CFA Info
Board of Directors
CFA Constitution
Central Office
CFA Foundation
CFA Legislative Committee
CFA Disaster Relief Committee
CFA Mentor Program
Rules for Registration
Registration FAQ
Rules Governing New Breeds
CFA Contacts
CFA Publications
CFA Price List
|
|
CFA Legislative ALERT
Last Updated: December 23 2002
You will recall our struggle in 1999 to keep Senator Frank Lautenberg's "Boris Bill" provisions out of the Federal Aviation Reauthorization Bill. CFA and cat fanciers favor safe air travel for animals, but we objected to all the provisions that could lead to a shut down of air transport of animals in the United States. Through successful grass roots action we were able to get the congressional conference committee to remove these and instead focus on reporting and training requirements.
A compromise was reached that would require airlines to file reports on incidents involving loss, injury or death of any animal during air transport. Now, after over 28 months, the proposed Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Rulemaking comment period is underway. The Department of Transportation's (DOT) proposed regulations are overly broad and would make it almost impossible for the airlines to comply. Other issues are detrimental to the interests of owners who ship cats, dogs and other animals.
We need letters to the DOT by the deadline of December 27, 2002. Sample points to make in your own words are below. Letters may be sent through the Internet or by mail. If you send by mail your letters must be in triplicate. All comments and letters must reference:
Docket No. FAA-2002-13378 and "NPRM on Reports by Carriers on Incidents Involving Animals During Air Transport"
Inflated and erroneous data was provided in 1999 by the "Boris Bill" Amendment promoters (the ASPCA, Doris Day Animal League and the Humane Society of the United States) concerning "problems" in shipping animals and the need for federal regulation. The contention that 5000 animals are "lost injured or killed" every year through air travel was revealed to be a gross distortion of a statement actually intended to show pride in the excellent care that animals receive. It was mentioned that "more than 99% of the estimated 500,000 dogs and cats handled each year reach their destination in good health". CFA, AKC, PIJAC and others refuted this information and pointed out that many animal related transport "problems" are either isolated or insignificant incidents not causing injury, loss or death (i.e., shipper arriving without a carrier labeled properly).
Some serious incidents are caused by such things as improperly secured carriers, use of tranquilizers or shipping very old/ill animals. We argued that preventing many of these incidents could be best addressed through better education of shippers and training of airline personnel rather than rules that would be impossible or impractical for airlines. We presented research information to show that the environmental conditions in the cargo compartments were within limits consistent for maintaining animal health during normally scheduled flights of commercial transport and did not necessitate the "Boris Bill" excessive requirements involving extensive retrofitting of aircraft. The cost would most likely have resulted in permanent embargoes on carrying any live animals.
We were successful thanks to your outpouring of letters and support. Fanciers are as concerned as any animal lovers about safety in air transport, but we do not want to end the ability of pet owners and breeders to ship their animals by air.
The Lautenberg Amendment finally resulted in a regulation compelling "air carriers that provide scheduled passenger air transportation to submit monthly "a report on any incidents involving the loss, injury or death of an animal during air transport provided by the air carrier." This seemed a reasonable and positive compromise to assess whether there really are serious problems with animal transport by air carriers and if so to determine the possible causes and solutions. We were satisfied with this decision.
It has taken more than 28 months for the FAA to draft and publish a proposed rule for implementing these requirements. There was no opportunity for input from organizations like CFA, AKC, or PIJAC whose participants or members are greatly impacted by these proposed air transport reporting rules.
Return to Top
Sample points to make:
"NPRM on Reports by Carriers on Incidents Involving Animals During Air Transport"
Stress that the proposed rulemaking is ambiguous and poorly drafted. Requirements are so broad and confusing that the airlines may not be able to comply and could place embargoes on animal shipping.
The reports call for "identification of the owner(s) and/or guardian of the animal". We question what "identification" means - the name, address, phone number? This information would become public record, and could mean an invasion of privacy leading to harassment of shippers (breeders, pet owners, commercial shippers) by extremists who oppose the buying, selling or shipping of animals.
This rule includes the term guardian. Cat and dog fanciers now are well aware of the significant link of this word to a national campaign to eventually erode property rights of animal owners. Object to its use on the basis that it is an undefined term.
"The air transport of an animal includes the entire period during which an animal is in the custody of an air carrier, from check-in of the animal prior to departure until the animal is returned to the owner or guardian of the animal at the final destination of the animal." This seems to apply only to a trip when the owner accompanies the animal, but it needs clarification. What if ownership does not transfer to the new buyer/owner receiving the animal (per special contract stipulations)? What about breeding cats shipped for lease? What about cats shipped for stud service who may be held for months before return to their owner - is this all to be considered "air transport" and are the airlines responsible for any injury, loss or death? What would this do to the costs of animal air travel?
The rules apply to all warm or cold blooded animals kept as a pet in the United States or being transported for the purpose of being sold as a "pet in a family household" in the United States. What is the definition of "pet" - does that include animals being shipped and sold as breeding/show cats? The animal definition would include every fish that is shipped and could make the checking in and reporting process unmanageable.
Experts in transporting animals were not consulted prior to writing these regulations. A study was prepared by the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA), at the request of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), to evaluate the areas of need. The FAA has failed to include the findings of this report.
Airlines are given only 15 days to file a report (similar to lost baggage). Considering the possible circumstances surrounding loss, injury or death of a cat or dog, this is unreasonable and should be 30 days.
Address letters to:
Docket Management System
U.S. Department of Transportation, Room Plaza 401
400 Seventh Street, SW
Washington, DC 20590-0001
RE: Docket No. FAA-2002-13378
Send in triplicate.
For a complete copy of the Federal Register with the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on "Reports by Carriers on Incidents Involving Animals" published September 27, 2002 (4 pages) please email me privately.
Joan Miller
CFA Legislative Coordinator
Return to Top
To correspond with the CFA Legislative Committee, please send email to legislation@cfa.org
|
