July 18th, 2011
08:54 AM GMT
Share this on:

Hong Kong (CNN) – Flat-faced canines can no longer fly Cathay Pacific. And their feline friends need to make other travel plans, too.

As of Monday, the airline has banned the so-called brachycephalic breeds due to concerns that certain types of short-nosed animals have an increased risk of breathing problems and overheating due to the stress of flying.

According to the airline’s travel advisory, the ban comes out of concern for the “negative health impact to the animal” caused by air transportation.

Banned are popular breeds such as pugs, bulldogs, and boxers, as well Himalayan, Persian and exotic short-hair cats.

Cathay Pacific is the latest airline to ban snub-nosed dogs, following similar moves by Singapore Airlines and several American carriers.

The move comes a year after the U.S. Department of Transport (DOT) released figures detailing the number of in-flight canine deaths between May 2005 and May 2010. Their results, compiled from monthly reports by U.S. airlines, showed that short-faced dog breeds such as pugs and bulldogs represented about half of in-flight dog deaths.

English bulldogs accounted for 25 of the 108 deaths of known breeds – far more than any other pedigree.

In a statement, the DOT advised owners of short-faced breeds to review the data before shipping them as cargo, and urged owners to consult veterinarians before flying their pets.

Brachyphalic dogs are at a higher risk of death because their breathing is more restricted than that of a dog with a longer muzzle. This restricted breathing makes it harder for a short-faced dog to cool itself down by panting.

American Airlines imposed a complete ban on the travel of snub-nosed cats and dogs in its cargo holds or as checked luggage, limiting their travel to in-cabin only. The airline also established a ban on eight breeds – including boxers, pugs and Boston terriers –between the summer dates of June 30 and September 1.

Delta Airlines, United Airlines and Continental Airlines offer similar temperature-contingent restrictions for the cargo and checked-baggage travel of pets.

Singapore airlines has issued a complete ban on snub-nosed dogs as well as their cross breeds.

Thomas Lau, Cathay Pacific’s assistant manager of public affairs, said that the move was necessary.

“The ban is to bring Cathay Pacific into line with industry practice because it has been found that there is quite a bit of danger,” Lau said.

Lau said that aside from media inquiries, to his knowledge Cathay Pacific has not received any passenger complaints regarding the ban so far.

Whilst Cathay Pacific’s measures appear to have the animals’ best interests at heart, Hong Kong’s Society for the Protection of Animals (SPCA) believes that the ban is an over-reaction.

“We understand that they must have some statistics that certain breeds of dogs are more problematic in the cargo cabin, but there are cases when air travel is unavoidable, especially when owners need to emigrate,” said Rebecca Ngan, PR and communications manager of SPCA Hong Kong.

“If owners cannot send them in the cabin they may have to abandon them or put them to sleep.”

As it stands, dogs already need a veterinarian-issued health certificate before they can board a flight from Hong Kong, with countries differing on travel requirements worldwide.

“A complete ban is quite difficult as it limits the routes where snub-nosed animals can travel,” said Stacy Tucker, director and owner of Ferndale Kennels & Cattery, a Hong Kong pet shipping company.

Tucker echoed the SPCA’s concern that the new travel ban would increase the number of dogs being euthanized or abandoned.

Dragonair and British Airways are among the airlines still allowing pets to be carried as cargo, but it seems that the days of flying pugs are over.

Posted by: ,
Filed under: Air industryBusiness


soundoff (128 Responses)
  1. octopus

    ok.

    July 18, 2011 at 12:15 pm |
  2. Quezz

    I welcome this ban, because most pet owners will blame the airline if something goes wrong and the animal is injured or dies in transport. While airlines are at times negligent, the risk is increased exponentially for certain types of animals. Many times the owners have not taken proper measures to insure their pets' safety.

    July 18, 2011 at 12:20 pm |
  3. Ian Abraham

    The ban on snub-nosed dog by British Airways has been in effect for more than 25 years.

    July 18, 2011 at 12:54 pm |
  4. Der

    People who cannot go on vacation without their dogs are morons anyways....they are not babies ffs.

    July 18, 2011 at 12:57 pm |
  5. Zaphod2010

    While you are it ban the annoying screaming, seat kicking kids. You want to talk stress on a long trip? I rather have a dog . Maybe if the sky god airlines allowed the dogs in the cabins they wouldn'g die! Duh!!!!!!!
    Dog spelled backwards means god!

    July 18, 2011 at 12:57 pm |
  6. Richard

    Just another result of stupid people and the breeding of physically debilitated animals. Too many breeds today have been bred to emphasize certain physical characteristics and this has produced a "sick" array of animals from collie's with flat foreheads and temperment problems to the pug breeds we see today.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:14 pm |
  7. Anne

    They should ban pets on most airlines, and not just for the animal's health – there are many people allergic to pets who may be unaware that they are onboard. Up in the air is not a good place to have a dangerous allergy attack just because someone had to travel with their pet.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:16 pm |
  8. Common sense 911

    And we care because......???

    July 18, 2011 at 1:19 pm |
  9. FauxNews

    More breed discrimination in the US. Don't worry puggy, we shall overcome.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:20 pm |
  10. Bob

    “If owners cannot send them in the cabin they may have to abandon them or put them to sleep.” Having had to put down some family pets due to illness, I can attest to the fact that if you can afford to put your beloved pet to sleep, you can afford to transport the animal in the cabin (assuming it's small enough – which pugs, shih tzu and cats are considered).

