Many won't go without pets if US evacuation called

...left behind in New Orleans. My cats are my family. They're my responsibility.

I'd no more leave them behind to fend for themselves than I'd abandon a puppy beside the road.

Where I go, they go. That's all there is to it. I will not leave my kitties behind just to save my own ass.

The captain goes down with his ship, and the cat parent goes down with her kitties.

Same with me. When I adopted my cat, I adopted her for better or worse. Where I go, my cat goes.

My dog is my family and I would never leave him to suffer and possibly die just to save myself.

If I have to leave, he goes with me and nothing and no one would make me leave him behind.

looks just like my beautiful dog. I wouldn't leave her for anything.

Sheridan is my baby. And he knows it. MY folks refer to him as their fur-grand kid. :)

I would die with my pets before leaving them behind.

No other words needed. Thank you, BrklynLiberal.

A hard heart never understands... we have a lot of hard hearted hard asses in the government.

I'd no sooner leave my dog than I would leave my child.

This is one area where my mind is closed.

with the Blivet, any sort of emotive content just isn't friggin' there. Ya know?..kinda like if you tried to imagine a universe with 16 dimensions. Our brains just aren't wired to comprehend all that.

Same with Bush. There's no THERE there. :(

I was just saying in another thread... we assume that in every game of chess the bishop moves diagonally. BushCo doesn't acknowledge rules. We have no idea how a bishop moves in their game.

moves unilaterally with death squads. ;)

;)

After watching the wholesale neglect by Bush over Katrina, I'd rather take my chances with Mother Nature! Fuck Bush and his asshole govt!

Staying could not be worse that what I saw on Television during katrina. At least we would be togetherVVV

then live with knowing I left them behind and defenseless.

During hurricane George, I was lucky,I went to a friend that had room for me and Einstein

I would NEVER consider leaving them behind to fend for themselves, nor would I leave their care up to a stranger. A lot of my friends with pets feel the same way, they are part of the family, and they go with the family, no matter what.

The people responsible for evacuating the population during an emergency needs to understand this, and deal with it ahead of time.

Unbelievable. Those people probably don't deserve to have pets.

Our family has had as many as 12 pets at a time and we treat them very well. We would never leave without them.

...who were precisely the sorts of folks who put their own convenience before their responsibilty to animals in their care. You're right-- they don't deserve to have pets. The rewards animal companions offer come with responsibilities-- how a person discahrges those obligations says a lot about them, IMO. Folks who could turn their backs on a pet-- I don't know if I'd ever want those folks to see my back, if you know what I mean.

..the cat would stay. There's a reason why people's pets aren't taken along in emergency situations like a hurricane evac, at least from the standpoint of emergency personnel: people's pets are just one more problem to deal with in a sea of human misery. I live in a hurricane zone and have already made preparations as to where I can go if a hurricane struck and bring my cat, too, but if for some reason I couldn't bring the cat, I'm sorry, but it'll check into the great cat heaven in the sky.

"It could be worse. You could be JackDragna's cats".

.."It could be worse. You could belong to someone who thinks you're as valuable as humans."

they are more valuable than anything! Isn't that the way cats are?

Seriously, don't just go through the motions without at least making a contingency plan for any lives in your care. If you take on the responsibility of a pet, their life is in your hands. Just "hoping they make it" isn't being responsible. I would hope you would do everything in your ability to save them as well as any humans or other pets that needed you.

It reminds me of that man who was left to die on Mt. Everest. The only reason a person would not give of themselves to save anothers life is cowardice. Those who walked past him to reach the summit were completely selfish cowards without any regard for a fellow beings life. I can only pray that what goes around comes around or however the saying goes.

I live in Baton Rouge, right in the firing line of hurricanes. I have places I can go where I can take my cat. The issue here seems to be, however, when given a choice between a potentially horrible death with their pets and evacuating a disaster area, people are choosing a horrible death and painting those who call that choice irrational as being cruel.

What arrangements to you have made for your cat so if left behind he or she doesn't suffer a horrible death?

..which would be extremely unlikely, given the amount of places I could go, I'd leave it with a friend here who has a big, sturdy house and doesn't even blink when hurricanes approach. It'd be the best of many bad options, but, again, hurricanes don't sneak up on anyone and I have many places to take both myself and my cat if there were to ever be a hurricane powerful enough to force the evac of Baton Rouge (which is unlikely, given how far inland the city is.)

It is humans that have created misery throughout the world not pets.

Personally, I don't think rescue boats should pick you up if you've ever voted Republican, but so long as Western society values all human life, we gotta do what we gotta do.

They are literally family members. They aren't more important than, say, my Mother... but they are more important than a stranger. And, I wouldn't leave them in a disaster, just as I wouldn't leave ANY family member behind.

Your opinion is your opinion, but please don't insult those who feel differently than you, which your statement does.

would have it a LOT better than YOURS.

Do us all a favor - GIVE THEM UP TO SOMEONE WHO CARES.

You do not need another "piece of furniture" to be abandoned when it's inconvenient.

Shamefull.

1. I'm a great cat owner. My cat adores me and is hale and hearty.

2. I'm afraid the cat would end up with a lunatic like you.

You'd kill your cat?

Or do you always ask complex questions?

killing it outright?

So, the answer is, yes, you'd kill your cat.

The issue in question seems to be, if people here had a choice between dying with their pets and leaving the pet to die, people here would die with their pets. I do not accept your characterization that I'm killing it. I'm sorry if it makes me cruel to respect human life more than animals, but when the chips are down, people are what matter. You can accuse me of killing my cat, I can accuse you of being an overly-sentimental, too-easy-a-life softie whose head is screwed on backwards, but I won't do that. Isn't it nice when we don't make logical fallacies? Yes, it is. *pats you on the head*

For me, animal life, like human life, is sacred. And then there's the issue of responsibility. I've taken these animals into my home, and bear the responsiblity for their well-being. Unlike you, this is not a resonsibility I take lightly. In my faith tradition we call this a "covenant", and we consider a breach of covenant a very serious matter.

The critters go, or I stay.

And HAVE you stopped beating your wife?

..I take my pet ownership lightly. Because I think people who die to stay with a pet are doing their friends and family a disservice. I take my role as a pet owner very seriously, but if I had to leave the pet behind, then I would. I have places to take my pet in an emergency, so I have contingency plans in case of disaster, as I've stated many times on this thread. I simply believe it highly illogical for people to die in situations where they have to evacuate and stay because they can't bring Fluffy.

