
3. Conformation. Brachycephalic pets are more prone to respiratory distress and overheating during flight due to their anatomy. This is a clear, consistent truth that no one argues with.
The PetSafe policies address these valid concerns in a reasonable manner. There are restrictions on travel for brachycephalic breeds during certain times of the year, high temperature conditions, as well as a complete embargo on English bulldogs over 20 pounds and/or 6 months of age. I get that. This policy keeps dogs from dying.
There are additional safeguards in place for all animals that are also reasonable and in the best interest of the pet:
- Dedicated 24-hour live animal desk
- Confirmed booking prior to departure
- Weather conditions constantly monitored at all points
- The ability to track and trace the animal from its origin to its destination
- Personal handling in climate-controlled vehicles for connections over United’s hubs when the animal will be exposed to temperatures above 85°F (29.5°C) degrees for more than 45 minutes
- United recommends (but does not require) that senior dogs and cats (more than 7.5 years old) receive a more extensive health examination (i.e., liver and kidney screens).
These are the reasons the PetSafe program is applauded. These policies are based on experience and done with the health and well-being of the pets in mind.
But then, there’s this
Hidden between a section about flying to Kuwait and another section on policies about shipping poultry is the paragraph that’s getting everyone worked up:
United will not accept the following breeds of dogs once they have reached either 6 months of age or 20 pounds (9 kg) in weight (whichever comes first). This includes mixed breeds of these dogs. No exceptions to this embargo will be permitted.
Restricted breeds:
- American Staffordshire Terriers
- Ca de Bou
- Cane Corso
- Dogo Argentino
- Fila Brasileiro
- Perro de Presa Canario
- Pit Bull Terriers
- Presa Canario
- Tosa (or Tosa Ken)
Determination of breed, age or weight of the animal is to be confirmed by the animal’s Health Certificate (dated within 10 days of transport). Additionally, United reserves the right to refuse any animal that displays aggression or viciousness at the time of tender.
Ah yes, BSL rears its ugly head once again. I’m not going to go into a huge dissertation about breed specific policies here because I think most of you already know this, but here’s the bottom line: these types of policies are ineffective in reducing dog bite injuries and serve no useful purpose.
For those who are curious, here’s a great summary about why BSL is a bad thing. The Humane Society, ASPCA, AVMA, and CDC all agree. I also highly recommend the AVMA Task Force on Canine Aggression and Human-Canine Interactions report to anyone who wants the in-depth breakdown of why BSL doesn’t work. Feel free to link to it in the comment section of any article about dog bites where the usual cavalcade of mouth-breathers come to yell about how pits are terrible and need to go away. But in abbreviation, the short-short version comes down to two key points:
1. Dog bites are caused by a multifactorial confluence of factors. Individual assessment of these risk factors, as opposed to generalizations based on breed, are a much more accurate predictor of aggression.
2. People are consistently unable to accurately identify a dog breed based on looking at the dog.
So anyway, back to United. No one can really figure out why they chose these particular dogs to ban, and United’s not talking. It’s not like there has been a glut of stories about Fila Brasileiros getting out in cargo holds and mauling the guy riffling through your luggage in the baggage handling area. The only other time an airline tried banning ‘dangerous’ breeds was American back in 2002, after a pit bull got out during a flight and chewed some stuff in the cargo hold, in which case I think they should also be banning labradors. (That ban was short-lived, by the way.)
Banning bulldogs because they have a nasty tendency to die during flights is something I can live with. It’s a decision made with the animal’s welfare in mind. Banning Cane Corsos because someone, somewhere decided, based on zero evidence, that they were scary and were going to randomly go Cujo on the hapless airline employees is just nonsensical. So just to be crystal clear: A 9 week old Boston, A-OK. Puppies under ONE POUND, also OK, as long as they are a) over 10 weeks and b) not a pit bull or the other 8 breeds.
You can’t tell me that this breed ban has anything to do with the welfare of the pets, because it doesn’t. While the airlines are not exactly known for their stellar customer service to begin with, they’ve always made decisions with the bottom line in mind. Why get dog owners angry over something so ridiculous and useless that at the end of the day doesn’t make anyone safer? I can fly Delta just as easily as United.
So what say you? Would this make you change your travel plans? Anyone have stories about the travails of traveling with a pet?
I’m an Army brat who always had some pet or another while growing up. When we moved to Germany we had a Pom. (This was 30+ years ago so I don’t know what the conditions were like then) We chose to leave her here with family instead of putting her on a plane in cargo for the long flight overseas.
I’ve never been in a position in my adult life where I have to decide to fly with a pet. As I have two large dogs (one a Mastiff/lab mix) I am not comfortable with the thought of them flying as baggage where I can’t be with them. A lot of it has to do with my being worried about how they are handled and if they are scared. We do a lot of driving from SC to FL though, and I have done the drive several times with dogs and cats. I’d much rather fly because it’s faster, but I will happily pack up the car, shove all the kids and fur babies inside before putting the fur babies on a plane.
I think it’s great that there are “rules and regulations” regarding pet safety while flying, but honestly, I guess I’m just not that trusting of strangers handling my babies in a situation that is stressful to them.
As for the BSL, well, prejudice is stupid no matter who or what it is. Sadly, as long as there are owners out there who are willing to train their dogs up to the sterotype, we will never see this go away.
I agree completely regarding flying with dogs. I have not had a reason to fly my labrador across the country, but even if I had to move there, I think I would take the extreme discomfort, money and time to drive with my dog rather than put him in cargo. I can’t imagine what dogs go through in cargo. I may be too distrustful of airlines and handlers, when most dogs do just fine… But I just can’t stomach the idea of my dog flying with a bunch of suitcases.