    July 18, 2011 at 1:21 pm |
  11. Jon

    While I certainly don't want dogs on a flight, this 'excuse' sounds like BS to me. Can't they get a little more creative in making up these type of excuses? I don't think the public is as stupid as they think we are. Wait a minute, now that I think about it, maybe we are.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:28 pm |
  12. Chang

    THAT,...is an ugly dawg.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:28 pm |
  13. JPX

    Why would anyone own one of those dogs? They're such a hideously looking breed. In that picture it looks like someone squeezed his head so hard that his eyes popped out. Yuck.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:29 pm |
  14. asgardshill

    Probably not a bad idea on the airline's part. For that matter, any summer travel for a pet has to be stressful – those cargo compartments aren't air conditioned, and they're likely to have to wait for hours in the oppressive heat as they're loaded and unloaded anyway.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:32 pm |
  15. Tom

    “If owners cannot send them in the cabin they may have to abandon them or put them to sleep.”

    Actually, there are alternatives. If a family is simply going on vacation, then a kennel is most certainly an option. If the trip is of a more permanent nature, and domestic (USA) then there's an organization that may be able to help. Pilots N Paws is a pet rescue service, that helps connect pets with new owners. I'm sure that given the alternative of killing the pet, that they may be able to arrange transport to the new home.

    http://pilotsnpaws.org/

    July 18, 2011 at 1:35 pm |
  16. Yesuranidiot

    zaphod2010: yes, you're an idiot.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:36 pm |
  17. jessica

    Zaphod2010, what?

    July 18, 2011 at 1:39 pm |
  18. db

    this is a ban on SHIPPING dogs in the cargo section, where there is no air conditioning, not in the passenger cabin. no reputable breeder or responsible owner should ship ANY dog on an aircraft when summer heat reaches a certain level. the breeds mentioned are the most heat sensitve. the cautionary applies to caring for them at home in hot climates as well.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:39 pm |
  19. Jeff S

    Ok, so 144 pets have died on planes and 88 more were lost or injured in the last 5 years. What is that number compared to the number of pets that flew during that same time frame? That helps determine the importance of a move like this. If only 400 pets flew during those 5 years this move makes sense. If 10000 pets flew than it doesn't really make sense. Pets die everyday. If the risk to a pet is not much greater than everyday than I am willing to take the risk. Why is it people do not care about the statistics? Why are people so willing to change over something that has low odds of happening?

    July 18, 2011 at 1:40 pm |
  20. pastafarian

    Seems that they might make an exception in the case of emmigration and with a signed waiver.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:42 pm |
  21. CaseyDilla

    Why wouldn't they just pump A/C to the cargo space when they know animals will be flying and turn it off when they're not?

    July 18, 2011 at 1:43 pm |
  22. Bird

    This is very understandable for certain breeds, and I'm glad to see this step taken. However, it will put a damper on dog breeders of these particular breeds. In order to bring in a different lineage to expand the bloodlines in other areas of the world, AI will be necessary now. This has happened with exotic bird shipping, and the bird breeders only have the species currently owned in the US gene pool for their breeding. Some species are now extinct because of it. I see the same thing happening with certain breeds of dogs now. The gene pools will be so limited that you will have inbreeding and genetic problems because of it. And then there are the dog shows. If the owners, from around the world, cannot get their champions on planes to ship to the show locations, where will all the competition be? Definitely a situation that needs a good remedy.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:44 pm |
  23. spm422

    For the safety of the dogs, I think this is a good thing. However I do not like when people bring their dogs into the cabin either. I am highly allergic to dogs. My last flight (4.5 hours) was miserable because of the reaction I had to the dog across the aisle. I politely asked for a different seat but the flight was full, so I was stuck. I spent the first full day of my vacation recouperating. The dog was adorable, don't get me wrong. I am not an animal hater by any stretch. I just don't think dogs belong in the cabin.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:45 pm |
  24. LTS

    Loved the headline! Very clever!!

    July 18, 2011 at 1:51 pm |
  25. eugene pebworth

    Glad to see this and why not ban all in-cabin pets. If they're that important find another way or pay for boarding.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:53 pm |
  26. Anne

    I have flown snub nosed dogs all over the world for many years with no problems. The airlines take very good care of the pets they fly. However there is always a risk when doign anything and that includes walking across a road. I am so sick of the pwers that be trying ot tell me how to run my life just because they dont like something. And I agree with banning the screaming kids and their usually equally obnoxious parents who think their kids are wonderful.............well I dont.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:53 pm |
  27. julie

    I agree with Zapod2010. Put the kids in the storage and let the dogs in the seats, it would be a much more pleasant trip. At least dogs know how to behave.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:54 pm |
  28. Sadstate

    Pugs are a genetic nightmare! Ok, Note to dog breeders, when you mix a brother and sister to keep the blood line going, you are actually DESTROYING the breed. I dont get breeders anyway. Fruitcakes. Maybe we need to force all breeders into having kids with their siblings. Maybe then they will get the picture.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:55 pm |
  29. Derek

    Time to address some of the morons here:

    Der: People travel with their pets when the relocate. Based on your post, you've proven yourself to be the moron.

    Quezz: Worry about yourself and leave others out of the picture. More stupid people sue over having coffee spilled on them than sue because of injured pets on airlines. I'd welcome a ban on morons like you being allowed to breed.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:58 pm |
  30. teremist

    I haven't air-shipped a pet in years, so I don't know the answer to this question: Are there freight carriers that allow pets to fly within the pressurized cabin space? The cargo holds of commercial passenger carriers aren't pressurized or climate controlled, I don't know how any animal survives them.