Frankly, I could care less how your "faith tradition" affects any of your judgements. I would even suggest you find something else to guide your life, because your faith tradition apparently teaches you to make personal shots in lieu of arguments. But hey, you're in good company here, cochise. Knock yourself out.

Is it? Is calling someone the name of an American Indian leader an insult in your book, kimosabe?

Just sayin'

nt

There are many oversensitive types on this board. Anyway, if there is some way to evacuate people and their pets without endangering the safety of the people that's great. If there isn't then the pets stay behind. If you want to stay behind with your pets knock yourself out. I'd bet good money lot of people who say they'd stay with their pet would sing a different song when Hurricane Katrina is bearing down on their home.

nt

So not worth it.

I would, and I bet good money most people who say they would, would. How dare you judge me?

and my neighbors stayed for theirs. I don't regret it for a moment. Had something happened to my pets while away, I couldn't live with myself.

My cats and fish are my family members and there is no way I'm deserting them. Unfortunately even the best evacuation plans can fail at the last minute and you have to deal with the hand you've been dealt.

I would rather try and fail rather than just abandon the animals in my care. If that makes me oversensitive then I'll wear that badge proudly. :D

but dying to save your pets is just tragic. It is the same as if my house were on fire - would I want my husband to go back in to get my kids?? Yes, and I would be right there with him. Would I want him to go back in, and die, saving my pets?? No. My husband is more important than my pets, and if he did that and died, I would be stuck with the loss of him and the anger over his decision forever.

That's a given by your disgusting satements.

Nice to see if it came to a choice between saving yourself and abandoning your child to die, you'd save yourself.

Same thing.

If you would never consider abandoning a child, then it's the same concept and "problem" with pets.

Apparently, valuing humans over "pets" is disgusting. I do not accept the premise that a pet is worth staying for if doing so will likely lead to a human's death. If I had a human to take care of, that's one thing, a pet another. It's not the same concept at all.

It's respecting my family member, especially one who depends on me for protecting them. You are being rather patronizing and insulting to those of us who DO feel our pets' lives are as important as humans.

..for your pets' lives are not as important as your own. Please spare us the melodrama of being "insulted." It's our opinion, nothing more. How you react to it is your call.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I think it was pretty straightforward, talking about pet heaven.

That's your whole problem right there.

I just might put you as the first person on ignore.

It's no use even talking with some idiot like you.

Please, be my guest. Before you do, however, I suggest you read a few posts down about the woman whose husband is a firefighter and has had to rescue people from flooded homes who didn't evacuate because they had to take care of a pet. No matter what you think of me, those pets ended up causing complications in the rescue of human beings and put the woman's husband in jeopardy. As far as "no use talking to an idiot like me," are we projecting a little? Yes, we are, because you're the one lowering to personal insults, not me.

Edit: the post I mentioned is #215.

why do they even have them if they can leave them just like that. :-(

I would have to leave them. I have 2 dogs, 2 cats, 2 birds and a horse, and I cannot imagine how horrible it would be to do so, but my kids' lives come first. No comparison.

However, that would be after I did everything I could to figure out a way to take them. And I am pretty resourceful, so I am sure I would figure something out. Leave them with a friend who lives out of harm's way, perhaps??

The things that go with me are papers and some stuff I inherited.

My cats go into their carriers and they come, too.

No way will I let my best friends face what I'm fleeing from by themselves.

pets they lost in post-Katrina ....

Children also need to know that a beloved pet is worth saving.. Children get mixed messages, and could have their personalities affected by the trauma of having to leave a pet behind to "fend for itself".. Small children could actually wonder if someday THEY might be left behind too..

The petcare industry is HUGE,so for the government to just think that people will "just leave them", is shortshighted..

There could easily be warehouse style structures built, a ways inland, that could be used to HOUSE the equipment needed in a hurricane, and when that stuff rolls out, cages could be set up on one side, and cots on the other for displaced people..

before Katrina would have, if they could have taken their pets. I wouldn't leave my boys behind.

In a typical disaster, not being able to bring along pets is the leading reason why people don't evacuate. This fact has been known for a while, and is why there has been a slow (too slow) movement towards the creation of pet-friendly shelters.

In Katrina, the difficulty of evacuation was probably #1. But I'm sure that pets affected more than a few people's decisions.

From the Sun Herald We Remember series:

WE REMEMBER - THE ANIMALS WERE THIS LADY'S PRIORITY, EMMA ANITA SEALS
Every morning, Emma Anita Seals put a pot of rice and chicken in the woodsy area across from her Pass Christian home, and every night she'd pick up the empty pot.. Grateful raccoons, possums, neighborhood pets --- and her own --- regularly dined on Seals' generosity. "My animals," she affectionately called them.. "Oma even had wild bunnies. All the animals flocked to her," said Natalie Krymski, who grew up next door...


http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/news/special_packages/hurricane_katrina/we_remember/12838795.htm

1823. Sun Herald (Biloxi - February 7, 2006 - A6 LOCAL-FRONT

WE REMEMBER - JAMES PIERCE DIED SAVING CATS
James Pierce died keeping a promise.. "He promised his mother that the cats would be safe," said Pierce's friend Roy Hutcherson.. Pierce, 30, lived with his mother in the Back Bay Place apartments at Oak Street and Bay View.. As Katrina was approaching, his mother evacuated to a shelter, and Pierce stayed behind to take care of the three cats.. That's the kind of guy Pierce was. He was committed to taking care of his mother after his...

1792. Sun Herald (Biloxi - January 9, 2006 - A4 LOCAL-FRONT

WE REMEMBER - WILLIAM W. MORRIS OF PASS CHRISTIAN
Never mind that William W. Morris lived in a travel trailer smaller than some of FEMA's, because that's how he wanted it, said his longtime friend and neighbor, Betty Bowen of Pass Christian.. He lived for the dogs that he raised, she said, which were housed in three or four igloos inside his fenced yard.. He would have never left his trailer and never left his dogs, she said.. "When I saw that name (on the Katrina fatality list), I had a crushed...

1773. Sun Herald (Biloxi - November 25, 2005 - A8 LOCAL-FRONT

WE REMEMBER PATRICIA MEEKS
WAVELAND --- Patricia Meeks moved here from Chicago to be near the water. She loved to fish, and walk her dog along the beach.. She lived on Whispering Pines Drive, just three houses from the beach.. "She loved the water. That's why she was here," said Susan Heine, one of Meeks' three daughters.. Besides her dog, Meeks' had a potbelly pig that was too big to load into a car and evacuate. And, despite the pleas of her...

