Pets on Amtrak - New Law in Congress

Someone just mentioned barking... I can only imagine an unattended dog barking like crazy in a sleeper while the owner gets dinner.

Last weekend I had a similar displeasure - I shelled out for sleeper, and they put me in the trans dorm. On this train, there's one locomotive and no baggage, which means I had K5LA blasting in my ear for 600 miles. I managed a bit of sleep after putting on earbuds and a pillow on either side of my head. It was bad (although not as bad as crossing the lake on ex-C&O SS Badger in the fog while sleeping on deck - foghorn on 3-minute intervals).

Ken W2KB wrote:
I've been on flights where some passengers had dogs or cats in crates. Stressful to the animals, yes, but so is boarding in a kennel for those animals used to owner coddling. What is it about Amtrak that you believe makes Amtrak incapable of handing crated pets? Amtrak's airline competition does that just fine and routinely, both as carry on and in cargo? Why do you have such a low opinion of Amtrak's ability?
.

I'll field this one. I'm not speaking from an emotional point of view. I'm speaking for an operational point of view.

Operationally, this is a nightmare ready to happen. This will create a problem that is similar to the problems when smoking was allowed on the trains. You end up designating a coach as a permanent smoking car. You assign it to a train and call it a day. That car MUST remain the smoking car because even with air purifiers, exhaust fans etc, it still had the smell of smoke whether people were smoking or not. If the smoking car was shopped, did you really want to pollute another car? The answer was no, and that meant the car was blanked. This caused front line problems as well as mechanical problems. Additionally, ridership climbed and climbed. Soon, people with children would board the train and the only place with seating was the smoking car.

What do you tell the people?

It was a big driver in decision to ban smoking on the regionals (NorthEast Directs at the time.) From a financial point, Amtrak got a bump when the airlines banned smoking. People would wait for the trains that allowed smoking. However, they deemed the revenue added wasn't enough to compensate for the cost of maintaining a smoking car at a time when the fleet was starting a major overhaul.

The same principal applies here. You can argue about second hand smoke is different than pet dander. That isn't true to someone such as myself. I can take the smell of smoke if I really have to. What I can't take is cats. They make me sneeze until I'm sick. With the trains being packed, it is just as the gentleman blogged in my previous post:

If I board down line, the only seating left may be the "pet" car. Now where does that leave people like myself? Additionally, what if you shop the car? Do you tell people the service is cancelled?

Another factor is the nature of trains. As EastCleveland mentioned, these aren't Metro-North cars with vinyl/plastic seats and an aisle that is easily mopped. Amtrak cars tend to have cushioned seats and carpeting on the floors as well as some of the walls. These thing hold scents and aren't easily serviced. Remember, some trains turn at outlying points with no real facilities. Someone comes on board, takes the trash and away it goes. Some places don't even do that. They turn and burn...period! As such, there isn't a way to clean up if Fido has an accident that spills under the seats. Are you going to hire people to staff outlying points and have them prepared to shampoo carpets if necessary?

This is why the baggage car is the obvious answer. However, until they are climate controlled, that isn't an option.

As for a pet wandering around a sleeper, the bill is quite clear on the matter. The cat or dog must be contained in a pet kennel. However, what if the animal has an accident and smells up the sleeper between Miami and Florence? Now the person boarding at Florence has to put up with the smell until Washington since there is no way you're shampooing this sleeper enroute.

These are legitimate operationally challenges, Ken Wk2b. It is as I mentioned, trains run point to point. The people? Not so much. Planes tend to run point to point and unload. Sure, they may load back up, but it isn't constant pick up/drop off operation at outlying locations.

If this bill is passed, I would take a page from this playbook:

ST214 wrote:. The only thing I can say is if Amtrak can charge for the pet, set the bar high, say $500 a pet. I would not want to be stuck in a car with other people's animals, not to mention the lawsuits that will happen when the person allergic to pet hair boards and the only seats are in the pet car.

The bill allows for Amtrak to charge a fee to at least cover the costs of administration of the policy.

Splendid.