    July 18, 2011 at 1:58 pm |
  31. John Sharp

    Whats next, banning people with small noses? The world has definitely gone nuts!

    jmsramsey63@yahoo.com

    July 18, 2011 at 2:01 pm |
  32. Doug

    they are not babies ffs.

    I would rather have a dog in the seat next to me than any screaming kid

    July 18, 2011 at 2:02 pm |
  33. PsychicThoughtSpy.com

    In this case, the suffering that these dogs would have gone through makes it inconceivable that any such dog breeder would want to continue pursuing sales. In other words, I suspect this could possibly have a significant impact on the availability of the breed eventually.

    July 18, 2011 at 2:04 pm |
  34. LPC

    "ban the annoying screaming, seat kicking kids". Sometimes reading these comments makes me embarassed for the human race.

    July 18, 2011 at 2:05 pm |
  35. Melissa

    I just had to comment how cute the photo is! :) And...if this decision is for the safety of the pets, then I'm for it. I wouldn't want my pet in those conditions anyway.

    July 18, 2011 at 2:10 pm |
  36. Chris

    Pugs are gross... ever hear one breathe or get excited? They snort and gasp and make all sorts of awful noises because generations of selective breeding have made them genetic freaks that do not even belong in nature.

    July 18, 2011 at 2:13 pm |
  37. Gianni

    Ahh this is good news. I think pugs should be banned in general; a very ugly and annoying breed.

    July 18, 2011 at 2:15 pm |
  38. Chet

    I've had only 1 dog in my life that I couldn't make friends with and it was a pug. He probably knew how ugly I thought he was.

    July 18, 2011 at 2:19 pm |
  39. Daws

    Heaven forbid they turn the A/C up a little... are they really that dumbfounded about how to accommodate animals, or gee are they trying to save a buck at the further expense of passenger convenience? Give me a break...

    July 18, 2011 at 2:20 pm |
  40. Maria

    People are always insisting that pets are family members... so what's wrong with this rule? You wouldn't put Grandma in with the luggage, would you? If you can be bothered to carry a laptop for personal entertainment, why would you not give a "part of the family" your time, space and consideration as well?

    July 18, 2011 at 2:29 pm |
  41. Timme62

    Count me in with storing the screaming babies and kids. Let the dogs ride up front.

    July 18, 2011 at 2:30 pm |
  42. NotaPugOwner

    Instead of banning the pets and allowing airlines to control the situation, why not have the owner take the "fly your pet at your own risk" crap that applies to humans so that the ultimate choice is on the owner?

    I agree with the everyone else who says, I MUCH rather have a cute snub nosed passenger sitting next to me than some annoying spoiled brat who's screaming because he can't play angry bird on his iPad.

    And to those who posted how snub nosed animals are ugly, take a look at your own so called "cute" children- gauranteed 99% of the population disagrees. They're just as ugly to us as pugs are to you.

    July 18, 2011 at 2:35 pm |
  43. Sydney Australia

    I agree with Zapod2010.
    Put the kids in the storage and let the dogs in the seats. At least dogs know how to behave.

    July 18, 2011 at 2:38 pm |
  44. Spica

    I agree with Zapod2010 too. Would much rather fly with a pack of dogs than 1 kid.

    July 18, 2011 at 2:39 pm |
  45. Caroline

    Get a clue! Not all people traveling with pets are going on holiday. When I moved overseas, I took my cat with me. If he didn't fly, how was I supposed to get him here? Throw him in the shipping container with my furniture?

    I'd much rather board my cat than have to fly with him. After sorting out the heath certificates, size & weight limits, etc. there's the actual hell of getting the animal through security. It's a real picnic taking a terrified animal out of its crate in a loud and crowded security line so the TSA goons can inspect the crate for explosives.

    July 18, 2011 at 2:47 pm |
  46. Lyndsey

    I understand why they are banning them but people aren't always taking their pets on vacation. My husband serves in the military so when we have to move, we take our pets with us. They are part of our family and I wouldn't want to put them down just because I can't bring my boxer with me.

    July 18, 2011 at 2:57 pm |
  47. Susan

    Poor things. Just goes to show you, dogs like that should not even be bred. People like them because their faces look human or something, but at the expense of their health and even breathing. How cruel. I am presently playing ball with an aussie and she can run all day with her long, free breathing nose.

    July 18, 2011 at 2:58 pm |
  48. Jimmy James Jim Jam

    It seems as though my dog is going to have to play dress-up next time it takes a cross country flight.

    July 18, 2011 at 3:03 pm |
  49. JOHN

    The title of this article is just another lame attempt at media humor...

    July 18, 2011 at 3:07 pm |
  50. churchstreet

    "No Shit-(zu)"
    Lol great headline :)

    July 18, 2011 at 3:18 pm |
  51. rmsbl4

    @teremist Pets are shipped in pressurized and climate controlled cargo holds. That is why there is a limit on the number of pets that can be shipped on an acft. The non pressurized or climate controlled cargo holds are not used for pets unless sombody screws up and puts them there. You might want to check some of the airlines webs before making your statement about shipping pets.

    July 18, 2011 at 3:35 pm |
  52. whatever1

    @JPX, your mother is uglier, you half hearted pos.. and your comment has no point whatsover in regards to this forum. Pugs and short nosed breeds should be allowed to fly, airlines simply need to allow these animals to board and be taken in the cabin. For individuals who live outside of the US and want to take their pets home with them, this leaves them with lesser options and I for one wouldn't put my pug to sleep or give him away.