1762. Sun Herald (Biloxi - December 31, 2005 - A10 LOCAL-FRONT

WE REMEMBER ROSELYN DESROCHERS, 57
Roselyn Desrochers, 57, died trying to save the animals she so dearly loved.. "No matter if it was a cat or a dog or a bird, she loved animals," said her sister, Deborah Downey of Waveland. "In fact, she died trying to save 17 Chihuahuas. She fell in love with Chihuahuas and she started buying them from the pound. They started having babies. She had a cage for each and every dog.". As the water rose around her house at 5145 Pointset in...

That's the few I found listed in the Sun-Herald. I rode out the storm with my son's girlfriend's mother who had about 10 cats and 5 dogs. My son decided to stay with her and I decided to stay with my son. I won't stay there again. We were lucky.

In the evening after the worst of the storm passed and we were trying to hook up the generator, one of the dogs bit the hell out of my calf and leg when I walked by him. My leg was bruised for a week or two. It was my only Katrina injury beside a few cuts I got from removing tin siding from the yard.

..rather, the poor priorities of the pet owners. As much as people value pets, people need to realize in 10 years, nearly all the pets they have will be dead. Most people, unless they're elderly, will be alive. It's sad to lose a pet, but it's not worth the comparative sadness over losing a person who could spend years counseling and helping their friends, neighbors and families.

I apologize for the kinda long and rambling post. But I'd like to share my experience - I was a veterinary technician in the LSU AgCenter Parker Coliseum in Baton Rouge the week after Katrina. This shelter was set up within 2 days after the hurricane. Supplies, cages, kennels, litter, food, etc began pouring in. We set up in the arena, the stalls, cats lined the halls, we even ended up with rabbits, birds, ferrets. We took in nearly 1200 animals. More volunteers than imagined came in from everywhere, was a huge line of them just waiting to sign up out front. Local restaurants, vendors, donated food, drinks, water, for the volunteers.
I've worked emergency medicine and triage, and even I couldn't handle volunteering after 2-3 days. My heart and mind were just too open and raw from what I experienced.

It was hot, no air conditioning, just bunches of fans lining halls, stalls, the arena.

Animals came in by owners, by van, truck, even a greyhound/tour bus. Animals arrived rescued from Metarie in the bus, full, dogs on leashes in the seats, cats in carrier lining the aisle. Others rescued from Chalmette came in small industrial truck, roll up the back door, cats, small dogs, stacked one on top of the other lining the truck. Many suffering from heat stress, we ran out of room in halls, so stacked them in stalls, rigged up bunch of fans in an attempt to cool them off. The abandoned kitten of 3-4 weeks screaming at the top of its lungs, its only comfort was clinging to my shirt, where it quieted and purred.

From children to large intimidating adults bringing in their pets, the looks in their eyes, distant, yet so many tears. The hysterical woman so upset she couldn't speak, vomiting, and passing out from her experience. The woman with her 2 children who didn't know where they would end up next, one child able to get into school here, the other could only be placed into Houston, she didn't know what was going to happen to her and her family, but so grateful there was somewhere for her pet to go while she tried to make sense of it all. The african american woman, with her mean Chihuahua rescued by boat, found there way here as well. Owners visiting, walking their dogs, sitting with their cats in carriers talking softly to them.

The outpouring of support from the school, the community, and everywhere, was beyond description. Yes, the emergency animal shelters can be set up, we made it work here in an Animal arena.
I think that one would find a lot of community support, and donations. And I think that because of that, federal and state would likely end up spending much less money than projected in the long run. What you put out in rescuing those people that wouldn't leave their pets cost so much more in money and manpower, than what would be needed to just set up somewhere safe for their pets to go.

For many of the survivors of the hurricanes, their animal companions were all they had left, literally. Personally, I could never leave my cats behind to die, and I don't think my fiance could either. They have entrusted me with their love, trust, and their lives, and they get a death sentence for it. NO. I don't think so. Believe me, since the hurricanes, I've had nightmares about that very scenario. It haunts me. I may be from CT, but I've been affected and changed by these disasters as well.

I don't think we can afford not to help our animal companions.

Links to pictures:
http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/family_home/hazards_and_threats/recovery_assistance/photo_gallery/index_seriespage-9.htm
http://www.lacanews.blogspot.com/ (scroll down)
www.vetmed.lsu.edu/Web_pdfs/ Operations%20Devel%20Brochure.pdf

What a tremendous set of circumstances! Thank you for caring for those lives in need. I hope your nightmares lesson with time. I would never leave my pets either, and I am appalled that those people had to make that choice. Those animals cannot fend for themselves, they are often less able to than humans! Thank god for people like you who are willing to give of yourself to save so many lives and to reassure the many pet owners who faced that horrible storm and aftermath.

It brought tears to my eyes.

don't want to pay higher taxes for helping anyone, including pets. Bloody savages.

I wouldn't be able to bear the thought of my boys all alone trying to survive something like that, let alone the total FUBAR'd incompetence that happened afterward.

I promised to take care of them and keep them safe. They are part of my family just like children or elderly grandparents or anyone else who needed help and who I loved and cared for.

It would take a pretty severe situation for me to leave them behind.

I couldn't do it, even if it meant great hardship for me for a time, because I couldn't live with myself afterwards if I avoided my responsibility to them.

I would happily live in my car with them after a hurricane evacuation if no hotels would take them. Heck, I'd live in a tent in the woods with them if that's what it took.

made only worse by the grim example of Katrina's pets.

In order for evacuation plans to meet with greater success, they are going to have to acknowledge and address it as reality on the ground though.

I wouldn't leave my critters either - although F. Atsokatso (a.k.a. Madam Butterfat), my vietnamese pot bellied water buffalo / calico badonkadonk cat hybrid would probably capsize the fanboat. Refugees would begin to mysteriously disappear around dinner time, leaving only their clothes, hair and bones.

She's a stout girl since birth.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Practically every time you saw evacuees in rescue boats or trudging through waist-high water, the family pets were there, too. Dogs, cats, ferrets, birds, etc. Even people carrying German Shepherds and Golden Retrievers through the flooding! It was like a balm for the heart, y'know? I realize that our flooding was nothing compared to something like Katrina. I only hope that, in the future, there will be better plans and facilities for animals. I have four cats, and I wouldn't leave without them.

