PETSAFE Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Mast, Brian J. [R-FL-21]
- Committees
- Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Feb 10, 2026
Bottom line
The PETSAFE Act of 2026 expands the scope of federal emergency preparedness grants to explicitly include companion animal support and significantly increases the federal funding contribution for these efforts.
What it actually does
This bill, known as the PETSAFE Act of 2026, amends the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 to explicitly allow state, local, and tribal governments to use federal emergency preparedness grant funds for activities supporting companion animals during disasters. Crucially, it increases the federal cost share for these specific companion animal preparedness activities from 50 percent to 90 percent.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that this bill addresses a critical gap in disaster preparedness, ensuring that pet owners are not forced to abandon their animals during emergencies, which in turn improves human safety and reduces emotional distress. They contend that lessons from past disasters, such as Hurricane Katrina, highlighted the need for robust pet evacuation and sheltering plans, and this bill provides the necessary federal support and incentive for such initiatives.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that while animal welfare is important, increasing the federal cost share to 90% and expanding grant eligibility for companion animals could potentially divert resources and attention from human-centric emergency preparedness needs. They may also contend that this represents an unnecessary expansion of federal spending into areas that could be more appropriately handled by local governments, private charities, or individual pet owners.
The bill is very short and easy to read, allowing ample time for comprehensive evaluation.
Section 2, amending Section 662 of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006
Expansion of Emergency Preparedness Activities for Companion Animals and Increased Federal Cost Share
This provision amends existing law to explicitly permit State, local, or tribal governments to use federal emergency preparedness grant funds for a range of activities that support companion animals during emergencies. These activities include purchasing collapsible crates, mobile equipment trailers, pet supplies, veterinary care supplies, emergency sheltering equipment, generators, disaster response software, training, animal response team development, and field rescue equipment. Furthermore, for these specific companion animal preparedness activities, the federal share of funding is increased from 50 percent to 90 percent.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that explicitly allowing and incentivizing companion animal preparedness through federal grants is crucial for effective disaster response, as many individuals refuse to evacuate if they cannot bring their pets, thereby endangering themselves and first responders. This provision ensures that resources are available for essential items like crates, mobile shelters, and veterinary supplies, directly addressing a known vulnerability in disaster planning and promoting a more comprehensive approach to emergency management.
Critics contend
Critics might argue that while the intent is commendable, increasing the federal cost share to 90% for these specific activities could set a precedent for other niche preparedness areas, potentially straining federal budgets. They may also suggest that local governments should bear a larger share of the responsibility for these costs, or that private charities and non-governmental organizations are better suited to handle companion animal welfare during disasters, rather than relying on federal funds at such a high matching rate.
Tradeoffs
This provision navigates the tradeoff between enhancing companion animal welfare and human safety during disasters, and concerns regarding the expansion of federal spending and the appropriate division of financial responsibility between federal and local governments for emergency preparedness. It also balances the need for specific guidance with the desire for local flexibility in disaster response.