I'd tell Congress for every route that this is implemented on, we're adding coach cleaners at EVERY endpoint that can perform heavy cleaning. I would also add, enroute cleaners and add the air purifiers they use on the long distance coaches to ever designated coach. I'd calculate that yearly and charge individuals accordingly. Then, I'd pull a Norfolk&Southern and charge people that bring pets in sleeper for any lost revenue from people that may not want it. They'd pay a fee equal to the cost of the sleeper from terminal to terminal or at least to a place where it can be sanitized.

I'd bet that would put an end to that.

I would not characterize air cargo travel for pets as dangerous, and especially not "extremely dangerous." In July of last year for all US airline flights in the aggregate, two pets were injured, one died. The prior month, two died, none injured. Compare that to automobile travel injuries and death to pets, either per mile or per hour - certainly much higher incident rate. See: http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/reports/atcr12.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good lord. Compare the number of pets who flew as air cargo on passenger jets in 2012 to the subset of that same group who died. If humans had the same death rate from air travel, jets would be crashing on a daily basis, and air travel would have been banned as a menace to public safety a half-century ago.

And who wants to sit in a compartment that smells like dog/cat & has fur all over?

Ergo, the designation of two specific compartments on a single railcar of a train with two or more. If they really were unsure about demand, they could even launch with just the one bedroom, and only add the roomette if they see enough demand.

I'll be the first to admit I'm not a huge fan of "dog smell", but I'll take "dog smell" over "fat lady in the adjacent roomette with horrific, explosive diarrhea", "old guy two tables away who's farted at least 3 times in the past 10 minutes", or "diaper-filling infants who seemingly need to be changed every 40 minutes" in a heartbeat. At least my kitty buries his poop, his pee turns to ammonia-neutralized rock, and he does #2 *maybe* once a day.

If odor ends up being a real problem, make professional bathing and flea treatment within 24 hours prior to departure a verified requirement, and charge anybody who can't provide proof an additional $250 cleaning and flea treatment fee.

Letting any animal out of their travel crate to "explore the nooks and crannies" is possibly the most irresponsible suggestion I've ever read on here.

Why? It's not like I'm advocating free-roaming animals in coach cars, or allowing passengers to bring their pet krait or spitting cobra on board. I'm talking about a private designated room, in first class, occupied first and foremost by other pet owners who'd be paying super premium rates so their cat or dog could travel with them in the safest and least-traumatic way possible. If there's some sudden lurch or movement that's bad enough to make a cat fall, don't worry about the cat... he'll be fine. Worry about the two dozen passengers who'll be getting airlifted to the nearest trauma center after getting cut from the train's wreckage.

I like cats and dogs, but am allergic to most of them due to dander. My son is special needs and is
very much afraid of them, regardless of how friendly and loving these pets might be. That's a work in
progress, but it would make for a difficult situation if we were seated near them.

That's OK, because nobody is proposing that you be seated near them. I'm saying that they should be in a designated room, with a closed door, out of everybody's sight. Look at it this way... if their owner WEREN'T in that room, he might be literally sitting next to you, with dander and fur all over his clothes *anyway*.

Insofar as fear of dogs and cats goes, I'm talking about a couple of cats and/or dogs per trip, in one railcar, in one or two designated rooms, not a drooling rottweiler walking down the aisle of a coach or dining car. If you tell an employee about your son's special needs, I'm sure they'll have no problem with allowing you to board a few cars away from the sleeper car with the designated pet room(s). By the time you make your way over to the sleeper car (assuming it's even the one you're in), the dog(s) and cat(s) will be inside their room with the door closed.


In many ways, the reaction by many here to the proposal is like the one some municipalities in Florida had when a few brave elected officials first suggested allowing pets at a few hurricane shelters. The way some people moaned and wailed about it, you'd have thought they were proposing the wholesale slaughter of asthmatic children, condemning the elderly to death by flea and tick bites, and robbing the county's bleeding taxpayers of their last dollar. Fortunately, they went through with it, and the only real problem was the gradual realization that their original estimates of how many people were likely to show up with pets were EGREGIOUSLY low.

Soon, people with children would board the train and the only place with seating was the smoking car.

What do you tell the people?

You profusely apologize to them, because many are nonsmokers who booked seats there hoping the smoke would protect them from second-hand exposure to screaming kids.

As for a pet wandering around a sleeper, the bill is quite clear on the matter. The cat or dog must be contained in a pet kennel.