I have never even heard of a pot bellied water buffalo lol!

I wouldn't leave my pets either.

You bring up an interesting conundrum, as larger animals like horses and
kangaroos are more difficult to whisk away so easily.

It strikes me that they could create in every storm-prone region a local
safe haven that people could, in that emergency, take their water buffalos
to the noah's ark center.. Livestock surely get it worse, how many chickens
drowned, and the like, animals nobody gives a toss about.

My pets come with. I couldn't live with myself leaving them.

Look at these faces and say sorry, I'm skipping town, hope you can swim! No way, no how. I'd load us all up in my little rowboat before I left them behind!

Could you leave that face? Here let me emphasize it for you

I'm with you, too. The center of our universe is in my sig line. Her name is Jean. If we have 'the big one', or any good sized earthquake, the three of us will get out together. Period.

:hi:

1) You don't use up time and resources recovering lost animals.

2) You don't use up time and resources recovering animal carcasses.

3) You don't have stray animals attacking other animals.

4) You don't have stray animals attacking stray humans.

5) You don't have stray animals attacking humans who are trying to help the stray humans.

6) You don't have stray animals eating animal carcasses.

7) You don't have stray animals eating human carcasses.

8) Most important, you don't have humans having to kill animals because they may have developed a taste for human carcasses!

:headbang:
rocknation

It's just common sense to let people take their pets. Common sense ain't this government's strong suit, tho.

problem. IMO, that reason alone should be enough for the govt. to provide shelter for animals.

or I don't go.

I remember watching the reports of people evacuating before Katrina and Rita, and thinking "Three cat carriers, the beagle, 15 lbs of cat food, 20 lbs of dog food, 2 or 3 jugs of water, dishes, and me. It'll be tight in the Focus, but we'd make it work!!"

Leaving 'em? Not an option.

I'm astonished at the unanimity on this thread, so I'm going to break it up a bit. I love my dogs too, as much as anyone, but they're not people, and I don't pretend they are. If there's a mass evacuation, and I have to rely on some one else to get me out, then the dogs aren't even 2nd priority. Sorry, but if there's a choice between saving my dogs and saving another person, the other person gets saved, and the dogs get abandoned or shot, depending on what I think are the odds of me getting back in time to care for them.

Evacuating animals is not an easy thing to do, especially in a mass evacuation. For one thing, do we just save the dogs and cats? What about folks with pigs or other exotic species? How well are they going to behave, not just around strangers, but around the other pets? They have different feeding requirements, which complicates the process immensely.

Evacuations are very complex operations, even when they're handled by a competent administration. Adding animals into the mix multiplies the complexity.

Now, if you're handling your own evacuation - you've got plans, a route out, etc. - knock yourselves out. Save your pets. We have plans for earthquake evacuation (we live in LA) and include plans to bring the dogs if possible. We also recognize that it may not be possible. If it comes down to a government provided rescue, we're in enough trouble already, and don't need the pets making it even worse.

R. Garrett

of their lives with those of dogs and cats ...

Who am I to argue?

I have to assume they know best.

You take on the ethical commitment to care for that creature no matter what. If you aren't comfortable with that you need to get those animals in the heart and home of somebody who is.

My baby, Baseball the Border Collie, lives with my mom back in Oregon, but he's part of the FAMILY.

YOU DON'T LEAVE FAMILY BEHIND. PERIOD.

I'd no more leave an animal to "fend for themselves" (and in an emergency that usually means die) than I would leave LeftyKid. I have the responsibility to work to ensure the survival of every member of my family.

If you knew that by staying with the animals you and LeftyKid would be stranded on a roof with no food or potable water for several days, would that change your perspective?

seen his "sibling" left behind to die?

from being without water for a few days? Fortunately for LeftyMom, flood season in Sacto is in the winter, so she would be more worried about cold than heat, but if it's a choice between the welfare of a human child or children versus animals?

I don't think there are easy answers there.

Through good and bad.

I always have emergency stuff around for just such a reason.

Edit: There's a creek 100 ft from my front door. It's never flooded on this section- usually does a little bit about a mile up the road and more severely on the other side of Hwy 99. Still I *always* keep food, a blanket, some water etc in a kit in the house and another in my car during the winter. Not that we don't get warning on small creek floods (thankfully I'm not real close to a river levee, that would worry me much more) but I like knowing that in a pinch I could grab the kid, cat, laptop and photos and be out the door in under 5 minutes.

:spray: :spray: :spray: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:





edited to add more :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: s

We are responsible for 8 lives besides our own and have plans to be evac and to shelter in place with those lives. It's not rocket science.

involving wildfires creeping up to my house and me trying to catch and stash all the cats in my Honda. In my dream every time I open the door to toss in another kitty, two escape. They don't understand what I am doing to them! I always wake up in tears, then count my pet carriers (I've got 3) and count my furbabies and then try to go back to sleep and not continue that dream! My dog will just go with me wherever I go, but the cats often get their own ideas, and I think that is where my nightmare stems from. I wish I could figure out a way to stop having it, but at least it makes me aware of what I would need to do in a worst case scenario.

As tragic as it is to leave animals behind, people's lives are infinitely more valuable.

And, given that I counseled and aided more than a few people displaced by Katrina, it's one area in which you have absolutely no authority to lecture me on. Stuff it, cochise.

:applause:

..when YOU spend several days exhausting yourself working with hurricane victims, letting them cry on your shoulder as they tell you how they watched people die, about their rooftop rescues, THEN you can imply I'm heartless because (god forbid!) I think people are more important than pets. Until then, I suggest you take a voyage to the metaphorical place where damned souls go after they die.

expressed any sorrow at the loss of their pets, huh? Color me skeptical.

Get a job building strawmen. You're good at it. Yes, many people did express sorrow. And I'm not just "claiming" to help them: I did. But, apparently, you feel you need to add that qualifier because I must be some heartless person. Very nice.

You words and deeds prove it.

No matter how much you refuse to see it.

...are too emotional. I will not be called heartless by people on internet message boards who have no idea of my personal life, nor by those who would so callously throw away their obligations to their family members and friends by risking their lives for a pet.

..prove I'm heartless. Oh, wait. I was Stalin in a former life! You must be psychic. Congratulations! Wow.

Cochise is an offensive term, don'tcha know, insulting to Native Americans and others. I've noticed that you're using it insultingly and in anger all over this thread. Stop it, now.