BSL. Bull S*** Legislation. ‘Nuff said. Totally support those groups that fight against this.
United, eh? Yeah, might have to change my travel plans. Thanks for the head’s up.
My husband is retired military and we’ve made plenty of those across country trips with dogs (and guinea pigs), also. We’ve also chosen not to ever put our dogs in cargo. The trips are memorable. Isn’t that what life it about?
thanks for the enlightenment: didn’t know that; that gives me one more reason to hate United. I decided after our last unnecessary fiasco with the airlines from hell that I wouldn’t fly with them even if they were the last airline around….seriously, I mean it. So this ridiculous policy does not surprise me one bit; glad you are able to put sane voice to the issue b/c I would just rant….
Thus far I have never had to fly with my dogs. But I will avoid United for myself as long as this policy stays in place.
All of my dogs have been too large to fit under the seat in front of me, and I wouldn’t feel good about sending my dog to fly in the cargo area. So no stories here. But BSL isn’t the answer. I have a lab who, for reasons unknown to me since I adopted him as an adult dog, doesn’t like kids and will bite them. Awesome dog in all other respects. I totally agree your first point:
1. Dog bites are caused by a multifactorial confluence of factors. Individual assessment of these risk factors, as opposed to generalizations based on breed, are a much more accurate predictor of aggression.
We have a pit/lab mix and we are a military family (hubby, doggy, and me). We move every few years, as do most military personnel, and I refuse to fly my dog anywhere in the continental US. We will be driving, not flying, from upstate NY (Ft. Drum) to western WA (Ft. Lewis) in great part because of the stigma on his breed and because he is a senior citizen and very easily stressed so a trip as cargo in June would probably not go over well. I will spread the word in the military community (where many of us have banned dogs and choose off post dwellings for our dogs’ sakes) that this airline is making another thing that shouldn’t be difficult even worse than it ready is.
BSL is totally ridiculous. My brother was bitten in the face by a dog – a German Shepard (not on the list). If they are already kenneled they should pose no threat to workers. Why not go one step further and have all dogs muzzled. I know for a fact if you come close to the kennel of a dog that is already terrified you will not like the results – even if it is the smallest dog in the world.
When we adopted our pit x from best friends he had to fly from Vegas to Cleveland. I probably wouldn’t have been comfortable with this if best friends didn’t suggest it first. I know the handlers at the pick up office all liked him way more than the yappy little dogs that came on the same flight.
i have the frustration of living in a city that bsl is alive and well, so i don’t have a pit bull although i would love one, especially to foster as it is a breed so misunderstood but yet has so much to give.
i don’t fly with the dog i do have but this absolutely means united gets zero money from me. when nike re-signed michael vick, despite enjoying having several nike products, i completely stopped having anything to do with them or with their associated companies.
shame on united!
Great post. I’ve never flown my dog below cabin and don’t plan to, but I have a friend who actually witnessed her dog’s kennel fall off the cargo loading ramp, causing a broken leg and tremendous mental trauma for the dog (and my friend!).
I have a question that’s just slightly off-topic: I was also asked to comment for the Fox article, and in researching other airlines pet policies, I noticed that American Airlines includes Presa Canario, Cane Corso, Pit bull and American Staffordshire terrier in the “brachycephalic” category, and Alaska Airlines includes pit bulls and Staffies in the same category, while so many other airlines do not. I’ve never met a Presa Canario or Cane Corso in person, and I am not a vet, but it seems to me that pit bulls and Staffies are only mildly to moderately brachycephalic. Do you, as a vet, consider these breeds at greater respiratory risk below cabin, or do you think this is just a sneaky way these other airlines can also ban breeds they’re not comfortable with?
Not sure I understand the ire directed at United in some of the comments. I too think BSL is foolish, but the truth of it is that typically it has nothing to do with breeds and everything to do with podium time for those wanting the public to think they’re “making a difference”. Watching those individuals I usually have little doubt they’d have trouble identifying the breeds from which they’re protecting “us”.
Regarding United, my guess is that the carrier has adopted BSL simply to protect itself from litigation in any location served where those breeds are, right or wrong, prohibited. A handler who gets bitten by a scared pup that managed to escape isn’t going to sue the owners, he/she is going to demand the requisite outrageously high sum from United and the price will only climb if counsel raves up and down about how UAL didn’t protect its employee from a “banned breed” in this or that state….
Don’t get me wrong, I avoid UAL for my own experience related reasons, but I can’t really hold this one against them (yet) without knowing the origin of their adoption of those rules.
My own dilemma may be what to do with our 1yr old lab (oh oh, tell us again about bite force BSL’ers) if we make a move to Hawaii; there’s really no alternative, and I haven’t been able to find ANY info (photos, etc) of conditions in the holds of HAL, etc.
i would never ship a dog in cargo to begin with and most responsible breeders i know, will not sell a dog to someone that cant pick it up or make other arrangements. i flew to fl to pick up my puppy, she weighed 3 lbs, min. schnauzer. i was told i had to have all of paperwork, health cert. etc, specific type of crate carry on, etc. had to pay 100.00 additional. they did not even look at her paperwork, not even look at the dog, i could have taken her in my tote and they would have never known. why didnt united mention mastiffs, chows, german shepherds, etc. i am so sick of people grouping dogs b/c of past incidents w/ some breeds….if is the way the dog is raised, not so much the breed of the dog. just like some people are assholes all of the time, they still get to fly, some people should never be allowed to fly….and talk abt the airline employees these days, rude, dont care what happens to you. my sis is a flight attend, been one for many yrs, she is just as rude and obnoxious as she can be, she also refuses to work anything but 1st class. i was glad to see pet airways however, they do not go to many places….