And that's why I'm attempting to make a compelling case for encouraging our lawmakers to instead allow Amtrak to set aside a room or two in lieu of upgrades to the baggage car. Maybe somebody in a position of influence will read this, and consider it as an option.

However, what if the animal has an accident and smells up the sleeper between Miami and Florence? Now the person boarding at Florence has to put up with the smell until Washington since there is no way you're shampooing this sleeper enroute.

That's not an argument for banning pets, it's an argument for having somebody schedule the carpet in the designated "pet" bedroom of the relevant sleeping cars for replacement at the next maintenance event with vinyl. So that when accidents happen, they can be unceremoniously cleaned up without drama, instead of being a major crisis. Document problems as they crop up, find solutions, and implement them. Trains already have a mixture of vinyl and carpet in the same car... this just changes a room or two from carpte to vinyl for ease of cleaning.

If I board down line, the only seating left may be the "pet" car. Now where does that leave people like myself?

In the same position you'd be in if you were forced to sit next to somebody who has cats or dogs at home. It's dried saliva protein, not plutonium. If the presence of a cat in a designated bedroom with closed door introduces enough ambient allergens into the surrounding environment to affect you that badly, you're probably going to be sneezing from the same ambient saliva protein that's going to be present in cat owners' clothing anyway. Cat allergens are everywhere, and short of moving to Antarctica, you're never really going to get away from them.

Quick reality check: if Amtrak set aside one bedroom in one car for passengers with pets, assigned other passengers randomly to one of the sleeping cars, and allowed passengers to pay $10 extra at reservation time to guarantee that they wouldn't be assigned to a room in that car, how many passengers would actually pay it? Lots might gripe, but I'd be willing to bet that when push came to shove, most people complaining now wouldn't ultimately care enough about it either way to spend even $5, let alone $10, more, to guarantee a room in one of the other cars.

miamicanes wrote:

As for a pet wandering around a sleeper, the bill is quite clear on the matter. The cat or dog must be contained in a pet kennel.

And that's why I'm attempting to make a compelling case for instead encouraging our lawmakers to give Amtrak the freedom to instead set aside a room or two in lieu of upgrades to the baggage car. Maybe somebody in a position of influence will read this, and consider it as an option.

The bill provides no direction. It would only compel Amtrak to establish policy. Additionally, most trains don't have sleepers or baggage cars. As such, your idea is extremely limited in scope.

miamicanes wrote:

However, what if the animal has an accident and smells up the sleeper between Miami and Florence? Now the person boarding at Florence has to put up with the smell until Washington since there is no way you're shampooing this sleeper enroute.

That's not an argument for not doing it, it's an argument for having somebody schedule the carpet in the designated "pet" bedroom of the relevant sleeping cars for replacement at the next maintenance event with vinyl. So that when accidents happen, they can be unceremoniously cleaned up without drama, instead of being a major crisis. Document problems as they crop up, find solutions, and implement them.

The bill mentions that Amtrak need not modify or purchase equipment to conform with this bill. Switching one car to a different material adds costs since you lose fleet uniformity. Will you put vinyl on the walls and remove the curtains too? The carpeting is not there for decoration. It is there to reduce the likelihood of slipping. Now, you propose putting something slippery but easier to clean on a train that is hurtling down the tracks. Additionally, animal urine is extremely pungent. I can smell cat urine a mile a way. An "unceremonious" cleaning enroute would not accomplish much before the next passenger arrives.

See, this is what you are failing to see. You're assuming that someone might occupy this sleeper for the entire trip. You're missing the fact that the seats and sleepers turnover enroute. A single sleeper may have several occupants, particularly on trains out of CHI. You could have two different groups of passengers use that sleeper before it comes anywhere NEAR a maintenance facility.

It is easy to say "document problems and find solutions" however problems and solutions tend to cost money. Is catering to animals a good use of Amtrak's limited resources? It's not like this will necessarily bring in more riders. Ridership is quite high as it is. How much more revenue and would it be worth the cost? If the pet sleeper doesn't sell because of concerns (contrary to what you think they do sell out and people do upgrade on the train in the event of no shows,) who would make up that lost revenue?


As for this:

miamicanes wrote:

Soon, people with children would board the train and the only place with seating was the smoking car.

