A feral cat did not respond well to an airplane environment, purportedly scratching and biting other passengers as it attempted to escape on a United Airlines flight.
Feral Cat Terrorizes United Airlines 737
We don’t have many details about the flight, but a video shows a squirming cat who manages to wriggle away from the arms of a woman before darting down the aisle of a Boeing 737 jet.
One of the passengers onboard tweeted to United, complaining that the cat was attacking other passengers:
Hey @united – there was a feral cat loose on my plane that was scratching and biting people. A bit traumatizing if you ask me!
— N8 (@Laymanz_Termz) April 21, 2022
When United did not respond back, the passenger sent video evidence:
Hey @united – here’s the VIDEO PROOF that a highly dangerous cat terrorized my flight. Still no response? #unedited #customerservice pic.twitter.com/MvsJLzLBFj
— N8 (@Laymanz_Termz) April 23, 2022
That finally prompted a response from United:
Hello. Thank you for reaching out and taking the time to bring this to our attention. When you have a moment, please DM your confirmation number along with additional details of your experience so our team can investigate this matter further. ^CC https://t.co/Y6hG6uklaR
— United Airlines (@united) April 23, 2022
United Airlines does allow domesticated cats and dogs in its cabins, but they must be kept in a carrier underneath the seat in front of you. So-called “psychiatric service animals” are limited to dogs only.
> Read More: There’s A New Loophole To Allow Emotional Support Animals On Planes…
Whatever that cat was (beyond upset), it certainly was not in a kitty carrier…
CONCLUSION
A diabolical cat terrorized a United Airlines flight, allegedly biting and scratching passengers as it attempted to evade capture. Just another reason I would not allow any animals in passenger cabins…
(H/T: View From The Wing)
..those bringing their pets on board in a carrier, always feel the need to take he pet out and hold them or let them lay by their feet. Unless it’s an emotional support animal, no pets are to be allowed out of their carrier. This is clearly the sole responsibility of the owner.
I’ve had to inform countless of times to those pax that take their pet out of their carrier, to kindly put the pet back inside…of course, these pet owners don’t think that there might be a slight chance that someone may have an allergic reaction to cats, etc.
Good thing airlines are not allowing “emotional support” animals onboard anymore. Only service animals now. And they do not need to be kept in a carrier.
“so-called psychiatric service animals” – I am shocked at how you diminish the value of this. There are some people who are deeply in need of a psychiatric service animal, please be a little more thoughtful how you phrase this in the future.
Sorry, but I’ve seen far too much abuse.
It’s hard to be sympathetic to people who essentially show no concern to the rest of the 150 people on the plane. It’s like the nuts who have peanut allergies and expect everyone to accommodate them. If people are in need of psychiatric animals to be in public places then that really isn’t doing anything to help the underlying issue, but just masks it. And aren’t there meds for these sort of things? It’s great that these people can sit and be relaxed as they pet their precious, in most-cases untrained service animals, while the rest of us are subjected to potential allergens, pets attacking people, relieving themselves etc. Sorry if you need a cat to be on an airplane, let alone in public, and you aren’t doing anything to proactively treat your issue, you’re just a p*ssy.
Some examples of legitimate trained psychiatric service animals (PSA), not emotional support animals. I thought this might help 🙂
1. Veterans who have extreme cases of PTSD from active duty may require a PSA that can search rooms, closets, and other spaces to confirm whether or not the room is empty. Helpful for those who are used to searching buildings during duty that may have enemy attackers and now have a strong reaction to going into a new room.
2. Individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia or other conditions that result in hallucinations have PSA that, when prompted can indicate if someone is present. For example, if an individual sees someone that may be a hallucination they can ask their PSA to “greet” or acknowledge the person. If the animal does not, they know its a hallucination
3. Individuals with mental impairments such as autism who may experience triggers that cause them to have an episode, may have a PSA that is trained to apply pressure, lay on the individual, lick their face or provide another form of stimulation to help control the episode.
It’s important to remember that not all symptoms can be treated with medication and not all people are able to use certain medications. Additionally, a service animal, including PSAs, are not just used for plane rides but also for assistance at the destination, meaning the person may be able to go on a 2 hour plane ride without assistance from their animal, but they certainly will need it at their destination.
To the authors point, people are using the system to abuse the PSA travel option with untrained animals and this isn’t okay, but there are real people who require service animals and PSAs.