    July 18, 2011 at 3:36 pm |
  53. c-mac

    I had no idea the cargo area was not air conditioned or pressurized. Any dog owner who allows their pet to travel that way is inhumane! I'm calling Pam Anderson!

    July 18, 2011 at 3:45 pm |
  54. Dan

    So, banning certain breeds of dogs based upon statisitcal history of incidents of dogs' deaths, in order to prevent other dogs' deaths, is quite alright.
    But banning certain set of humans, based upon statistical history of incidents of humans' deaths, in order to prevent other humans' deaths, is a politically incorrect abomination that must be avoided at all costs.
    Yep, makes sense to me!

    July 18, 2011 at 3:47 pm |
  55. Wobbles

    Dogs have been bred/selected for special characteristics since they were first domesticated. That some have been so 'created' for strictly cosmetic reasons is simply more evidence of the arrogance the human species is capable of. Of course, many of the breeds were meant as working animals and the characteristics optimized for that purpose. Perhaps the most serious problem that breeding causes is in an attempt to keep a breed 'pure', the gene pool is so restricted that unforeseen ailments result.

    It would be far better to restrict such excessive 'purebreeding' practices and slowly remove what I call the 'fragile' breeds form the canine population. It definitely should be against the law for breeders to kill pups that 'have the wrong coloration' or who 'don't measure up,' a common practice by many so-called premiere dog breeders.

    July 18, 2011 at 3:50 pm |
  56. Fred Murre

    A sometimes pilot here; jet airliners at cruising altitude provide cabin pressure equivalent to about 5000-7000 feet in altitude, infrequently less, so the effect on the canine companions will be similar to having the dog at mountain elevations, less oxygen will be available. Additionally, the engine bleed air that is used to pressurize the cabin is very very dry, which will speed the loss of water through the nasal lining and tongue in an overheated and panting dog, further threatening heat stress. Unfortunate extremes, which can be book-ended by high temperatures in the baggage hold, while on the ground in the summer.

    July 18, 2011 at 4:13 pm |
  57. DogsNotHumans

    Fair enough if it protects the dogs.

    Airlines also need to ban stupid people from flying. They can start with the majority of people who post comments to CNN stories.

    July 18, 2011 at 4:17 pm |
  58. Wasted1

    Shih Tzu's are much better cabin mates than most people. (Too bad the picture is incorrect.)

    July 18, 2011 at 4:31 pm |
  59. Pure Energist

    So if the issue is with overheating why not implement cooling devices inside the carriers with the animals..Dry Ice packs for example , or even cooling units if applicable... rather then creating a solution to beating the heat they are taking the easy way out with bans.

    July 18, 2011 at 4:35 pm |
  60. lolface

    now they will be begging for a bailout when people stop flying their planes and wonder why... corperations are run by idiots.

    July 18, 2011 at 4:41 pm |
  61. Sam

    Keep the dogs and ban the screaming kids. As a teacher I have a better idea. Write detentions for the kids and make them sit for 20 minutes outside the plane and on the wing.

    July 18, 2011 at 4:44 pm |
  62. Alex

    When it's okay for children to fly in the cargo hold, I'll put my dogs in there, too.

    July 18, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  63. Bulldog fanatic

    Some people like myself have moved overseas, and choose to take pets with them. I have a English Bulldog, French Mastiff, and Exotic Shorthair. Both the bulldog and shorthair flew both to Austrlaia and back to the US, and were perfectly fine. The owners need to be aware of the risk of flying their pets, and the airlines require that the pets are given an examination prior to boarding the plane.

    July 18, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  64. Alex

    Why worry about these dogs, it's the people who own such dogs that should be banned.

    July 18, 2011 at 5:14 pm |
  65. ALTDPB

    My Pug flys all over the world with me.  She always travels under my seat, never in the hold.  I take 100% responsibility for her wellbeing in flight.  I bring a fan and ice in case of A/C failure.  During most flights, she goes unnoticed by both crew and passengers.   By the way ... Pugs are not s new deigner breed.  The breed dates back to 800BC.

    July 18, 2011 at 5:16 pm |
  66. Mokitoo

    Having been a frequent flyer for many years, but now, wouldn't get on a commercial flight unless there was a gun pointed at my head, I would rather stay home with my pug nosed dog! Even though, my husband and I have most of our family out of state, we prefer driving . Many nice motels welcome well behaved pets and it sure beats the heck out of being subjected to the humiliating searches the airlines subject their customers to..

    July 18, 2011 at 5:47 pm |
  67. Doggie

    You can never compare a dog/cat with a human being. Hence learn to love your own children more than the freq'n dogs and cats.

    July 18, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  68. Adam

    ... so Cathay says you can't bring these dogs on a plane because they're precious and might get hurt, but you can likely walk off the airplane and into a local market where they're serving dog meat?

    July 18, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
  69. jon

    I don't have a problem with this ban; regarding the health of the animals. I can't imagine the owners putting up so much of a fuss. If they have to travel with their pets they could find another airline and assume the risks themselves.

    July 18, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
  70. Aubrie

    Ever sit next to someone on a plane with an animal in a pet carrier who was so stressed by the flight that they had loose stinky bowel movements??? It was all I could do not to puke. Animals should NOT be allowed in the cabin for ANY reason.... I don't care who you are.... (Paris Hilton types....) It's not sanitary.