What do you tell the people?

You profusely apologize to them, because many are nonsmokers who booked seats there hoping the smoke would protect them from second-hand exposure to screaming kids.

miamicanes wrote: Insofar as fear of dogs and cats goes, I'm talking about a couple of cats and/or dogs per trip, in one railcar, in one or two designated rooms, not a drooling rottweiler walking down the aisle of a coach or dining car. If you tell an employee about your son's special needs, I'm sure they'll have no problem with allowing you to board a few cars away from the sleeper car with the designated pet room(s). By the time you make your way over to the sleeper car (assuming it's even the one you're in), the dog(s) and cat(s) will be inside their room with the door closed.

If I believed this, I wouldn't mind it as much. I'm also not as hell bent against sleeper as I am coach. I've witnessed and read reports on what people have tried to bring aboard the train with a ban. I can only imagine what happens if this bill passes. It will be challenged by the brigade that cries favoritism and demands equal treatment. People will demand the right to bring their pig, snake, miniature horse, chicken, duck and anything else they can fit in a cage. They try to do it now, I'm sure they will push the point.

So, I don't believe for one second it will be one or two cats or dogs sitting quietly in a carry on kennel, tucked underneath the seat. I believe it will be a lot more than that, in coach, on crowded trains.

To put it another way....Amtrak has a luggage policy, right?

I PERSONALLY watched a group boarding a train and a red cap was wheeling one of those little refrigerators with their luggage. I looked at the conductor and said good luck with that and walked away.

It gets better.

As it turns out, that refrigerator wasn't empty. It was LOADED/ They plugged it in and a few hours into their journey, the industrious group (who obviously were fed up with the prices in the cafe car) plugged in a deep fat fryer, took some food from the fridge and proceeded to have a cook off in the handicap space of an Amfleet.

Next thing you know, there's an argument, the police are called, the train is delayed, the red cap (who never should have brought the fridge to the train) has problems and you have a car that smells like the a fast food joint at the final terminal.

I don't have much faith.

The bill mentions that Amtrak need not modify or purchase equipment to conform with this bill. Switching one car to a different material adds costs since you lose fleet uniformity. Will you put vinyl on the walls and remove the curtains too? The carpeting is not there for decoration. It is there to reduce the likelihood of slipping. Now, you propose putting something slippery but easier to clean on a train that is hurtling down the tracks. Additionally, animal urine is extremely pungent. I can smell cat urine a mile a way. An "unceremonious" cleaning enroute would not accomplish much before the next passenger arrives.

"non-requirement" != "prohibition against". The fact that nobody is holding a gun to Amtrak's head forcing them to modify or purchase equipment doesn't mean it wouldn't be a sensible & prudent thing to do anyway.

They can cover the floor in the "pet" bedroom with the same material used for the shower floor. I think you'll agree that if there's any spot in a moving train with risk of slippage, it's a shower. I don't know how big the open floor is in a bedroom, but you'd almost have to *try* to meaningfully slip on the floor in a roomette, even if it were covered in teflon and coated with silicone grease.

No, I wouldn't remove the curtains. Even if they were climbed-upon daily by cats, it would take at least a year or two to get damaged to the point that even cat owners would find them to be objectionable. It doesn't have to be an absolute dichotomy. There's no need to replace them before they get damaged... just assume it will happen eventually, and have a plan ready to replace the curtains in that room during a future scheduled maintenance event.

Let's not forget... you might be 4 rooms away, but if there's pungent urine in a bedroom, whomever's dog just had an accident is going to be sitting literally over it, and will likely be very motivated to grab some paper towels and clean it up immediately. Yes, it means adding a bottle of enzyme cleaner to the cleaning supplies cabinet.