It wasn't meant as a slur, only as an equivalent of "Hey, bub, buddy, etc." I've seen people call others "amigo" on here many a time without a reprimand. I'll stop using it out of respect for those who might be offended, but be sure to know I find the sensitivity to it silly.

Friend.

Cochise on the other hand was used for decades(still is by some) was a slur that originated in the southwest originally amongst the US Cavalry to refer to any and all Native Americans. It is more along the lines of wetback, dago, spick, mick, etc. etc.

You may find the sensitivity to it silly, but trust me, among Native Americans that is a word that will get your ass kicked in a hurry. Just because all those old Westerns used that word doesn't make it OK for you to.

But hey, thanks for foregoing it here after, for whatever reason.

Peace:hi:

I mostly used it because a friend of mine called me it all the time. I never meant to insult anyone. Sorry if I did.

Cochise is the name of a historical figure, a person whose memory deserves respect. That his name has become a racial epithet is bad enough. That it shows up on DU is just sad.

Thanks!

nt

:)

I will pray for your cat, and put you on *ignore*

..and like so many others here, you hide when called out on it. Fine. Go hide in your little cave. :)

But hey, sometimes people are ignorant of what is insulting of other people. It isn't deliberate, it's just that they don't know any better:shrug:

As far as the original point of this thread, I'm with you on this, my animals would be going with me, all seven of them(four dogs, three cats). Since I have a pickup for the farm, that is the vehicle we'd be using. No way would I leave them behind.

Nice.

Did you bother reading the posts I made, or even the ones MadHound made? I never intended to offend. Are you really that desperate to smear me? Answer=yes. You're no different from many on this board who resort to personal attacks instead of arguing the validity of their side.

and they are spiritual beings as well.

My dogs and cats will evacuate with me... the kids too!

I must say, though... there are some really, um, sick attitudes exposing themselves on this thread. It makes me feel like I'm talking to my mom again... and that's not a good thing.

I fel the same way about mine

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

. . . that's based solely on what species you are. What's the basis for believing a person is *always* more "valuable" than a dog? Because I can tell you, if it came down to Shrub the Fascist and my Gracie, there'd be no contest. And I would be wrong for leaving Bush behind? In my mind, it's just karma, baby.

Pets of poor owners to not deserve to die simply based on their financial status. They are not second class compared to pets of owners you can afford all their own evacuation plans. As I understand before the government made NO plans whatsoever for evacuating pets. That is simply cruel and irrational.

but I know it will get there.

One cat carrier on the floor in front of the front passenger seat, one in the passenger seat, the beagle and one carrier in the back seat, and the hatch space filled with clothes and critter necessities. The only problem was that Leon meowed the entire time--5 hours of this rhythmic meowing. At one point, the beagle actually did this little bark as if to say "Enough already!"

But we're all here, safe and sound. We did it before and we can do it again!

I have made my own preparations and would never rely on this administration for help anyway. My way includes the survival of my little guys.

live, or die together. He is our precious child, and we would never dream of leaving him behind. My children, who also have pets, feel the same way. They are family. I call my daughter's pets my granddogs. I could never live with myself if I left a family member behind.

and I think that's sweet...of him and of you. :hug:

There were accomodations for pets at the shelter. A guy from animal control or the humane society (I forget which) was there with us, sleeping on cots just like we were. He was caring for people's pets. (Of course, this was a MUCH smaller scale than the hurricanes.)

BTW, our house was safe.

We didn't have pets at the time. If I had to evacuate now, both of my snakes would go into pillow cases and get stuffed under a huge t-shirt next to my body. No one took care of the doggies and kitties. I'm sure not going to trust that anyone would care about my slithery darlings. (And yes, they are darlings.)

nothing on this earth would make me leave them.

we belong together.

They don't mouth off, you don't have to worry about them falling in with the wrong crowd, and you don't have to worry about saving for college.

cats go, or nobody goes.

And also on those around them. They even let Georgie travel with his dog to keep him calm!

I remember the little boy crying while being forced to board a bus for evacuation as his little pup watched him from the sideline.

My kitties are my family. They love me unconditionally and I love them in the same way. They have seen me through a Masters, a Doctorate, a marriage and a divorce, and never once shunned me. When I am upset, my youngest jumps up on the desk and lets me know that it is OK for Dad to have a good cry.

If it is possible to make different accomodations both for transport and sheltering of pets, then I say go for it. But if the choice ever comes between humans and pets, I choose humans every time. My brother's violently allergic to furry animals - his health is more important to me than someone's pet. Call me cruel, but that's where I stand. If evacuation plans become too complex and dangerous to execute if they include the transport and accomodation of pets, I say concentrate on the humans.

I have lots of rescues with no exit plan. Yeah, I know.

We've been lucky here. I stared down a couple 'canes coming this way (Tampa, FL) last year. I'll be doing it again this year.

BTW, read the article. Pacelle (HSUS) has a great quote at the end...

I would rather die with him, then live with the guilt of leaving him.

You get to an evacuation point. The only way out is on a publicly provided bus. You have a right to 2 seats, one for you and one for a pet. The unbreakable rule is that a pet MUST have a seat. You are provided the last 2 seat via lottery. There are folks left behind. There are no more busses.

Do you leave a pet to allow a human on the bus, do both of you stay or do you stay?

Not even a moment's hesitation. I brought my pets into my home and my life. I have a responsibility to them. Period.

because they artificially limit the options. I believe that simplistic questions, even as an exercise, produce simplistic "ethics" answers.

In the real world there are no unbreakable rules and there's more than one bus worth of transportation. There's everything from feet to Space Shuttles in the world I live in, and no hurricane in my world is big enough to use up all available buses (esp. since in a disaster setting buses and fuel can be commandeered). In my world people do not deal with apparent binds by resigning themselves to an either-or: they improvise and innovate.

Sometimes there are either-or questions in the world, but they are rarities, and never take the form of this hypothetical.

I have observed that the simplistic answers such hypotheticals engender are not, as it might seem, mere hypothetical simplicities. The simplicities so generated often become the justification for very bad, even murderous, policy. As a disabled person I'm painfully aware that such simplicities may be used as an excuse for killing me, instead of continuing my medical care, and in fact have been repeatedly used in such a manner, ostensibly to ration scarce medical resources, but in fact to enhance insurance profits while perpetuating the myth that disabled people are miserable and useless creatures who are better off dead. Similarly such a simplicity might be used to discontinue the movement towards disaster planning for pets, ostensibly to save more lives, but in fact to justify government incompetence and indfference.