    July 18, 2011 at 6:05 pm |
  71. Gidget

    I suppose all of you who are complaining about kids on airplanes were perfectly behaved angels when you were children and never annoyed a single adult, and also that you have no children of your own (which, in my opinion, is a good thing!). I love my pets, but at the end of the day – they are animals, not humans. People who equate animals wiith humans need to have their heads examined.

    July 18, 2011 at 6:17 pm |
  72. JoJo

    How about airlines offering real customer service ... like, anyone can take their dog as a "carry-on" if it can be placed on the floor in front of the passenger (small dogs of course).

    July 18, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  73. greeniz

    I am a pug owner and for all you posters that say they are ugly, nasty and all those negative adjectives; Yes, they snore (your spouse/partner probably does too), make nasty noises, (again, humans do it too). Pugs as well as any dog bring different experiences for everyone. My pug welcomes me when I walk through the door, always happy, always loving. They give unconditional love, which is more than i can say for most humans. Maybe they are not a part of the family to you, but my dog is a part of my family, regardless of any ones opinion. Live and let live!!! (By the way, I have never flown with him and would never put him through that). I agree that there are risks involved and that is the reason I personally would not do it.

    July 18, 2011 at 6:38 pm |
  74. Sal

    I moved my 3 cats from US to Hong Kong last year by Cathay Pacific. International pet travel is different, it required your pet to be in the cargo and don't allow in the cabin. During the whole trip, I was worry sick. Even I pick the shortest flight which still over 20 hours (They can only stuck in the tiny Kennel too). If airlines apply the ban to the certain breeds, now the travel time may increase even more and will have more stress on the pet. I agree with the article some people may abandon their pets. Basically, the ban only prevents them the possibility to die in the plane, but may not help the pets on other outcome. Hope they let those breed in the cabin. For my lucky cats, they are super happy in Hong Kong now.

    July 18, 2011 at 6:58 pm |
  75. Doc

    “If owners cannot send them in the cabin they may have to abandon them or put them to sleep.”

    Really? What an incredibly stupid, insensitive, and arrogant statement to make.

    July 18, 2011 at 6:59 pm |
  76. Meghan

    As the owner of a boxer, I welcome this ban. Really, it is extremely unhealthy and uncaring to ever ship a pet in cargo, but I understand that in cases of moving overseas, pet owners want to bring their beloved animals with them. However, dogs with snub noses are incredibly sensitive to heat. I wish we'd have laws against taking snub-nosed dogs for a run or extended walk in the heat, as they cannot recover and could very easily die. All pet owners need to understand the specific requirements of each breed- it is our responsibility to keep them healthy and safe.

    July 18, 2011 at 7:11 pm |
  77. OrangePekoe

    I would NEVER ship an animal as cargo. It's too dangerous. Fly them in the cabin or find another way. I don't think animals should be banned from cabin travel just because someone has an allergy. PErhaps if that is such a problem a passenger should make certain to book only on a flgiht without pets.

    July 18, 2011 at 7:23 pm |
  78. nobody

    Should they also ban people that look like bulldogs?

    July 18, 2011 at 7:49 pm |
  79. apiz

    Rude!

    July 18, 2011 at 7:50 pm |
  80. valoree

    Lots of pug hatin going on here. We have two pugs and love them. The article is correct, they don't do well with heat at all and it is safer not to fly. For all of those out there who can't stand to hear pugs breath, ever been around st bernards or mastiffs that drool? I've had both and I'd rather listen to my pug breathe than clean up slobber :-)

    July 18, 2011 at 8:30 pm |
  81. civitas

    Cross-breeding to create specific characteristics has been a problem for a long time, it finally is catching up to those frankenstein dog breeders. Too many popular "created" show breeds have so many physical problems they aren't worth having any more.

    July 18, 2011 at 8:31 pm |
  82. Thoth Amon

    "Zaphod2010: While you are it ban the annoying screaming, seat kicking kids..."

    What a miserable wretch your Momma raised.

    July 18, 2011 at 8:36 pm |
  83. Tay

    To all of the inconsiderate heartless pug haters: You obviously do not know how wonderful and delightful a pug is. You should be forced to be put in a cage and left in the bottom of a plane.

    July 18, 2011 at 9:15 pm |
  84. louise v. angeles

    If dogs would be allowed into d cabin then by all means I'll go for it!!! Whatever others may opine&/or say, comforting my pet during airtravels(esp.,on long-tiring flights)is exactly what he'd get...

    July 18, 2011 at 9:17 pm |
  85. Sara

    Ok CNN how about doing some research. Even when DOT and the airlines don't talk about the big picture in their press release, it doesn't mean you can't.
    144 pet deaths in 5 years. I won't go into how the report doesn't differentiate between carried on or cargo and time of year. How many pets fly a year? There's a generic 50,000 estimate floating on the web. So, 122 out of 250,000. Each one is a huge loss for the owner, but the chances of a pet dying anytime is .049%.
    There's no need for an expose, but these airlines are having a knee jerk reaction to an extremely rare situation. Completely banning these pets will have a negative affect on many more of their perspective passengers than the minuscule chance of a fatality. The US Airlines actually did something right by mitigating the risk, instead of knee jerk banning.

    July 18, 2011 at 10:37 pm |
  86. M3NTA7

    @Der... Ummm.. you know what? It can be really expensive to board a dog depending on the number of days. It can be really expensive.

    July 18, 2011 at 10:45 pm |
  87. Mark

    Its nice that these airlines are taking a responsible approach. Having owned a pug and now a pekingese, I am well award of the breathing difficulties these breeds can have, especially in hot and humid weather. Unfortunately some owners don't think of this, so the airlines have to. I wouldn't put my dog through the stress of traveling in the cargo compartment anyway. If she can't ride with me on the plane, then she gets to go to a kennel or we drive.