Also, if you have an allergy, you should take all precautions to be exposed to an allergen. Animals on board or not, people with pets tend to have pet hair on their clothes, just as peanut residue from a PB&J you ate prior to travel might be on your hands when you touch your seat, and this can cause a reaction. Make sure to carry your medications/Epipens as allergens can’t be avoided on board or in public in general. 🙂
I fully agree with you about the emotional support animal loophole and that it should end. That said people do have legitimate reasons for bringing pets on the plane beyond emotional support, such as moving or temporary work assignments in a different city for an extended period of time (like a month or more) and either don’t want to drive or risk harming their pets if they are in the hold (such as certain dog breeds which are only allowed on planes as in cabin pets). Airlines limit the types and sizes of pets that can fly in cabin and they also limit the number of pets on any given flight (after a certain number of people pay the pet fee for a flight, the airline refuses to let people pay to bring pets on, which is another problem with the ESA loophole since they are exempt).
All pet owners should be subject to the same rules. If someone needs to bring their support animal on their flight, they still should only be allowed to bring an approved animal that meets the size limits and they should have to pay the fee (which is usually only $100 each way). If there are already too many pet owners on the flight either find a different flight that has space or book earlier. Once on board the pet should never be allowed out of its carrier (some dogs maybe, but definitely not cats, as this incident is exactly what you would expect to happen if a cat got out of its carrier mid flight). I have no problem with making it hard to bring pets on board through rules, fees and limiting the number of pets allowed, but that should apply to everyone. Sure, that might make it harder for the few people who legitimately need ESAs, but those people are likely a small minority of those claiming to need one.
Animals on planes? Only in the USA could this happen. How crazy.
Looks more like a psyco service animal.
It is highly unlikely that this cat was “feral” — if he or she were, it’s improbable they would have been in a carrier, traveling with humans, in the first place. While not feral, the cat was clearly terrified, which is what causes such behavior (“attacking” people, etc.). Either way, the cat should not have been let out of his or her carrier. They typically feel safer in a small, confined space where they cannot see around them.
Completely agree!
I was just about to say that. When Matt said feral I thought he meant some random cat some how found it’s way on the plane. If someone brought it with them, it’s by definition not feral. Also the cat’s behavior is not diabolical but rather pretty typical for a cat that suddenly finds itself surrounded by people in a loud and unfamiliar environment. The owner should certainly be blamed for letting the cat out, but the cat behaved as one would expect in that situation.
Finally who knows if it’s a support animal or not? Every Christmas my sister comes home for a month and she brings her cat with her. She doesn’t try to claim it’s a support animal and pays the fee and books early enough so that there aren’t too many pets aboard (most airlines limit the number of paid pets that can travel on any one flight). The problem with support animals is that many people are using them to get around the pet fee/lack of pet slots on their flight. Not that people are bringing small animals allowed by the airlines on the plane in the first place. So long as people follow the rules the airline sets forth for in cabin pets, don’t try to use the emotional support loophole, and keep them in their carriers (my sister also always gets her vet to prescribe something to keep the cat calm), people should be allowed to take them on the plane with them.
Of course it’s not feral. A feral cat is one that is not a pet, but a cat that has grown up in the wild (though does descend from domesticated cats).
WHY, beyond the question of animals being on passenger flights, are people allowed to take their animals out of their carriers? It’s absurd.
The cat isn’t diabolical, it is clearly scared out of its mind nor is it feral. I have dealt with feral cats and that cat ain’t feral. It is just a regular house cat that is truly terrified. Cats like to be in control and in an environment like that most cats would struggle to get out of the arms of their owner, never mind a stranger. The humans that let the cat out of its carrier are the diabolic idiots here. I agree with the above post the animals should remain in their carriers. I flew with my then spouse with two cats cross country the only they left the carrier was when TSA suggested we put them through the x-ray machine in the carriers, eh no. So we had to take them out and walk them through the metal detector. They struggled like this cat did but of course my spouse and I knew how to deal with cats and it worked out.
Well said, Philco! It was not the cat’s fault.
Agreed, thank you! The word “feral” is often used as a catch-all for frightened or aggressive cats. Even the most docile, “domesticated” cats will likely be terrified on an airplane and should be kept in their carriers to diminish their fear. They are not the same as dogs, who might feel less afraid if they could be petted or in their owners’ laps.
