Qantas Temporary Ban on Snub Nosed Breeds

[Guest The Pom Queen]

Unfortunately due to the publicity that was created in regards to the boxer left too long on the tarmac and it’s sad passing. Qantas have stopped all snub nosed breeds from flying with immediate effect. 
‘We were advised over the weekend that this would be a temporary measure whilst they work with the RSPCA on stricter guidelines, some which are rumoured to be banning all snub nosed breeds, a list is below. Banning severe brachy dogs but requiring a vet fit to fly immediately before flight for all other snub nosed breeds. 
 

What really annoys me about this situation is that they have flown snub nosed breeds for all these years without problems. Then this case which, I would guess, is going to be due to being left out on the tarmac in the full heat and every other breed gets banned from flying. 
 

If you have a flight booked to travel to Australia for your pet (dog or cat) and it comes under a snub nosed then please contact your agent for updates. I am sure they will be aware and like everyone here, will be waiting for the next media release. 

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12301513

Their latest release 4 hours ago stated

Reinforcing existing procedures designed to minimise the time animals are required to spend on the tarmac prior to being loaded.

"These changes will not apply to non snub-nosed breeds..."

So it seems they are happy to let all the others suffer on the tarmac. 

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media-releases/qantas-freight-rolls-out-changes-for-pet-travel/

 

[LouDYorkie]

I don’t like the idea that any dog is left on the tarmac in the heat, regardless of breed. If it was a distressed dog in a crate outside a shopping centre in the sun, the public would probably (hopefully) get involved quickly. There is no option of anyone helping a distressed dog at an airport, even the owner it seems.
This story (and others previously) have really upset me (I’m a boxer owner), and although proportionally the number of deaths must be small, I wish there was a much better process.

[calNgary]

Animals should not be left out on the tarmac at all. If something is wrong and loading delayed they should be took back inside. On saying that,i own 2 snub nosed dogs and if i had to fly them interstate i would be picking flights as late or as early as possible to avoid the heat, if anything maybe thats a rule Qantas can look at bringing in if and when they start allowing them to fly again.

Cal x

[patsmb]

We flew our Shar Pei with Qantas UK to Oz and had no problems But there was a cut off period when it was too hot from May to September  I think Qantas needs to look at its procedures ie designated handler to make sure that no animals are left on a hot runway or outside To me its not the breed thats the problem its how they are looked after during the journey

[Marisawright]

2 hours ago, patsmb said:

I think Qantas needs to look at its procedures... To me its not the breed thats the problem its how they are looked after during the journey

Of course in the case of the boxer, that shouldn't have happened.   However it's untrue to say that the breed isn't the problem.  It's an established fact that snub-nosed breeds are at far higher risk than other dogs when flying.  The problem is they can't be "looked after" while they are in the hold, which is the majority of the journey.  I'm so glad your Shar Pei made it without problems but other snub-noses haven't been so lucky.  Just talk to a pet shipper and they'll confirm the risk.

[Guest The Pom Queen]

On 30/01/2020 at 17:27, Marisawright said:

Of course in the case of the boxer, that shouldn't have happened.   However it's untrue to say that the breed isn't the problem.  It's an established fact that snub-nosed breeds are at far higher risk than other dogs when flying.  The problem is they can't be "looked after" while they are in the hold, which is the majority of the journey.  I'm so glad your Shar Pei made it without problems but other snub-noses haven't been so lucky.  Just talk to a pet shipper and they'll confirm the risk.

The breeds that are on that list are incorrect, not all are brachycephalic.

@patsmb you are correct this is a case of a dog being left out on the hot tarmac. There are thousands of these breeds flown each year and the vets, animal transporters, breeders I’ve spoken to and airport cargo where my son works and another main airport have never had any deaths. 
Once the post mortem is finalised then they can complete their investigation and new guidelines 

[Marisawright]

24 minutes ago, The Pom Queen said:

The breeds that are on that list are incorrect, not all are brachycephalic.

@patsmb you are correct this is a case of a dog being left out in the hot tarmac. There are thousands of these breeds flown each year and the vets, animal transporters, breeders I’ve spoken to and airport cargo where my son works and another main airport have never had any deaths. 
Once the post mortem is finalised then they can complete their investigation and new guidelines 

I thought that about the list too, actually.   

I know the case that got the most publicity was the boxer, but there was also another dog that died in transit and the result was all those headlines about TWO dogs dying.   I think that made the publicity a lot worse, because one dog could be seen as a one-off human error (which it probably was, BTW), whereas two dogs was presented as evidence of poor practices. 

  The owner of the second dog claimed he was unaware there were any risks attached to flying his dog and said Qantas should have a vet at the airport to check every dog - but Qantas was able to prove he'd signed a waiver warning of the risks to brachy dogs.  

I wonder if that's what really triggered Qantas's decision.  If people are going to sign waivers without reading them, not consult their own vet, and then bad-mouth Qantas all over the internet when the dog suffers, what else can they do? 

It comes back to what you were saying about the power of social media.   Qantas' record with dogs, even taking these two into account, is better than some overseas airlines - but the social media backlash was such bad publicity, they felt they had to protect themselves.

Edited January 31, 2020 by Marisawright

[Returnhome]

Quick google search and older articles come up about deaths of those types of breeds. 