    July 18, 2011 at 11:02 pm |
  88. American One

    Provide the Lil Bugger with a Oxyen mask:)

    July 18, 2011 at 11:09 pm |
  89. Brownstain

    No fatties on planes. They may overheat and stink.

    July 19, 2011 at 12:38 am |
  90. julianpenrod

    Note the characteristic mislieading description. "English bulldogs accounted for 25 of the 108 deaths of known breeds." The article, however, doesn't describe the proportions of dogs in cargo that were English bulldogs and which weren't. It leaves it to the pigeon to con themselves into thinking all breeds were equally represented! Just like exercises such as the "war on 'terror'" assertion that Homeland Security is necessary to protect the country, leaving it to the rubes to "come to the conclusion" that there really is a large scale conspiracy out there among Muslims to attrack the U.S. and the only reason it hasn't happened is that Homeland Security has stopped them. In fact, if there was such a threat to short faced dogs and cats, it would have been recognized and acted on long ago.

    The alternative is that the air is changing, and that seems to be what is happening. The government program to gain control of the weather, chemtrails, has certainly had a noticeable effect on the atmosphere. Since chemtrails were first recognized in 1997, the world has seen the worst hurricane season on record; the largest year-to-year drop in Arctic sea ice; unprecedented hundred degree heat waves from London to Siberia; tornadoes become so numerous, meteorologists no longer talk about tornado numbers, but about numbers of "tornado days"; tornadoes occurring in places they were never known before, such as Brooklyn; the first new cloud species in a half century to be recognized, the undulatus aspiratus; the sudden melting off of glaciers; and the clearing of the Northwest Passage. A dramatic demonstration of the changing nature of air has been even the recalculating of "wind chill"! The drop in perceived temperature of air is half what it used to be, incidating the air is holding more heat than normal!

    Another major effect has been on planes, making the air impossible for them to fly through. About five years ago, it took the form of a few weeks span of almost daily crashes followed by a period of a few months when almost no incidents occurred. The spans became longer and the intervals shorter. Now, there seem patches of denatured air everywhere. The airlines now put a great deal of effort into avoiding them. "Accidents" or "malfunctions" or "incidents" on the tarmac, delaying take-off are at epidemic levels. "Accidents" or "malfunctions" or "unruly passengers” in the air, “forcing” a "diversion" are equally prevalent. Cancellations and delays are at record levels. And if they need to pretend that they "overshot" a destination because pilots were "preoccupied", in order to avoid a patch of unnatural atmosphere, they will.

    Since a situation like this would have prompted responses in the past if it existed, it has to be suggested that this is because the air has become so perverted that short faced dogs and cats can no longer tolerate it at altitudes.

    In fact, it seems destined, if the New World Order has their way, only to get worse. Soon, no one will be able to fly, and the only things in the air will be the non-aerodynamic triangular or diamond shaped drones that are being spotted. That may be why some crooks in politics have begun suggesting Homeland Security checkpoints on trains. Beause they will take the place of air flight in the near future and they need an alternative venue of harassment to keep the unquestioning dullards feeling like cattle.

    July 19, 2011 at 1:33 am |
  91. VANewsMan

    What I don't see mentioned is that some pet owners also medicate their pets to keep them calmer while traveling. This can have a sedating effect, which slows their breathing even further and increases the chances of death. Pet owners need to talk with their vets about the dangers of traveling, especially flying, with their furry pals.

    This is an unfortunate consequence of breeding for aesthetic reasons. No matter how sweet the pets may be, they were bred with a genetic defect that puts them at risk.

    July 19, 2011 at 2:10 am |
  92. Matt

    Where the rest of you bicker about the genetics of the breed and its attractiveness according to your subjective mind (How many of you have ugly children or genetic abnormalities in your family tree? Come on...admit it!), I sense a business opportunity. Invent a pet carrier with a built-in battery operated fan. Much of the issue here is not heat, per se, but airflow. Provide the air and limit the suffering. Every pet could benefit from this. Short-nosed breeds may experience a higher than average death rate, but this means all pets in cargo at least experience discomfort.

    July 19, 2011 at 2:39 am |
  93. JohnX

    Shih Tzu
    - a place with no animals

    July 19, 2011 at 3:13 am |
  94. Andyvon

    Well done Cathay Pacific! The picture's brought back unpleasant memories.

    My first wife had a Shih-Tzu (called Scamp) which was as pugnacious and disagreeable as she was! She spent hours combing it and putting pink ribbons in it's hair. I came second to that poor excuse for a canine (as did her own children). They jolly well should be banned!

    July 19, 2011 at 3:41 am |
  95. Scott Hall

    Why not bifurcate the cargo hold, pipe in air condition and charge a premium for carrying live animals? Instead of issuing bans, it seems the airlines could create an opportunity.

    July 19, 2011 at 3:43 am |
  96. satsing

    what about banning bad people. at least most dogs are civil.

    July 19, 2011 at 4:40 am |
  97. Person

    To those complaining of allergies to animals. Please refrain from wearing scented deodorant, perfume or use perfumed laundry detergent as I am quite allergic to it. People with small children should consider a using tranquilizer or at least some duck tape and/or a muzzle. Fat people should buy a first class ticket or an extra ticket and not expect to take up part of my seat as well as their own. People with excessive overhead luggage should wait for the people with no luggage to exit first. Or we could all just realize that if we weren’t able to fly we could spend many hours driving or many days at sea and that travel has never been as easy as it is today and we should be greatfull that it doesn't take three months to travel to Australia.

