> I didn't go into great length, but I
> guess you need more of an explanation than what I gave.
Michael, most people who post questions here (or any other board)
are NOT familar at all with certain things, and that is why you
NEED to be more detailed in explanation, especially when it
pertains to an issue that could have potentially bad consequences.
I cannot believe that you would think that I would
> jeopardize a bird and expose it to unsafe conditions.
I don't think that at all about you, but someone unfamilar with
traveling may take what you posted to mean that cargo is 100%
totally safe, period. NOT the case.
> What bothers me is when I see words like "never" and "always"
> when it comes to advising people. There are intelligent and safe
> methods to most everything we do in this life. To tell someone
> that they should never do something is not any more realistic
> than saying that it should always be done.
OK, let me rephrase...I, PERSONALLY, would never palce any animal
in the cargo hold of a plane.
> Everyone needs to make an educated and informed decision based
> upon concrete facts and not conjecture.
Absolutely correct. Problem is that many people see that someone
says they have never had a problem, that may be enough for them,
and they won;t feel the need to find out about any negatives...
> I stand firm in my conviction that safe travel is available for
> both human and animal when it comes to flying.
> Michael L
Again, absolutely correct...Safe travel for a pet traveling by
plane is either being small enough to travel WITH a person in the
cabin, or not going...)
Sorry, we are both firm in our opinions, so we'll have to agree to