2017

https://www.dailymercury.com.au/news/how-many-arrive-alive-grieving-pet-owner-wants-fli/3188051/

2014

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11207530

“A North Shore veterinarian, who did not want to be named, said it was not uncommon for dogs to die during transit.”

I think the bottom line is if you own one of those breeds and you must transport it interstate (and this is going to be be an unpopular opinion) drive it. Even if it takes you a couple of days, at least your dog is still going to be alive at the other end. Let’s face, with those breeds, you’re playing russian roulette flying them. That’s why a lot of airlines refuse to fly them. 

[Guest The Pom Queen]

What it doesn’t show is that there have been other breeds die on flights, I know a Labrador puppy did, I know a rabbit and a parrot also died. Then there have been incidents of them losing the dogs on the runway etc, but they can’t use the breed as an escape route for their mistakes so that is kept quiet. 
‘I suppose I should be defending them, my son has worked with Virgin and Jetstar for years now. However, I can’t, I’ve seen at the larger airports how they leave the dogs sat on the tarmac waiting to be loaded. Why can’t they have an aircon van there on the tarmac and load them in at the last minute. Everyone airport side has an ASIC, they have the catering vans airside so there is no reason why they can’t have an animal transport van, maybe Jetpets or Dogtainers on the tarmac waiting to load and unload. 
 

The other thing they need to implement is flying early morning only during summer. 
 

The posts you made above where it states “A North Shore Veterinarian said it was not uncommon for dogs to die during transit”  It is uncommon when you compare the amount of animals they fly.  Australia doesn’t need to keep a record but America does. The stats are always behind but this is 2018’s that was released not so long ago.

Incident Rates by Carrier

Incident rate is important as it directly addresses how many incidents air carriers experience by the number of pets they transport. For example, an air carrier that transports 100 pets, but experiences 1 injury/death would have a 1% incident rate.

Here is a look at the incident rates of these carriers from worst to best:

1. Hawaiian Airlines – .03% Incident Rate

There were 3 animal deaths, with only 9,505 animals being transported. This resulted in an incident rate of .03% overall making Hawaiian the carrier with the highest incident rate in 2018.

2. Delta Air Lines – .009% Incident Rate

During 2018, there were 4 deaths and 3 injuries reported during transport. For every 10,000 animals transported, there were .93 incidents noted – the second highest among U.S. carriers in 2018. In one of these instances, a Pomeranian died during a layover while it remained in cargo.

3. United Airlines – .007% Incident Rate

In 2018, United experienced 2 deaths and 1 injury during transport of 44,432 animals, bringing their incident per 10,000 animals transported to .68.

Of the notable headlines, a United flight attendant forced a French Bulldog puppy into an overhead bin and it unfortunately died as a result. The next day, a German Shepard was mistakenly sent to Japan instead of Kansas. This dog luckily experienced no injuries, but the reputation of the airline was further damaged because of this mix up.

4. American Airlines – .003% Incident Rate

American Airlines experienced 1 death and 1 injury of animals on board, but the incident rate remains relatively low at .33. This was also an improvement over 2017’s .87 incidents per 10,000 animals transported. In 2018, American transported 61,040 pets with 2 incidents resulting in an incident rate of .003%.

5. SkyWest Airlines – .003% Incident Rate

In 2018, SkyWest transported 32,515 animals or 8% of all animals transported. This was actually down from 2017 when they transported 46,392 animals. There was 1 injury reported, bringing the total incidents per 10,000 animals transported to .31 and an overall incident rate of .003%.

6. Alaska Airlines – 0.0007% Incident Rate

While Alaska Airlines did experience 1 injury, the airline also transported 34%, or 143,634, of all animals in 2018. This makes the carrier’s incident per 10,000 animals flown only .07 or a .0007% overall incident rate.

Of the airlines with a larger network, Alaska Airlines has the best track record in both 2017 and 2018.

 

[Quoll]

3 hours ago, The Pom Queen said:

What it doesn’t show is that there have been other breeds die on flights, I know a Labrador puppy did, I know a rabbit and a parrot also died. Then there have been incidents of them losing the dogs on the runway etc, but they can’t use the breed as an escape route for their mistakes so that is kept quiet. 
‘I suppose I should be defending them, my son has worked with Virgin and Jetstar for years now. However, I can’t, I’ve seen at the larger airports how they leave the dogs sat on the tarmac waiting to be loaded. Why can’t they have an aircon van there on the tarmac and load them in at the last minute. Everyone airport side has an ASIC, they have the catering vans airside so there is no reason why they can’t have an animal transport van, maybe Jetpets or Dogtainers on the tarmac waiting to load and unload.

Someone tried to bring a rabbit????? What the hell were they thinking?!

[Amber Snowball]

53 minutes ago, Quoll said:

Someone tried to bring a rabbit????? What the hell were they thinking?!

Maybe an internal flight?

[Quoll]

10 hours ago, Amber Snowball said:

Maybe an internal flight?

That's even worse! Some states don't allow rabbits as pets 

[Amber Snowball]

1 hour ago, Quoll said:

That's even worse! Some states don't allow rabbits as pets 

Oh God! Don’t know then. Not something I’d consider doing.