That's not to say that I think that's your agenda, in particular -- I don't. But I do think that's the unintended effect of exercises like you propose.

In an emergency no driver will make a person put thier kitty carrier on a seat instead of a lap and leave somebody to die.

If we had to evac my neighborhood due to flooding (the big risk here) first of all nobody'd send a bus and second I'd load up my kid, my cat and a few of my things then see if my neighbors (who have more companion animals than car space to evac them, even if they all got along) needed me to take a few of thier kitties since they'd likely barely have room in thier car for themselves, thier grandson and thier two dogs.

I leave the issue of practicality to those who have already responded. As to the logic:


If "the unbreakable rule is that a pet MUST have a seat" in order for both subjects (pet and person) to evacuate, then the very first option you provide - leaving a pet behind to allow a human on the bus - is not in fact a viable option, is it?

Either the pet is beside you on the seat, or you both stay behind, but leaving the pet behind is not allowed according to your own parameters.


So what then is the purpose of this hypothetical? - Other than trying to get people to agree with you that all humans are always more important than any animals.

And good luck with that.

automatic. After that the hard decisions come.

and he's big. When space is limited, you improvise... but my pets go with me no matter what. Or I don't go.

is a lapfull. But if we don't get a 1/2 hour or more of lap time every evening, there's something wrong.

Thankfully, my dog is only 30 lbs or so cause he really thinks he's a lap dog. (And if he were twice as big, I think he'd still consider himself a lapdog.)

Thinks he's still a puppy!

That is a false choice - I'd take the pet on my LAP and give the seat to another.

Only problem is, I have THREE Goldens plus one cat - they are safe WITH ME - no other choices allowed.

The ACTUAL choice would be my pets or people with possessions - I'd be the first to throw out the posessions to make room for the PETS!

And I'd DARE anybody to stop me - I'd KILL them if they tried to keep their possessions over another living thing!

my dog fits under my shirt.

if not that, give it up, preferably to a child. then hightail it to high ground and fend for ourselves. dh is an experienced hiker, mountain climber, and survivalist. We would survive.

thinking about this more, I'd probably give up the seats anyway, we would survive- all three of us. I have no doubt. put kids or old folks on the bus.

be being evacuated in a bus full of people's animals. It sounds like pure hell.

So I can't see us ever leaving our pets behind. Our kids are grown so we refer to then as 'the kids'. Min Pin and Jack Russell terrier.

WHY!!!!!!!!!!

Given that in the event of a coordinated forced evacuation space is at a premium, and there's not much room for people to bring more than the clothes they stand up in and a few personal effects, to expect that pets would or should be given priority in an emergency of this nature shows an utter lack of perspective.

And from the viewpoint of logistics, it's the equivalent of throwing a spanner in the works. If you have strained and limited resources and an emergency situation where common sense dictates that the most important task at hand is the evacuation of humans, an insistence on making room for little Muffy is going to slow the whole process down, make it much more inefficient, and ultimately result in lower human evacuation rates and potentially in greater loss of human life.

that conventional thinking has been turned on its head by the results of disaster research. Most people who put themselves in harms way, in most disasters, do so for their pets. Whether you approve of this or disapprove of this, feel it is rational or irrational, this is a fact of human behavior, just as the tendency to seek confirmation of an emergency warning, even if confirmation involves running toward the hazard, is a fact that needs to be accounted for when developing warning systems.

As a consequence the trend in emergency planning has been towards more accomodation of pets in order to save more human lives. Where pets have been accomodated (there are a number of "pet friendly" shelters operated in hurricane prone areas, for example), anecdotal accounts suggest that more people evacuate, though given the variables involved it's not possible to say this is so with any rigor.

need to be rescued. So a rescue worker risks his life rescuing you, so that you could stay with your pets.

People who stay behind 99% of the time are screaming to be rescued when the going gets tough. My husband was a fireman and also did rescue during floods. They had to take leaky, tippy boats down streets and rescue people, many of whom stayed behind with their pets. Their storm, mind you, was still going on, conditions were treacherous, and he would not have been out in that boat if the people had left their homes when told to leave.

Now, I am not saying that these people could not have taken their pets, but I am saying that if they had stayed behind because of their pets, they now jeopardized another human's life - my husband.

methinks you joke.

segregated animal-friendly and no-animals-allowed services (transport, shelters or separate areas within the same building, etc.)

This is not as difficult as it might seem, since we've got a very good idea of how many households have pets and other relevant demographics. Crunch the numbers and assign services proportionately, and then stay flexible in order to accomodate any unexpected developments.

How about crying babies, smelly old people?

Buses suck under the best of circumstances. If you never want to evac on one keep your car gassed up. :shrug:

I'll take their pets instead.

Although the time I was stuck on a standing-room-only bus for an hour wedged against a man, who was a louder, more flaming, FAR MORE angry version of Elton John, I really think that man could probably only own a really annoying animal. In case of emergency though, I think I could deal with it though.

Also wet dog would only improve the smell of the city busses around here. :puke:

evacuated, it would be being evacuated in a bus full of people's kids. Sounds like pure hell."

Sorry but that is selfish. When you have to be evacuated, you help eachother, you tolerate eachother, you work together. You don't sit and bitch because you don't like the way people's dogs smell or that their kid won't stop crying. Crikey.

Can't really respond without the reasons as to why that would be. May be quite well-founded.

All three passed through Palm Beach County. I evacuated with the pets for the first two storms, weathered the third. My sister lives up the road in Stuart. She and her girlfriend were listed as right in the path of Frances when it was barrelling in as a cat 4 and they refused to even consider evacuating because of their birds. Not "going to public shelters" evacuating, I'm talking about "We have a secure place we're going to, you guys are welcome, get in the car and drive down here." They said the birds would beat themselves to death in the cages if they took a car trip. Well fuck, how do you even get them to the vet?!?! I understand not wanting to evacuate without pets, that's why you make plans that INCLUDE the pets. But owning pets that cannot be evacuated? If I had a horse, I'd make damn sure I had a trailer and the means to move him if such a situation arose. Not preparing for that eventuality and then staying behind because you can't take the pet is stuid.

The thing that really pissed me off about her attitude with Frances is that she acted like she knew all about what would happen and said she was fine. Shit, at the time we were trying to get her to leave, the dotted line was heading right over her house and there was no guarrantee that Frances wouldn't spike to a cat 5. As is, we were damn lucky she dropped down to a sloppy 2. The eyewall on that bitch was huge, something like 75 miles at landfall.

