On DL, there's no separate BP, but there is a pink tag that is issued and must be attached to the carrier at all times during the flights.

I've flown with a pet a few times, and while the 'pink tag' issued by the TA at check-in does not get verified on every flight, I've had more than one FA ask to see it.

I know, it's kind of like airlines saying that an oversized or heavy bag is a safety risk to their employees (which I am not arguing with them on that point) but it isn't a big enough risk that they don't mind taking a 70 lb bag if you pay an additional charge:)

In all honesty, I don't have an issue with the fee if it's reasonable like $50, especially if they wouldn't count the carrier as your carry on. I realize there is some extra work involved and if they allowed you to bring your pet on board for free it would be creating a lot of problems since a lot more pax would be taking their pets with them, but these fee amounts are absurd. It used to only be $50. How is bringing a pet onboard costing the airlines $75 more? Since the pet counts as the carryon, if someone isn't elite and has a rollerbag they would normally put in the bin, I am sure the airlines will stick them with a checked bag fee as well.

On Southwest you pay an extra $75 fee to have a pet in the cabin with you yet WN only charge $50 for an unaccomanied minor fee. It seems like it would be a lot more expensive for WN to have a UM (and definitely a lot more responsibility) than an owner bringing his pet onboard and having it under his supervision at all times.

The pet fee is certainly a money grab, but it's also a deterrent to bringing pets onboard. If there were no fee, some people might be inclined to drag Muffy along on every flight, even when the animal would be fine at home for a day or two. I suspect that charging $125 helps Delta limit the number of animals needlessly carried onboard.

Exactly. Charging money does help alleviate conflicts because it ensures that there are fewer pets on board.

Don't they already limit the number of pets onboard, regardles of fees? You can say all day long that the fee deters people from bringing their pet and for some, it probably does, but don't ever say the fee is about convenience for other passengers. If they can get $150 from the max number of people on every plane, someone's gonna be sitting next to rover whether they like it or not.

I really doubt that's the airlines' reasoning.

+1

I have cats who actually seem to think airplanes are a great adventure (as opposed to a horrifying feline trauma). If it didn't cost so much... I would definitely take one along on more trips. If the fee is meant to discourage feline air travel... mission accomplished in my case.

I do always worry about pax who may be allergic... I don't want to make someone else on my flight miserable because I insisted on dragging a cat on an airplane. (I've only actually done it twice.)

I have two cats that I never travel with and even if Delta didn't charge a fee at all I would still never travel with them. I am sure it is different with people having dogs, but I have a petsitter that comes in once a day for only $18 a visit who feeds and waters them, cleans their litterboxes and plays with them and they are content. If I travelled with them, I think it would be unfair to them, since they would have new surroundings to get used, they would be stuck in a carrier for a long period of time on the airplane and it's not like I would be in the hotel room much to play with them anyway.

I also understand that people have pet allergies and it could result in the FA having to move people with pets around if their seatmate was allergic to pets. I also realize some people don't want to sit next to a pet the same way some people don't want to sit next to a child.