By the same token... what does Amtrak do when a small child throws up mid-route? Or an adult, for that matter? What about guys who think it's somehow immoral to aim when they pee? It's not like cats and dogs are the only ones who have smelly "accidents". Here's something to keep you lying awake at night... at some point, someone probably slept on the bed in your bedroom or roomette nude. They might have even had sex. There might have even been skid marks left behind, or random tampon failure. Think about it for a minute, and let it sink in. It kind of puts occasional accidents by a dog or cat into perspective.

miamicanes wrote:

The bill mentions that Amtrak need not modify or purchase equipment to conform with this bill. Switching one car to a different material adds costs since you lose fleet uniformity. Will you put vinyl on the walls and remove the curtains too? The carpeting is not there for decoration. It is there to reduce the likelihood of slipping. Now, you propose putting something slippery but easier to clean on a train that is hurtling down the tracks. Additionally, animal urine is extremely pungent. I can smell cat urine a mile a way. An "unceremonious" cleaning enroute would not accomplish much before the next passenger arrives.

"non-requirement" != "prohibition against". The fact that nobody is holding a gun to Amtrak's head forcing them to modify or purchase equipment doesn't mean it wouldn't be a sensible & prudent thing to do anyway.

Ooohh. I see...because Amtrak is loaded with funds, right? So insetad of buying things to accommodate the surging ridership, we're going to spend it carrying animals?

Good plan!

miamicanes wrote: They can cover the floor in the "pet" bedroom with the same material used for the shower floor. I think you'll agree that if there's any spot in a moving train with risk of slippage, it's a shower. I don't know how big the open floor is in a bedroom, but you'd almost have to *try* to meaningfully slip on the floor in a roomette, even if it were covered in teflon and coated with silicone grease.

No, I wouldn't remove the curtains. Even if they were climbed-upon daily by cats, it would take at least a year or two to get damaged to the point that even cat owners would find them to be objectionable. It doesn't have to be an absolute dichotomy. There's no need to replace them before they get damaged... just assume it will happen eventually, and have a plan ready to replace the curtains in that room during a future scheduled maintenance event.

Let's not forget... you might be 4 rooms away, but if there's pungent urine in a bedroom, whomever's dog just had an accident is going to be sitting literally over it, and will likely be very motivated to grab some paper towels and clean it up immediately. Yes, it means adding a bottle of enzyme cleaner to the cleaning supplies cabinet.

Again, your singular focus is on the sleepers. I'm not a huge fan of the thought of pets in the sleepers, but if you let the animal out, how do you know what damage can be done? How many people have stood before a judge claiming "I don't understand it your honor, my pet is usually so calm. I don't know why it...."
If you let the animal out of the kennel and it gets spooked by the horn (as an example) and starts barking, meowing, scratching, teething (etc) and being disrupted, what do you tell the other passengers? Your "plan" of allowing the conductor or attendant use their discretion about the animals making noise and banning...blah blah blah sounds great on paper.

Until the letter comes in about they were picking on me, my pet was an angel, the dog broke the leash while I was walking it and by the time we got back, the train was gone and now I'm suing.

Then, the counter letter comes in claiming the crew didn't do enough to to control the animals
and they let it go too far and my vacation was ruined....blah blah blah.

You can sit on a board and make statements because you will never have to address any of the eventualities.

If you think this won't happen, just change the name from pet car to quiet car, which is another operational nightmare, especially if you're short equipment or have to rescue a train. I see the same arguments developing.

miamicanes wrote:
By the same token... what does Amtrak do when a small child throws up mid-route? Or an adult, for that matter? What about guys who think it's somehow immoral to aim when they pee? It's not like cats and dogs are the only ones who have smelly "accidents". Here's something to keep you lying awake at night... at some point, someone probably slept on the bed in your bedroom or roomette nude. They might have even had sex. There might have even been skid marks left behind, or random tampon failure. Think about it for a minute, and let it sink in. It kind of puts occasional accidents by a dog or cat into perspective.

Except that you can hold people accountable for those actions if necessary. People may have sex in the cars (the attendants change the sheets and do a cleaning and more trains have enroute cleaners to address the people with poor aim) but I've never seen someone scratch at the walls, put teeth marks on things and people aren't generally allergic to other humans. Sure, some colognes and perfumes are a bit too strong for my taste, but it generally doesn't cause people to break out in rashes or hives. I've also never seen a human eat there own excrement, lick their crotch, drink from the toilet or attempt to mark their territory. Personally, I have footies for my feet, I carry my own sleeping gear and largely keep my bags closed. I do the same thing if I go to a hotel. My feet and bags never touch the floor, the first thing to go is that grimy comforter followed by the hotel bedding and I clean the bathroom and my room with my own supplies prior to getting bag out of the car.

