The relationship between man and animal has gone through several evolutions throughout history. This relationship has evolved from primarily hunting animals for food and raw materials in prehistoric ages, to using animals as methods of transportation, to training animals to detect medical conditions and explosive devices. In addition to the practical evolutions, this relationship has gone through an emotional evolution. Studies show a consistent upward trend in pet ownership over the past two decades in the United States with sixty-eight percent of U.S. households owning at least one pet. In the households that do have pets, the majority of them consider their pets to be family members. Even though a majority of pet owners view their pets as members of the family, animals are still considered property and are not afforded the same considerations and rights that humans have.

When disaster strikes a community, members of the community may turn to the local, state, and federal governments for assistance before, during, and after the disaster. Traditionally, governments have focused disaster preparedness and recovery plans on the human members of their communities but in recent years governments have begun addressing animals in their disaster planning efforts based on the evolving nature of the relationship between humans and animals.

The most obvious change in disaster planning related to animals came after Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in the summer of 2005. The Pets Evacuation and Transportation Act (“PETS Act”) was passed in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina as it became evident that disaster planning did not adequately address the needs of pet owners. While this is a great step forward in planning for animals’ needs during disaster, this act is not without its holes and the need to address animals on a larger scale remains.

This paper will discuss the events precipitating the passage of the PETS Act and what this act means. Specifically, this paper will outline the provisions of the PETS Act and aim to clarify misconceptions about what pet owners are permitted to do with their pets in the event of natural disaster. The paper will then move on to discuss the “holes” in the PETS Act by discussing what provisions and protections are or are not in place for animals that are not pets. At this point, the paper will turn to a discussion about how farm animals are treated in the event of a natural disaster. This paper will conclude with a proposal directed at insurance carriers to include exemptions or limitations in livestock insurance policies that preclude insurance recovery for violating any law, specifically animal abandonment or animal cruelty laws.