As far as evacuations go, I think family should be together. Find a good, safe place, everyone make preparations and stay together. Cells and landlines will be shit after the storm and it's no use being left to worry about how people weathered the storm. My rule of thumb at this point is stay for 1's and 2's even if it calls for a direct hit and evacuate for anything 3 and up, depending on how close it's coming. The bigger the storm, the further you run. Frances and Jeanne came through up the coast but Wilma passed right overhead. I got to go out in the eye. Pretty wild how still things got. The funny thing, even after passing over so much land the backside was worse than the front since it was eating into a cold front on the way over, made the storm far more powerful. Was funny how we went from super muggy weather before the storm to wintery coolness afterwards, was like nature said "ok, I've been a bit of a bastard, enjoy some cool air now that your AC's don't work."

If a person can't fit on an evacuation bus because of animals, then the animals stay behind and fend for themselves.

However, if space allows, bring the animals.

And yeah, some of you will accuse me of being human-centric, and you'd be right - so I take no offense at that term.

But I, for one, refuse to let a PERSON stay behind and die just because someone else feels they have to have their pets with them.

I love my animals. I've had dogs and cats all my life. But, people are more important. If there's enough room for both people and animals, then that's fine. I'd take my animals with me. But, I wouldn't insist that my animals take space that might be used to save other people. And I certainly wouldn't stay behind and risk my children losing a parent, or risk their lives, because we couldn't take the animals. I don't think that means I shouldn't have them, or that I'm ethically or morally inferior to those who claim they'd stay behind. I don't think someone has to be willing to lay down their own lives and the lives of their human family members in order to be worthy of having pets.

Fine if they can evacuate the pets but if not then people are definitely top priority. If you don't want to leave without your pets then stay behind but don't expect sympathy. Its nonsense to expect your pets to take priority over any person. Also, I imagine its difficult enough to get the people out without their pets, much less with.

My god, it's nice to see a shred of sanity on this board.

I am not going either. We will either live together or die together.

you should not have them to begin with. I'd leave the family photos before I'd leave the critters to fend for themselves. Life is precious...!

My only tornado plan is the dogs and me in the closet. That's all we have--can't afford a shelter and no room in the closet for anything else. Same for my car--if I had to evacuate, it's me, the dogs, and a little food. Whatever I could grab, and believe me, it's the dogs first and foremost.

I agree, that if someone could leave without their animals, they shouldn't have the animals in the first place. Adopting a companion animal means that you assume all responsibility for their care.

that fund FEMA would be used to get you and your doggies out of danger! I'm tired of paying for worthless government employees! In the Northridge Quake aftermath 12 years ago, FEMA was excellent. What a difference 12 years of rethug 'rule' makes!

I'm adopting another kitty...a baby someone had shot a bb at if you can believe that. :mad: She's recovered and beautiful but the worried look in her eyes got my spouse and I. She will forever more be a COUCH QUEEN!

My animals *are* my family.

nothing inanimate goes before the critters

Our emergency would more likely be flooding, fire or earthquake (yes, friends, California), but Henny the Pet Chicken would come with us. We are her flock and she is a wonderful friend, who just happens to have wings and lays eggs.

My dog Rusty is old as heck and would never make it. My ferret Squeakers I had since she was a kit and my frog which was my sons who didn't take care of him and he almost died is mine now. I renamed him Lazarus. He's an aquatic and can live for 30 or more years.

because it's so hard when i lose them. but we did have 2 dogs in my family when i was growing up. anytime an earthquake came and we would go out we would always take our dog with us. i couldn't imagine leaving him behind.

sometimes people don't realize how close you are to your pet until the time comes when you have to make a decision about leaving them or you lose them.

:wow:

to tornado sirens. We already have a system. All the cat carriers and one dog crate are in one room in my basement--along with water dishes, a litter box and some toys. The critters all go into that room at the first notice of a weather watch--severe storm watch or tornado watch. When a watch becomes a warning, everyone goes in a carrier or crate, and I join them in that room with a weather radio.

But my folks had some friends who had to evacuate their town in Wisconsin when a train car with chemicals derailed. AFter that, my mom made sure they had two sets of cat carriers--one in the basement for tornadoes, and one in the front hall closet that they could grab in a hurry.

Ya never know!

I would NEVER go without my animals. My animals are more loyal to me than any human friends I have ever had.

Kerby, my black and tan Cavalier King Charles Spaniel and I are inseparable. There's no way I'd leave him !!!

My dog is welcome most places. My cat would be allowed at my sister's house.

If I did that it would haunt me forever.

Even if you aren't a pet owner, public policy and public health concerns weigh inexorably in favor of evacuating pets with people.

This is in addition to the fact that many, many people love their pets and simply will not leave without them.

Less than 18 hours before Katrina landfall and she had 8 animals she needed to board. We had no room at all. We'd already doubled the occupancy in the pens as much as was possible. I wonder if she found a place or stayed with the animals.

A couple of blocks away. I didn't know them and it doesn't appear that they have returned. After what I've seen in this city Post-levee failure, I've decided that people who can't take their pets with them when they evacuate, shouldnt have pets. PERIOD.

On a more positive note, this years plans do include a shelter where pets are allowed. We need to encourage people to have kennels and food for their animals, b/c a bunch of loose animals in a shelter under harsh conditions is a recipe for disaster. I'm not sure how their goign to manage this exactly. They haven't communicated the plans very well with us.

Thankfully I have family to the north where my pets are welcome.

. . . there were a lot of pet rescue folks who were just DYING to help down there, but couldn't or WEREN'T allowed to do anything. I'd bet they would be glad to help out the shelters in setting up kennels, pens, whatever needed to happen to keep things from turning to chaos. That's what they do.

....well, to be precise, I herd ONE ferret - 'Kashi'. She, and her sister and brother kitties, are my 'children', in almost every sense of the word that I understand. Where Mrs. Ferretherder and I go, so will our 'family' go.

And those who would kill themselves over a dog will be removed from the gene pool. Oh well.

Dogs and humans have co-evolved. One little storm sure as hell isn't going to upset millions of years of evolution already in place.

Oh well.

may there be no dog around to jump in to save you. If there is a dog around, may he lift his leg to piss in the pool before walking away.

Texas is making plans to evacuate animals.