But, I'm strange.

The bottom line is your comparison lacks validity since ( I think I've said this) most trains do not have sleepers or baggage cars. Your scope is narrow in application.

If the bill passes, it'll hit the coaches harder than the sleepers.

If this requirement does come to fruition, the policy will likely be relatively simple, as it only applies to corridor trains without any sleeping accommodations. The fee will likely be something like a flat $50 fee or something like 50% of the owners fare. Since at this time baggage cars are not climate controlled, it would only allow animals in coaches, and they should be limited to those that can fit in small pet carriers which fit on the floor in front of your feet. They could limit the number of pets allowed per train (maybe 2-5), and even designate an area in the "pet" car where they may be carried. Require that the pets never be removed from the carriers and that all pets are up to date on vaccinations and currently be using a flea/tick medication (of course there is no good way to enforce this). When purchasing tickets, terms would include a warning that if you disobey the rules or your pet is disturbing to other passengers you may be asked to detrain and be responsible for your own transportation. If there comes a time when the new baggage cars are climate controlled, allow larger animals in pet carriers to be checked, again, only on corridor trains. Long distance will likely stay as a no-go I would think, unless they apply that 750 mile limit to them also (should really probably be a 10 or 12 hour limit instead of mileage). This policy is similar to most airline policies, with in-cabin pets limited to a certain number and required to stay in their carriers, while larger animals can be moved as cargo depending on the itinerary length.

Still don't think that we would travel with our dog, but we are lucky to have many family and friends that enjoy watching him.

25Hz wrote:

charlie6017 wrote:I agree, Noel. I think the only people that would be in a tizzy are the people that seem to enjoy
having Fi-Fi in the front seat with them as they drive their cars (don't even get me started on that one).

Charlie

That is actually illegal in an increasing number of states, NJ being one of them. PA has similar legislation upcoming as part of a broader traffic safety initiative, which includes cell phone/hands free restrictions similar to NY and NJ.

I don't know about other states, but NJ has no such prohibition against an animal in the front seat. There was a bill introduced last year (Assembly Bill A3221) in that regard, and was sent to committee and nothing has happened since.

The only relevant NJ law states: "4:22-18. Carrying animal in cruel, inhumane manner; disorderly persons offense
4:22-18. A person who shall carry, or cause to be carried, a living animal or creature in or upon a vehicle or otherwise, in a cruel or inhumane manner, shall be guilty of a disorderly persons offense and punished as provided in subsection a. of R.S.4:22-17."

To obtain a conviction the State would have to prove that having the animal in the front seat was being carried in a "cruel or inhumane manner" beyond a reasonable doubt. That is significant prosecutorial hurdle to leap, not impossible depending on the specific facts and circumstances, but far from an easy proof.

I'm talking about a couple of cats and/or dogs per trip, in one railcar, in one or two designated rooms

So now we're talking about fourteen sleeper equipped trains, times one in each direction, times two pets. We have congressional action and a giant hullabaloo to move 56 pets daily around America, when there are 78,200,000 dogs in America according to ASPCA.

We get choices and tradeoffs in life. I can't take my dog to Burger King, Walgreens, or Amtrak. It's just how things work, and there's a lot bigger problems to deal with than this.

Ooohh. I see...because Amtrak is loaded with funds, right? So insetad of buying things to accommodate the surging ridership, we're going to spend it carrying animals?

This of this as a golden opportunity for Amtrak to lobby Congress for funding to buy more sleeper cars, arguing that the additional car can have a room or two set aside for passengers with pets and be a net gain for all stakeholders across the board. It's a way to enlarge Amtrak's base of political support. Many of those passengers traveling on Amtrak with pets will be new passengers who were attracted to it in the first place BY the new policy.

Again, your singular focus is on the sleepers. I'm not a huge fan of the thought of pets in the sleepers, but if you let the animal out, how do you know what damage can be done? How many people have stood before a judge claiming "I don't understand it your honor, my pet is usually so calm. I don't know why it...."
If you let the animal out of the kennel and it gets spooked by the horn (as an example) and starts barking, meowing, scratching, teething (etc) and being disrupted, what do you tell the other passengers? Your "plan" of allowing the conductor or attendant use their discretion about the animals making noise and banning...blah blah blah sounds great on paper.

