The reason they don't do this is because on flights that have pets allowed in cabin they are limited usually to 1-3 on the whole plane. It depends possibly on the size of the plane, but one in F and 1-2 in Y is fairly common as I recall. So just bumping the pet and owner to the next flight would mean checking for flights which have not reached that limit, in addition to having a seat available. Given the very low limit, flights with in-cabin pets have to be booked well in advance, and on top of that there's an additional fee even though the pet does not take up additional space (it must remain in carrier under the seat in front of you). The typical fee is $75 one-way if I'm not mistaken. (May have gone up from that, in fact.) So the pet owner has scheduled this well in advance and paid extra for the privilege. I'm not really surprised that the airlines choose to work around this by reaccommodating other passengers rather than the pet.

Actually stress can bring on dander so if you are giving fido a hug before he goes into the cargo you will have more dander (and fresh) than usual. You are better off sitting beside a pet who has been wiped down with listerine (which gets rid of dander) than someone who has just hugged their pet goodbye. Plus you are forgetting people that live with multiple pets (I was just at a house with over 40 cats!).

actually some pets are better behaved than some passengers. I love a change of pace.

It should be the AIRLINE's responsibiility to protect people who don't want to sit near someone else's pet, just as it is their responsibility to protect people that may not want to sit next to an overly larger person, just like it is the airline's responsibility to enforce and protect people from being around someone else's foul, cancerous, proven dangerous, annoying, smelly cigarette smoke. If they want to get paid to transport us, the have to protect us at the same time from certain hazards in small confined spaces, 35,000 feet in the sky.

And if they are going to protect a miniscule percentage of the populace from possible peanut reactions, they surely can do the same for those that don't want to sit around pet.

Personally, I would be thrilled to sit next to any pet... I love them, and I don't seem to have any alergies... and it might give me something pretty to look at during a flight... BUT... there is no doubt that being around a pet can really make some people SICK... As much as I generally like Air France and the French attitude and/or policy of EVERYONE ON BOARD CAN TAKE A PET IF THEY WANT, it's way beyond reasonable.

Then there's the other attitude of, "well, if you're SOOoooo delicate that you can't handle pet dander, just stay home, or drive..., or charter your own aircraft..." Personally, I can't stand or tolerate strong cheap perfume... I wish the airlines, and society in general would crack down on that.

My son's allergist and the ER doctors who treated his last ashtma-attack-due-to-dog-essence-on-Granpa's-clothes would disagree with you - people can and do react to second-hand "dog essense."

If that's the case, you REALLY should see your allergist/primary care doc and get an Epi-Pen.

Count me another cat allergy person as well. Unfortunately, to be really effective, I need to have taken the anti-histamines for several days before I fly if I am going to be exposed to cat dander. Just taking one once exposed is too late really.

Second point is the problem with peanuts/bees is the risk of anaphalatic shock - hence the prescription of epi-pens for sufferers. Animal allergies tend to cause asthmatic attacks, so epi-pens are not appropriate. I do (now) carry my inhaler with me everywhere just in case, having suffered severe allergic asthma attacks in the past brought on by cats - but if you are cat allergic, you tend to avoid them, so you may not have realised this. My first attack brought on by cats was very scary, and that was on the ground!

Given that there is an alternative to animals in the cabin, and that pet allergies are actually one of the commonest allergies (IIRC, only pollen is more common), I'm surprised that US airlines continue to allow this to happen. I suppose it will take someone actually dying (or an airline being sued :rolleyes: ) before the rules are changed. Perhaps the OP should sue the airline for the distress they caused ;)

I don't want a pet next to me in-flight.

Think of your safety and comfort. No pet ever tried to light its shoes or fly the plane into a building. Every seat occupied by a pet makes the plane that much safer for you.

Pets don't get drunk, talk on their cell phone, or hog the arm rest. People do.

Pets don't bore you talking about their latest MR to TOM. FTers do. :D

The solution is very simple, and a wonderful business opportunity for someone with an enterprenureal spirit: Bubble Airlines. With John Travolta as its spokesman, this airline offers a complete, self-contained atmosphere for each passenger. You are rolled aboard the aircraft in your own individual plastic bubble, sealed and filtered against germs, pet dander, nut dust, perfume fumes, body odor, noxious food items brought on by fellow passengers, baby diaper crap smell, etc. Also, the issue of personal space is instantly resolved, as the bubbles do not recline, and your bubble also acts as a barrier to fellow passengers' various body parts encroaching on your territory (whether POS will be required to purchase TWO bubbles is still up for debate).

HAHAHAHA! That's great. For a couple of years now...there's been an attempt to get a charter airline up and running for pet owners. It would be expensive as all get out to fly with them (yeah...I just said that.) so I imagine it's been problematic to get off the ground so to speak...but I can see many a people using them if it ever works. But until then (and until I make tons of cash), me and the weiner dog will continue to anger people by flying in the cabin. Sorry folks.

The "Pets Not Allowed" thread seems a little late this month.

Our dog is on his 14th trip across the Atlantic, all in cabin, and never a problem. He's always clean, tired and happy to sleep through the flight. Most of the flights, the person across the aisle from us never even knows we have a pet, even on overnight flights.

On our last flight, the folks in the seats in front of us told us as we deplaned they had heard we had a pet and were concerned. But they said our dog was a great companion, and they'd love to fly with him again. By the way, they learned he was there when the FA tried to play kootchie-koo with him on the tarmac.

There are those with true medical allergies, though fewer than these threads would have you think (I sneeze around cats too-I guess I'm one of the 10 million). For those with real medical allergies, they should take precautions like others with allergies must-medicine if possible. If their allergies are serious, they may be taking medicine anyway. They should also check that their assigned seat is not near a pet, and if they wind up near a pet anyway, they should get a priority change of seats, either for them or the pet. I would gladly move to accomodate someone in that situation.

Beyond that, it's public transportation folks. There's a thread over on the UA boards about a pregnant gal who wants to take her new baby to Austrailia next winter in Business Class, in her lap no less. Fly next to her for 13 hours and I almost guarantee you'll ask to sit across from me and my dog next time.

The next "Pets Not Allowed" thread will start by May 12.

I believe the APA did a survey where it found that 78% of people who said they did not like being with animals did not like people either.

It's chic to have a nut allergy but not one for cats! Seriously, I agree. This is crazy. Even if the flight were full, a simple announcement could have made a world of difference.

Do you think that people who have a cat allergy have a conscious choice in the matter?

If so, then maybe we should tell all the "nut" allergic people that they're just nuts and should just get "over" their afflictions!