Does emotional closeness to pets motivate their inclusion in bushfire survival plans? Implications for emergency communicators

As pet ownership influences responses to the threat of bushfire, current preparedness communication acknowledges the pet-owner relationship as a key reason for including pets in emergency plans. However, not all pet-owner relationships are the same. Some people are physically and emotionally 'closer' to their pets than are others, a difference that could impact survival plan intentions. This South Australian study examines how differences in pet-owner closeness affects owners' views of pets as a motivator for plan creation and of pet inclusion in planning across four survival-plan intention types: 'stay and defend', 'split the household', 'wait and decide', and 'leave early'. Of several pet-owner closeness indicators, family membership of pets and anticipated separation distress influenced whether pets were considered a motivator and were included in plans. Intention-specific recommendations for creating motivating communications based on these effects are presented for emergency services communicators.

[1]  Douglas Paton,et al.  Preparing for bushfires: understanding intentions , 2006 .

[2]  Steven White,et al.  Companion Animals, Natural Disasters and the Law: An Australian Perspective , 2012, Animals : an open access journal from MDPI.

[3]  Debra L. Scammon,et al.  No Pet Left Behind: Accommodating Pets in Emergency Planning , 2007 .

[4]  Robert J Ursano,et al.  Psychological Impact of the Animal-Human Bond in Disaster Preparedness and Response , 2004, Journal of psychiatric practice.

[5]  Kirrilly Thompson,et al.  No Pet or Their Person Left Behind: Increasing the Disaster Resilience of Vulnerable Groups through Animal Attachment, Activities and Networks , 2014, Animals : an open access journal from MDPI.

[6]  Bev Carlsen-Landy,et al.  Dimensions of the Human–Animal Bond and Evacuation Decisions among Pet Owners during Hurricane Ike , 2012 .

[7]  L. A. Kurdek,et al.  Pet dogs as attachment figures for adult owners. , 2009, Journal of family psychology : JFP : journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association.

[8]  Lawrence T. Glickman,et al.  A Study of Pet Rescue in Two Disasters , 2000, International Journal of Mass Emergencies & Disasters.

[9]  Froma Walsh,et al.  Human-animal bonds II: the role of pets in family systems and family therapy. , 2009, Family process.

[10]  Scott L. Stephens,et al.  Protecting Lives and Property in the Wildland–Urban Interface: Communities in Montana and Southern California Adopt Australian Paradigm , 2011 .

[11]  Phillip R. Shaver,et al.  An attachment perspective on human–pet relationships: Conceptualization and assessment of pet attachment orientations , 2011 .

[12]  David D. Blouin.  Are Dogs Children, Companions, or Just Animals? Understanding Variations in People's Orientations toward Animals , 2013 .

[13]  Daniel L Sullivan,et al.  Non‐human Support: Broadening the Scope of Attachment Theory , 2014 .

[14]  Kathleen Sherman-Morris,et al.  Pet Ownership and the Spatial and Temporal Dimensions of Evacuation Decisions , 2012 .

[15]  P. Sable,et al.  Pets, attachment, and well-being across the life cycle. , 1995, Social work.

[16]  P. Sable,et al.  The Pet Connection: An Attachment Perspective , 2013 .

[17]  A. Beck,et al.  Human and pet-related risk factors for household evacuation failure during a natural disaster. , 2001, American journal of epidemiology.

[18]  Kirrilly Thompson,et al.  Save me, save my dog: Increasing natural disaster preparedness and survival by addressing human-animal relationships , 2013 .