Even if the Feds are still clueless.

It doesn't have to be either/or. Let the animal rescue folks work alongside the other evac crews. Up to now, they've not been allowed to provide the service they are freely offering. That's just wrong.

n/t

no text

and all the belongings of the people. Why we can't do it the way the Cubans do it?

Pretty much what we are saying here is, and i'm not sure i disagree, is that when the mandatory evacuation orders come (like they did prior to Katrina), we each would probably decide to ignore them for one reason or another. Does this lessen the liability on the government to ensure we evacuate? If not, what lengths would we then allow the government to force us to leave? Remember, its an emergency, and likely there isn't time for case by case reviews.

Previous policy had been to not let pets suffer.

Peoples views have changed since then. And thus so to must any emergency response.

In fact, pets were evacuated from Galveston before last year's Hurricane Rita.

Part of the family, part of the disaster plan
Katrina changed the attitude that animals are just an afterthought

By MELANIE MARKLEY
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle

Dawn Blackmar could hardly believe her ears.

Her truck radio had just announced that Galveston was evacuating the island in advance of Hurricane Rita — and pets were welcome on the buses that were lining up to leave.

"I just about wrecked my truck," said Blackmar, Harris County's director of veterinary public health. "I thought, 'You're kidding. I can't believe that we've been trying to get people to do this for years, and she's finally done it.'"

Mayor Lyda Ann Thomas' actions last year represented a major shift in the way companion animals are treated in hurricane evacuations, and now, for the first time, pets have become an integral part of state and local disaster plans.
www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hurricane/3915666.html

Galveston & other areas subject to storm surge MUST be evacuated if a fair-sized storm threatens the area. These people need to make plans NOW & not wait until the wind is rising; most of them know it. (The main evacuation route from Galveston will be flooded early on.) Many will drive & have been urged to take their pet supplies.

"Special needs" people are being asked to register in advance--& let the authorities know if they will bring their pets.
www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hurricane/3915953.html

We are NOT waiting for the Feds to tell us what to do.

The phrase: "Run from water, shelter from wind" has been repeated to lessen congestion on the highways. Many who left last year were far from the Gulf & lived in sturdy houses. Those who will "shelter in place" should include pet supplies in their Hurricane Kits. (I dropped by the store before Rita to replenish my kit. The storm swerved at the last minute & missed Houston but hit East Texas pretty badly. The only bare shelves had held toilet paper & kitty litter!)

I live smack dab in the middle of Katrina-Rita landfalls. We had evacuees from both directions. All had pets. We have hosted 3 cats and four dogs in the process (causing quite a bit of stress, considering the conflicts with our own cats). The first evacuee asked if it was okay to bring his cat. My wife said she wouldn't shelter anyone who would leave a cat behind. Of course they were welcome.

We're very attached to our pets, and can certainly appreciate anyone's affection for their own.

And let's face it. I'm happier about housing your cat than your kids. Simple reality.

they're two of my best friends.

(Not my dog, but a cool dog nonetheless.)

then I don't see how it is heartless. Sometimes disasters are so horrific, like Katrina, that it really does come down to that choice. Thankfully, that isn't common, and people usually are able to make it to safety with both human family and pets. But, I don't think that the people who left their pets behind during Katrina to save their own lives were heartless. I hope like hell it never does, but if it ever comes down to my children or my animals, my children would win. Between my animals and my neighbors, my neighbors would win. It would be utterly devastating, but there it is. I can't imagine how it would feel to a child if their parent had chosen to stay behind with a pet and die, leaving them orphaned for the rest of their life, for instance. Or, I can't imagine how it would feel to know that their decision to stay behind has cost their human children their lives because they couldn't part with the family pet, and suddenly realize the folly of their decision, too late. I think it's a bit harsh and judgmental to say that people who've made such a heart wrenching decision to put their human family, friends, and neighbors first, in the face of such devastating loss, were heartless.

I understand the people that say they could never leave their pets behind. What I don't understand is the harshness towards those who would put their lives and the lives of their family and comunity at top priority. Neither position is unethical or heartless. Most people, if they're able, will take their pets with them. And usually they'll be able to find a way.

is that we are called crazy or overly emotional because we actually do consider our pets to be family members. If a person stays behind with a pet, that is their choice. To call it folly is to not understand the strong bonds between some humans and their pets. It isn't an act of selfishness, it is an act of selflessness.

As a pet owner I've got relatives who don't have pets who've constantly told me that I'm crazy to treat my pets so well, to spend $$ on their vet bills, etc. I think many other people have had the same treatment and we can see it spread out in this thread. To me, asking me to leave my pet behind is like asking me to leave my child behind. Bottom line. Many would laugh at that, including my (they happen to be RWers) relatives, but that's how I feel. And I know I am not alone. Until we recognize and respect the various relationships people have with their pets and with other people, there will always be this gap in understanding.

I don't take issue with people who would stay behind with their pets. I completely understand. I do feel my pets are part of the family. Mine are ridiculously spoiled. I spent a lot of money treating my cat when he was deathly ill. My whole point was that those who think people should take priority overall in a major disaster like Katrina, and people who would put humans first, aren't callous and heartless, as has been asserted in this thread. When it comes right down to the wire, and the choice is stay and die, or leave without your pets because they aren't allowed on the bus or in the shelter, I don't think the choice to save yourself and your human family members is heartless. And, if there aren't enough resources to evacuate humans and animals, having the opinion, as I do, that people are the priority, isn't all that absurd and irrational. I think that most of the time both can be accommodated. But, in the case of Katrina, there weren't enough resources to get all the people out, let alone the people and their pets. The people who left their pets behind weren't callous monsters unworthy of having pets. They were people facing the worst disaster in the history of this country. They were facing losing their lives, and the lives of their families. And they were the top priority. I don't think it makes me cold, callous, or anti-animal to think so.

who refused to leave their pets were elderly. In most cases, for these elderly people, their pet is their ONLY companion and friend and very dear to them.

Someone up thread said that a pet is going to die in a few years any, making it seem that's why they weren't worth saving. These elderly, who wouldn't leave their pets, only have a few years left, too. I don't think that having only a few years left diminishes the value of either one of them.

From my experience, elderly and single people become much more attached to their pets because the pets ARE their family.

What about the other human beings in your life who love you? What about your friends, your family, people who rely on your for emotional support? It's great you treat your pets so well, but you are doing those who care for you a grave disservice by putting yourself in harm's way for the sake of an animal.