    Personally I would be happy just to know that the guy in front of me who has been coughing up blood for the last 6 hours of the flight didn't have untreated TB.

    (typed on a plane) isn't technology wonderful?

    July 19, 2011 at 4:54 am |
  98. mark

    dumbest thing ever...just have people sign whatever papers necessary stating the concerns and that they will have no responsibility for any deaths and such. people still need to travel occasionally with their pets, now they just won't travel with this airline. whatever, their loss.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:55 am |
  99. Kyne

    Why would animals have to fly, anyway? Except for relocation, emigration, moves etc. I don't see the need for it. At breeders contests they're celebrating the systematic crippling through breeding of animals with inferior respiratory systems, so it serves them right that they're not allowed to fly their 'babies' there for exactly that reason. And for the time of vacation there are things like dog sitters and pet hotels. Either you want to spend your vacation with your canine or feline friend or you want the overseas adventure, then leave your animal in someone's care at home. It's sad that airlines have to protect animals from their irresponsible owners.

    July 19, 2011 at 7:36 am |
  100. Dyna19

    I always get my back up when people complain about having kids on flights. I am the mother of 3 energetic well behaved loving boys. I have to say that while I am sitting in an airplane waiting to take off I am a whole lot more worried about my kids disrupting your flight than you are. My parents live in Mexico and I get the chance to take my kids to see their grandparents once a year, They love their grandparents so much and are so excited to see them it takes everything they have to sit and behave on the flight. I think there are people who act worse than kids when they complain about kids on the flight? What gives you the right when I paid for each of those seats the same as you paid for yours, to tell me to keep my kids quiet and not disturb you? I seem to remember we all were children at one time or another so maybe we should all remember that.

    July 19, 2011 at 8:07 am |
  101. Linda Christian

    This is good to know because people will know how to deal with it and Facdogs in a positive way.

    July 19, 2011 at 1:56 pm |
  102. Dave

    No More" Men In Black " pooches in the sky...sorry boys :-(

    July 19, 2011 at 2:05 pm |
  103. Lu

    Aubrie, get over it. I would rather smell dog poo than a stinky kid's poopy diaper. That's much worse, and much more unsanitary. I agree with Zapod2010. I would rather be around 10 dogs than one screaming bratty kid kicking the back of my seat for three hours. This has happened to me and the parent did nothing about it. I am amazed that anybody would ship a pet as cargo on a plane. Dogs should be given a pressurized air-conditioned area on the flight. Small pets can be in a carrier under the seat or in the passengers lap. If a child can ride in a lap, then a pet can too.

    July 19, 2011 at 2:17 pm |
  104. anna

    To Dyna19

    I have the right to expect you to control your children on a plane. I paid for my ticket too, and not to have to put up with noisy kick seating kids while there ignorant parents do nothing about it.

    If the airlines can ban dogs, then I wish they would ban small children too. Fly your parents to you for them to see their grandkids!!!!

    July 19, 2011 at 2:33 pm |
  105. Ace Bevacqua

    I believe this is a rather drastic and not thought out approach. Rather than just saying NO, just have better information that these dogs are more prone to ilness during flights. Also sign a contract saying that the airline is not responsible for any deaths that may occur. For those who say that people who go on holidays with dogs need to grow up, the majority of those flying with pets i believe would be people moving overseas long term and not short holidays, lets put it into perspective.

    July 19, 2011 at 2:43 pm |
  106. Responsible Parent

    I have a snub nosed pekingese dog. And they are very sensitive to heat. If I were to travel with him, he's going to be by my side 100% of the time. No way will he be traveling where the cargo is. Pets are living beings! Not luggage! Airlines should allow pets in the cabin. I'd pay for 2 seats just so my dog can be next to me. I should start my own human and pets airline.
    Those w/allergies to pets, stay home. Just bubble wrap yourself and live in a ball. Chances are youre allergic to dust and pollen as well.
    As to kids on the plane, Parents, it is your responsibility to control your child and make sure that they are on their best behavior and to teach them to respect others. No screaming and kicking, this isn't your house. I have a child myself, and I take full responsibility for him and make sure that he is taught to understand and respect others. Keep those spoiled, no mannered kids at home, or place them in a kennel.

    July 19, 2011 at 7:40 pm |
  107. Responsible Parent

    @ Dyna19, I thought you said that your 3 boys are very well behaved. So why is it that you feel you need to defend them? Who would tell you to keep your kids quiet and to not disturb them if they are so well behaved? Doesn't make sense.

    July 19, 2011 at 7:45 pm |
  108. Larry Grill

    Pugs Piss to much on vertical objects. Death to all pugs!

    July 19, 2011 at 10:22 pm |
  109. nobody

    Legally the airline should only have the right to require a waiver of responsibility signed by the owner. I find it hard to believe that the airline cares anything for whether you pet lives or dies. The motive has to somehow be related to expense, not consideration.

    July 20, 2011 at 12:04 am |
  110. Emelia Kanson

    Dyna, while I see your point, a parent's duty /is/ to teach a child how to behave. Nobody was calling your children ill-behaved; however, the "kids kicking your seat" stereotype exists for a reason. Things become stereotypes for reasons, and while I have seen well-behaved children, many a time I've flown I'd considered sitting on the floor because of the person behind me making the flights living Hell.

