This study characterized risk factors for household evacuation failure. A random digit dial telephone survey was conducted of 397 households in Yuba County, California, in July 1997, 6 months after residents had been under evacuation notice due to flooding. Case households failed to evacuate, whereas control households evacuated. The cumulative incidence of household evacuation failure was 19.4%. Fewer households with children (25.8%) failed to evacuate than households without children (45.9%, p < 0.01). More households with pets (20.9%) than households without pets failed to evacuate (16.3%, p = 0.11). With multivariate logistic regression, the risk of household evacuation failure was lower in households with children (odds ratio = 0.4, 95% confidence interval: 0.2, 0.8) compared with households without children. The risk of household evacuation failure increased in pet-owning households without children (odds ratio = 1.3, 95% confidence interval: 1.1, 1.5) compared with pet-owning households with children; the more pets a household owned, the higher the risk of household evacuation failure was. Impediments to pet evacuation, including owning multiple pets, owning outdoor dogs, or not having a cat carrier, explained why many households that owned pets failed to evacuate. Predisaster planning should place a high priority on facilitating pet evacuation through predisaster education of pet owners and emergency management personnel.

Simple SummaryThis article describes common challenges to managing animals in disasters in the US, summarizes how some of these challenges are being met and makes recommendations on how to overcome others. Many predictable adverse situations affecting animals and their owners can be prevented when communities develop a comprehensive emergency management strategy that integrates animal care into planning, preparedness, mitigation, and recovery activities, as well as response.AbstractCommon to many of the repeated issues surrounding animals in disasters in the U.S. is a pre-existing weak animal health infrastructure that is under constant pressure resulting from pet overpopulation. Unless this root cause is addressed, communities remain vulnerable to similar issues with animals they and others have faced in past disasters. In the US the plight of animals in disasters is frequently viewed primarily as a response issue and frequently handled by groups that are not integrated with the affected community’s emergency management. In contrast, animals, their owners, and communities would greatly benefit from integrating animal issues into an overall emergency management strategy for the community. There is no other factor contributing as much to human evacuation failure in disasters that is under the control of emergency management when a threat is imminent as pet ownership. Emergency managers can take advantage of the bond people have with their animals to instill appropriate behavior amongst pet owners in disasters.

Pet evacuation failure was common and jeopardized pets' health and well-being. Logistical challenges to transporting pets were substantial contributors to pet evacuation failure, whereas not knowing where to house a pet was only a minor concern. Most pet owners seemed self-reliant and acted appropriately towards their pets. Such self-reliant behavior by pet owners should be encouraged prior to disasters as part of an evacuation plan for households.

Predictors of pet evacuation failure are usually present before a disaster strikes and are potentially modifiable. Mitigation of pet evacuation failure should focus on activities that reinforce responsible pet ownership and strengthen the human-animal bond, including socializing dogs, attending dog behavior training classes, transporting cats in nondisaster times, and seeking regular preventive veterinary care. Most pet owners are self-reliant in disasters, and this behavior should be encouraged.

Different disasters have similar consequences on the health and welfare of livestock. Numerous geophysical disasters can exacerbate epizootics, resulting in the deaths of many animals and the reduction of production efficiency. These disasters also present a considerable threat of spoilage of processed foods, endangering public health. Furthermore, large-scale disasters involving animals can modify the long-term stability of national economies, the environment and social structures. The authors discuss the vulnerability of the livestock industry to natural disasters and the impact of floods, droughts and transboundary diseases and pests on national economies. Examples are given on how some losses can be avoided, evaluated and compensated. The role of the veterinarian is presented in relation to work conducted by other relief organisations in cases of emergency. In developing countries, mitigation programmes should focus on strengthening global animal health services. Preparedness needs to be community based, with education provided in a timely manner. Effective recovery from disasters should be based on mitigation programmes, including international trade and mutual aid agreements between neighbouring countries to supply appropriate goods and environmentally and culturally appropriate breeds of livestock. Disaster relief for the care of livestock should be recognised as a form of humanitarian assistance, given the benefits to be derived for public health and the socio-economic implications of successful intervention.