The main reason for my focus is simple: think of the sleeper car room as being a human-sized pet carrier that can effectively contain cats and dogs and keep them away from the rest of the train. If you're going to start somewhere, that's probably the most straightforward place to do it. Just because you can't accommodate 100% everywhere, all the time, doesn't mean you should go to the other extreme and ban it entirely instead as a precautionary measure against failure. If risk of failure were a universal justification for never doing anything new, we'd still be hunter-gatherers without agriculture, cities, electricity, and modern medicine.

95% of the arguments made for banning cats and dogs from trains could be made about infants, toddlers, kids (and adults) with autism, teens, the handicapped, people who drink excessive amounts of alcohol, the mentally ill, and people whose hygiene doesn't align with societal norms. And if you look hard enough, you WILL find humans who eat and play with feces, lick crotches (and more unmentionable areas), mark their territory (they just use spray paint, markers, and sharp objects, as opposed to urine, which can be easily neutralized and washed off), and drink from toilets ("Rule 34"). No matter how messed up you might think it is, somewhere... somehow... people who do it exist, and you can probably find videos of them doing it on Youtube. Does anybody really think that nobody has ever taken a child off a train in a station, turned around for a moment, and had the child run away and cause both of them to miss its departure?

For people who can't fathom cats in a sleeping car, I present this awesome Youtube video I stumbled upon. A couple is making in overnight rail trip from Vienna to Berlin with their cat.

Note the content cat, and general lack of drama or ceremony. He's there, and everybody is cool with it. No screaming passengers out in the corridor crying for help because somebody went into anaphylactic shock after walking past the door and catching a whiff of dander. Just a happy couple and a mellow cat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3d9rQ5cn3E" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Taking pets on board CityNightLine

There are some clear rules that you’ll need to know when taking your pet on City Night Line:

• You can only take your pet onboard if you have booked a private compartment.
• Smaller pets in carriers travel for free.
• Larger dogs are subject to a one-off fee of €30.00 payable onboard.
• Pets are not allowed in the bar & lounge car or the standard class seating carriage.
• Guide dogs travel for free and are not subject to the above restrictions.

Ill get my friends Caucasian Shepard & book a trip on every route/train if this gets implemented. Meanwhile ill be chasing my eyes as they roll down the road & practice the art of having my palm just so on my face.

More examples of drama-free rail travel with pets around the world:

Britain: http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_ ... imals.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Essence: your pet has to be leashed, in a carrier, or in a private room. You have to buy a ticket for each seat your pet occupies in public coaches. In theory, rail operators could refuse... but in practice, the public backlash would be severe. The British have a long habit of traveling with their pets. For some bizarre reason, pets aren't allowed on Eurostar. Legislators in France and England have been trying to pass a law to force them to allow pets for years, but due to the way Eurostar's charter was written, neither country can unilaterally pass laws governing it... and getting the two governments to agree 100% about *anything* is nearly impossible.

France: http://www.seat61.com/dogs-by-train.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Pets allowed on all trains, including TGV.

BeNeLux, via Thalys: http://www.thalys.com/be/en/services/be ... urney#pets" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
No problem, just don't annoy other passengers. If your dog barks a lot, they reserve the right to exile him (and possibly you, if he's leashed and not in a carrier) to the baggage car, in which case you'll have to stand for the remainder of the trip.

Netherlands: http://www.nshispeed.nl/en/before-you-g ... rting-pets" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
No problem. If the train travels through Germany, pets aren't allowed in the buffet car.

Spain: http://www.renfe.com/EN/viajeros/info/animales.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
No big deal. Pets are only allowed in sleeping cars if the room is entirely yours (ie, you can't have pets in a couchette room shared with strangers).

Russia:
Generally allowed, but often consigned to second class. Travel between Russia and Finland with pets is allowed.
http://www.russiantrains.com/en/page/ab ... ets-sapsan" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.russiantrains.com/en/page/ab ... ts-allegro" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Italy: http://www.trenitalia.com/cms/v/index.j ... 16f90aRCRD" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Allowed. In sleeping cars, the room must be entirely yours.

... and so on. Anti-pet policies seem to be a uniquely American perversion.