[PyrNet-L] Fw: Air Safety Bill vote NO

["Lara & Jimmy Spears" <k9parent@earthlink.net>]

>posted with permission from Judi..also she said pass it on.
>Sandy
>
>
>>
>>>sorry to disagree with Dog Fancy magazine article, BUT.........the Animal
>>>Air safety act will be WORSE than no help at all.  The reasons below will
>>>explain:
>>
>>1. The cost to "retrofit ONE aircraft is over $100,000.
>>2. the revenue that the airlines gathers from animal transportation does
not
>>cover the cost of such retrofit for 4 years
>>(remember we are only talking ONE retrofit to ONE aircraft.
>>3. CRO Ron Petit of Northwestern Airlines has officially said that the
cost
>>is prohibitive when compared to the number of animals shipped as as excess
>>baggage and animals shipped to "flight destination" non excess baggage.
>>4 Northwest Airlines, American Airlines, United Airlines, Southwest Air,
>>Continental and Delta have all agreed that the cost of such retrofit is
not
>>a cost effective move, so they will, after the passage of this bill, NO
>>LONGER ACCEPT ANY ANIMALS FOR SHIPMENT ON ANY OF THEIR AIRCRAFT.
>>5.Passage of this bill will virtually eliminate any possibility of any
>>animal flying to dog shows, to the stud dog to be bred, to new homes etc.
>>In short form: air travel for all dogs for any reason will be a thing of
the
>>past.
>>Further investigations by the FAA has stated that most problems with live
>>animal transit is in the negligence of the load packers and baggage
>>handlers, improper packing, blocking vents for air circulation, not safely
>>securing animal cargo crates, improper crating and packaging of animals
for
>>transit by air (some by the shippers themselves.
>>6. The cost of lawsuits verses the training of competant "certified"
animal
>>loaders" by the airlines is about the same.  It is far easier to train
>>people to load animal and live cargo properly than to refit all aircraft
or
>>even a few models of aircraft. (note the cost of retrofit to the AIRBUS
300
>>is over $172,000 per aircraft (American uses these for cross country
travel
>>non-stop flights.) The airlines would rather foregoe the expense, not do
it,
>>and refuse to transport the live animal cargo.
>>
>>SO IN ESSANCE: passing of this bill would force almost all the major
>>airlines to to refuse all live animal transports.
>>It is "tagged" onto a Air Travel SAFETY bill in an effort to make people
>>think that this will make air travel safer for your animals.
>>
>>So think about traveling to your next year's National or field trial
>>national without your dog in flight. Or plan on using AMTRAK.
>>Do you want to eliminate all live animals from the Friendly skies??
>>Or would you prefer the FAA reccommended required certified Live cargo
>>trained handlers?
>>      For me it makes no difference, my show dog is also a service dog
that
>>can ride in the cabin with me, while working.
>>
>>
>>Judi Bayly Cedarwind Setters / Copperline (reg.)
>>Lyric (THE 911 DOG)IS,  Copper (Service dog)IS
>>Windy & Dancer IS
>>AND...SUNNY..Home again...Forever and Ever AMEN
>>The "Granite State" of New Hampshire
>>judibayly@hotmail.com * or *  cedarwindsetters@hotmail.com
>>http://homepages.msn.com/PetsPl/cedarwindsetters/index.html