I’ve flown cross-country several times with cats (out of absolute need) — they feel most secure when in their carriers, by my feet, not able to see much. But landing hurts their ears, just as it does for babies, so they often cry then.
I don’t agree that “feral” is commonly used in this way. I checked the Corpus of Contemporary American English
https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/
and found little to support that idea.
Nor could a cat be deemed “diabolical” because, as you say, it’s clearly terrified and suffering from owner error. Yes, of course the poor animal should have been kept safe in its carrier.
As for the author’s contempt for folks needing emotional support, I’d say fire him.
Matt Klint should accept the criticism and mend his ways or find a more-suitable line of work.
Klint has shown to have no understanding of cats and is obviously a cat “hater.”
I have something to say about both sides of this issue. First, the cat shouldn’t have been on the flight in the first place. Many people are allergic to cats. The allergens travel a lot farther than a few seats (so re-seating someone somewhere else doesn’t help). On the other hand, look at the unfazed guy in the white shirt (and the people around him) in the video. This is Matthew’s attempt at stirring up drama where there is none. To say that the cat “terrorized” the flight is pure hyperbole.
What if someone has to move? Are they only allowed to drive or leave their pets in the hold (which can be dangerous for some pets, especially certain dog breeds)? The airlines allow approved pets in the cabin (and even then only a limited number can be brought on any given flight). If you have a problem bring it up with the airlines not the pet owners following the rules (this group does not include those taking advantage of the emotional support animal loophole). Also even though it’s not a perfect solution given cabin airflow, many conscientious pet owners are willing to move away from people with allergies if asked. My sister in grad school takes her cat home for winter break every year since she usually is gone for a month or so, she has always done her best to accommodate those who don’t want to sit near her and makes sure the FAs she is willing to move wherever they can put her if someone asks.
Matthew juiced up his title to get more responses to his blog. He obviously isn’t informed that cats aren’t diabolical and he has shown his disdain for cats by calling it feral. I’m sure he has no cats at home.
The owner should not have let the cat out because a cat in an unknown environment, can be terrified. That doesn’t justify the blog editor distorting the issue. It shows him to be a hater.
Scratching and biting sounds pretty diabolical to me! It’s not cool what the owner did considering that cats are very difficult animals and not suited very well to be pets.
There is one cat incident in years and now let’s ban cats from planes , really ? , compared to thousands of human incidents ? In addition of the thousand of humans traveling with deseases ? I say let’s ban humans first unless background check on mental and health issues before boarding
I’d ban dogs too…I don’t single out cats.
Too much arrogance in one single post and many comments.. all coming from a man that flies to Tokyo and returns with the same plane to escape whatever he wants to escape at home. Maybe you do need an emotional support animal.
So much for “live and let fly” huh? I guess this guy doesn’t apply that philosophy to anyone who isn’t a straight, white male without pets or service animals. Enjoy being at the top while it lasts.
Please don’t call the cat ‘diabolical’, it is not its fault but rather, the owner is to blame; first of all, the cat got scared and stressed and felt vulnerable in an incomprehensible atmosphere, thus defending itself from what he thought to be a dangerous situation; the owner should have taken action the very minute the cat got loose instead of letting things grow out of control.
It is NOT the animal’s fault and the 20-year-old girl who owns it must be held accountable.
You may not be fond of cats but please don’t use such a damaging adjective to refer to him/her.
Agreed, thank you! “Scared” does not equal “feral.” The owner is clearly to blame here for putting their cat under additional stress by taking him or her out of their carrier.
Actually I think it’s fair to use that word – too many people are exposed to cat-positive PR and get themselves cats only to find out that they are rather difficult animals. It is important to understand what it entails and what NOT to do, as in the case of this owner.
I don’t have a problem with people bringing their pets in a carrier… as long as they stay in the carrier as per the rules. If they choose to break the rules, then they should be treated the same as other passengers who break the rules.
They are required to pay a fee in order to carry their pet in the cabin, so at the time that the fee is paid, they should be reminded of the rules and told that violating them will result in cancellation of their ticket with no refund and/or ban from the airline.
However, when a passenger informs the airline of an allergy to a nearby pet that someone else is carrying onboard, the airline should be required to reseat the passenger making the request. People should never be required to fly near an animal to which they are allergic.
