From my thesis

Pets and companion animals:

Hurricane Katrina also brought to light the difficulties faced by pets and companion animals, and their owners.[1] Anderson and Anderson, writing in 2006, noted that responders to Katrina in some cases forcibly separated citizens from their pets, adding to the emotional trauma of already trying circumstances. Many pet owners consider their pets to be members of their family, and being separated from their pets was much more painful than losing their possessions. From an emergency manager’s point of view, abandoned pets had to subsequently be rescued and, hopefully, reunited with their owners. These activities took resources that might have been spent on other needs had pet owners been able to evacuate with their pets.{{131 Anderson, Allen 2006;}}

What is more, pet owners who refuse to evacuate because they cannot take their pets with them, along with those who return to evacuated areas to rescue their pets, may subsequently require rescue or become casualties, creating additional dangers for responders.{{131 Anderson, Allen 2006;136 Nolen, R. Scott 2005;}}

This situation is further complicated by animals’ inability to speak: any animal that is separated from its owner must be reunited with that owner, but the animal cannot provide information to help with this. This is important in cases where an animal is brought to a shelter by someone other than its owner (e.g. a neighbor or rescue worker). In cases where the owner drops off the pet, provision must be made for taking down contact information and for keeping that information with the animal. Finally, animals are just as prone to injury in a disaster as humans are, so a complete animal emergency shelter needs veterinary facilities in addition to lodging facilities.{{135 Clark, Alison 2005;}}

Although it is, ultimately, the responsibility of a pet owner to plan for an evacuation with her pet{{137 Kahler, Susan C. 2005;}}, experience has shown that people’s pets influence how they will comply, or not comply, with an order to evacuate or seek shelter. This, coupled with the fact that any pet owner who is out of town (e.g. at work in the city) may not be able to care for his pet on his own, suggests that responsible disaster management includes pets in its calculations.

[1] Though the author’s position is that a pet is cared for rather than owned, and that a pet is a family member rather than a possession, it appears to the author that own is the relationship term most likely to be readily understood by readers, and thus this is the term that will be used.