    July 20, 2011 at 6:35 am |
  111. Aimee

    Why is it the airlines that is regulating this? Vets are the ones who give required health certificates to fly. They should be the ones determining if a certain breed of dog or cat would negatively suffer during air travel.

    July 20, 2011 at 6:40 pm |
  112. SofGangsta

    Now how will my pug ever see Bali?!

    July 20, 2011 at 8:51 pm |
  113. azdreamer

    The airlines definitely have the right to ban certain animals, and we customers definitely have the right to find an airline that will serve all of our needs. My family has relocated twice in the past few years, and chose to take our animals with us. One of our dogs has a fairly short nose, and we lived in the desert city with very high summer temperatures. It was definitely a concern for us. Our solution was to find a reputable pet relocation service. They were quite knowledgeable on how to get our animals safely onto a plane (they actually had to be driven to another, cooler, state), as well as what airlines would pressurize and cool part of the cargo hold to care for them. Shipping your animals overseas requires several vet examinations at both ends of the trip, micro chips that can be read at your destination, certified carriers, and in some places, quarantines...it is an expensive undertaking, and I would guess the majority of people doing this are not just doing this because they cannot bear to be separated from Fluffy during a two week vacation. If you don't know what your talking about, don't comment.

    July 21, 2011 at 4:18 am |
  114. twinnie

    The breeders are at fault for the breathing problems of these animals. I don't blame the airlines for banning them. They are prone to breathing problems anyway.

    August 4, 2011 at 11:49 pm |
  115. mary

    i ve got 3 adorable cavalier king charles...my boyfriend is australian and we have a beautiful little boy...I m going to move to australia now that i got my visa...And i was supposed to take my dogs who i love so much and can t even consider leaving them behind!I was told few months ago that my girls would flight with cathay pacific...i started the (complicated) process to take them to Australia(i m from france) and i m just desperate finding out recently that it s no more possible...What can i do????If anyone has got solution, please help me!

    September 29, 2011 at 2:06 pm |
  116. aliza

    Excellent Post! I just noticed this change a few minutes ago and made a short post about it. I will include your post in it.
    Thanks for the suggestions
    how to breed a dog

    October 29, 2011 at 9:07 pm |
  117. Shopping Marathon

    Hello, I love to read more on this subject. I appreciate you for writing this.

    January 26, 2012 at 12:50 am |
  118. dog pain relief review

    Dogs just make my heart melt! I just read this news article on NY Daily about how this blind dog found a dog buddy who used to lead him everywhere and had leashed him and guided him everywhere (coz he couldn't see himself). Adorable :)

    May 1, 2012 at 4:13 pm |
  119. large dog crate

    Hello, i feel that i noticed you visited my site thus i got here to return the favor?.I'm trying to in finding issues to improve my site!I assume its ok to use a few of your concepts!!

    August 5, 2012 at 8:11 am |
  120. dog rescue clearwater

    I've read a few good stuff here. Certainly value bookmarking for revisiting. I surprise how a lot attempt you put to create one of these fantastic informative web site.

    August 13, 2012 at 11:12 am |
  121. puppy collar

    certainly like your website but you have to take a look at the spelling on quite a few of your posts. Many of them are rife with spelling issues and I to find it very bothersome to inform the reality nevertheless I'll surely come back again.

    August 28, 2012 at 3:03 pm |
  122. icons downloads

    P.S. Please review Abort Icon from jpeger

    September 20, 2012 at 10:28 pm |
  123. los angeles pool contractor

    Its like you read my mind! You seem to grasp a lot about this, such as you wrote the book in it or something. I believe that you simply can do with some percent to pressure the message home a bit, but other than that, that is great blog. A fantastic read. I'll definitely be back.

    September 30, 2012 at 9:49 am |
  124. train dog

    Hi there, just become aware of your blog thru Google, and found that it is really informative. I am gonna be careful for brussels. I will be grateful if you proceed this in future. Many other people will probably be benefited from your writing. Cheers!

    October 3, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
  125. Tatiana

    University of PennsylvaniaResearch Study on evacuation duinrg Hurricane IreneWe’re interested in household evacuation duinrg Hurricane Irene and its effect on people with pets.If interested, please visit surveymonkey.com/s/upennpetstudy to complete a brief survey or email with any questions or concerns.

    October 7, 2012 at 2:47 am |
  126. ally mcridgeway

    i traveled to nfld canada with my pup puppy and my shih tzu and they where both fine .instead of banning a dog or a bread why not just ask the person to sign a paper releasing the airline of any liability?

    March 12, 2013 at 2:58 pm |
  127. kvalli82

    I've a question here for all the pug haters:

    Do you people all consider yourself or the one you love most as Ms / Mr universe – An affectionate pugs face is worth more than your cruel face..

    If perfumes are banned totally then you yourself can't tolerate your own stinking body odour

    For instance if you people get contagious disease that will be more allergic so ...you'll all put yourself to sleep?!!

    Probably you might be a nightmare / devil to someone try to correct yourself

    Love can be in anyform shown to anything...a pet in any form demands ONLY love n gives back unconditionally

    My opinion about this ban is : hurdles will be there in all form and we humans, the great with 6 sense should find for an alternate rather escapism won't be an solution..
    Finally...

    Don't wound others feelings....

    March 21, 2013 at 7:12 pm |
  128. caseyak1

    Moll pics:
    http://cats.blognet.pw/?stefanie
    New photos

    August 7, 2013 at 10:48 pm |

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.

About Business 360

CNN International's business anchors and correspondents get to grips with the issues affecting world business, and they want your questions and feedback.

 
 
Powered by WordPress.com VIP