Another correct take by Matt, the system has been abused by too many 21 year old women with “service” dogs for whatever made up phobia or mental condition they have.
The service animal loophole is definitely abused, especially when you consider the fee is usually not more than $100 each way. So long as the pet owner follows the rules about what kind of pets are allowed to be brought in the cabin, pays the fee, books early enough to ensure there aren’t too many animals on the flight (the airlines tend to limit the number of pets allowed on any one flight, which is yet another reason the service animal loophole is BS as it is often used by people to take their pet on flights where the pet cap is already reached), and keeps the animal in its carrier (hopefully drugged in consultation with their vet), they should be allowed to bring their pets on board.
That poor cat must have been horrfied beyond belief.
It’s obvious the cat was terrified, but Matt Klunt find humor for profit posting about an animal’s terror flight. He’s a very sad person!
I don’t give a damn if the cat was scared. It can be scared in its carrier. The owner should be barred from flying UA ever again.
Totally agree…………. There should be a No Fly List for just this kind of STUPID Dangerous behavior!!
Matt, please refrain from referring to animals as “diabolical” when they are simply frightened out of their minds. Would you refer to an equally disruptive screaming baby or toddler as “diabolical”? (Those of us who have enduring countless flights with screaming children might, but only in jest.)
Some babies do deserve that description!
Can’t argue with you there!
You’re an idiot as usual!
What’s wrong with calling things what they are?
I fear the biting and screaming Karen more than a “diabolical” cat.
Absolutely!
Clearly!!!
“A bit traumatizing if you ask me”. Ohhhhh, snowflake generation!!! The best job in the world today is a psychiatrist. They must have been printing money with the number of snowflakes with mental health problems out there. Everything for this generation is traumatizing.
Yes, leave your stupid cat at home but traumatizing…..
Instead of meat I eat veggies and pussy. Problem solved.
That thing should have been killed before the plane landed.
Maybe we could say the same thing about you! It’s not a thing, it’s a cat. An animal that deserves safety and care. Another hater!
Title should read: “Diabolical human forces innocent cat out of a safe kitty carrier and onto an airplane filled with strangers.”
I just read the story about Frontier and was annoyed that there was still no response from Frontier Airlines and now reading this story to find that United has already responded. Sure, it’s an easy story to comment on, but it’s such a simple thing to get right and United usually does that very well, in my experience.
Still confused why Frontier hasn’t responded to a story of a woman nearly dying on their plane.
Sorry, this story is about Cats, so I’ll comment on cats…I prefer dogs.
It’s not a feral cat, it’s some snowflakes pet that finally had enough of the cage BS and decided to show stupid humans how not to treat an animal. Stupid people, do stupid things. We now live in a time when intelligent people are being silenced so that stupid people won’t be offended.
YOU’RE typically an asshat about everything, for your own profit! I think you need a different/real job! #CATLOVER
With so many people allergic to animals, they need to be banned from planes.
I’d rather ban evil people from planes. One cat gets lose and the asshat forgets about all of the harm done on aircraft by insane humans. He’s having a “slow” news day!
To the author: “Diabolical”? Settle way down, you’re ridiculous and dramatic. It’s a CAT. A f*cking cat. The poor animal was terrified. None of this would have happened if the idiot owner had left the cat in the carrier, as the airline rules require. Human beings really should concentrate on being less of a pot-stirring drama d**chebag and more of a solution to a minor, avoidable situation. Some kindness and humanity (and following the airline rules), goes a long way.
United seems to keep having all sorts of problems.
Strange, there was a loose cat on my LH flight from Chicago to Frankfurt this weekend, too. This cat escaped its carrier mid-flight and was still not found by the end of the flight. Planes are not safe places for cats!
It’s also the responsibility of the airline to make sure that was the case before letting her board. But they failed to do that at multiple points from the boarding gate and again when actual entrance where flight attendants great you. Both parties UA and the cat owner are at fault.
I assume this, along with my other comments, won’t be posted, but every other article about this incident states that the cat was, indeed, feral, and had snuck aboard in the cabin before the plane was boarded. It’s almost as though the author is biased – God forbid. As I recall, this article previously claimed it was a pet cat before being called out on that “mistake”.
There should be a No Fly List for just this kind of STUPID Dangerous behavior!!