Viral video of fire victim reuniting with dog after Palisades Fire inspires new pet rescue bill
viral video of a fire victim reuniting with his dog
days after the Palisades fire erupted in January, has inspired a new bill aimed at protecting pets during emergencies and disasters.
Casey Colvin was not home when the fire broke out in his Pacific Palisades neighborhood and mandatory evacuation orders were issued. Local officials set up roadblocks prohibiting residents and traffic from entering certain fire zone areas.
CalFire Battalion Chief Brent Pascua offered to go to Colvin's home and search for his two dogs. Pascua was able to rescue one but his other dog, Oreo, was still missing.
As the fire continued to grow and spread Colvin's house was destroyed. Five days later, Colvin received a call from the Animal Advocacy Network, that Oreo was seen near his property. The reunification was captured on video and quickly went viral.
"You're seeing this surreal experience that you could only dream of," Colvin told KCAL News during an interview. "When you have the rallying support of the community… it really really helped me."
On Tuesday, Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur announced the
Friends of Oreo Uniting During Disasters (FOUND Act).
The bill is aimed at ensuring local governments have procedures in place to support pet owners during evacuations.
"Pets are more than just property—they are family," Zbur said. "When disaster strikes, no one should have to choose between their safety and their pet's survival."
A statement from Zbur's office said the bill is sponsored by Social Compassion in Legislation and helps promote legislation to save animals across the U.S. The key goals of the FOUND Act are pet rescue procedures, emergency preparedness resources and extended holding period for rescued pets.
"The FOUND Act ensures that local governments have clear rescue plans in place, so pet owners don't have to risk their lives to save their animals," Zbur said. "While we've seen incredible examples of fire and safety officials working alongside the public to reunite pets with their families, as well as the extraordinary efforts of local animal shelters and rescuers, we owe it to pet owners across California to ensure that every city and county has a plan in place before disaster strikes."
Zbur also said the bill is a critical step in the right direction as the state continues to face wildfire threats. The legislation is expected to be introduced to a policy committee in the coming days.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
9 hours ago
- Washington Post
What are kids thinking about on the first day of school? We ask them.
A box of cupcakes, flowers for the principal and classroom teacher. Safety patrols with neon sashes standing guard. Younger siblings in tow who would be like their older brothers and sisters in just a few years. They all posed for photos and waited with friends to go into the school building.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Dear Abby: My family and friends abandoned me after my mom died
DEAR ABBY: I recently spent weeks caring for my mom in hospice. I was holding her hand when she took her last breath. I had announced to family and friends her choice to enter hospice. They knew her death was imminent. Being the last surviving child, it was up to me to arrange her funeral. Everyone, including my friends, asked me to keep them informed as to the service date and time. As soon as I posted the funeral information, the excuses started rolling in. People I had considered close friends and family who supposedly loved my mother came up with a dozen different reasons not to attend her funeral. I took stock after Mom's service and realized I had attended all the bridal showers, weddings, baby showers, funerals and graduations, donated to the school fundraisers, bought their Girl Scout cookies and listened to their litany of woes over the years. At the most horrible time in my life, they chose to leave me alone. Then it struck me: I really have no friends or meaningful family. I feel abandoned and angry, and I'd love to tell those people how I feel. What are your thoughts? — DEVASTATED IN DENVER DEAR DEVASTATED: Please accept my deepest sympathy for the loss of your dear mother. Your feelings are justified, but understand that your emotions are raw right now. Because you want to tell these people how you feel, do it — but not in anger, even if that's what you may be feeling right now. Speak with each of those folks individually and be honest about how hurt and alone their absence made you feel at a time when you needed them most. They need to hear it, and you need to get it off your chest. DEAR ABBY: My son-in-law, 'Samuel,' whom I adore, is a great partner to my daughter and an amazing father to my grandson. Unfortunately, he talks excessively, moving from topic to topic, even when people walk away or try to deflect to a different subject. He believes he's an expert in multiple subjects, and he expounds about experiences I'm fairly confident never happened. Samuel comes from a history of abuse but has been supported and loved by our family for years. I know he loves and trusts me, and I'm conflicted about whether (or how) I should tell him how his excessive talking may deter his future goals. He is highly intelligent, but if I were an employer, I would pass him by. Knowing what a good, hardworking young man he is, this saddens me. Should I have a private conversation with him about it? This may seem trivial, but it weighs on my heart. Please give me an outsider's opinion. — WISE MOM-IN-LAW DEAR WISE M.I.L.: My intuition tells me that would be a mistake. However, discussing your concerns with your daughter so she can talk to Samuel about them might be a more diplomatic way to get the message across. Dear Abby is written by Abigail Van Buren, also known as Jeanne Phillips, and was founded by her mother, Pauline Phillips. Contact Dear Abby at or P.O. Box 69440, Los Angeles, CA 90069. Solve the daily Crossword
Washington Post
3 days ago
- Washington Post
Carolyn Hax: They didn't make daughter's guest list, but could have sent a gift
Dear Carolyn: My daughter got married a year ago. It was an immediate-family-only affair, which is how she wanted it, since even then the guest list was over 100 people. Many of my friends did send my daughter a gift anyway — not a huge gift, but at least a nice acknowledgment and gift card, and it was so thoughtful. I'm disappointed in two very close friends who didn't do anything and am having trouble getting over it. I have sent very generous gifts to their kids. One of the weddings we couldn't attend and the other we did. They contributed $35 to a shower gift. I know it isn't a tit-for-tat thing and I know the rule of thumb is that if you aren't invited, then you aren't required to send a gift, but — they've known my daughter forever. And having given their kids really nice gifts, I would have expected them to do something. What do you think? — Disappointed Disappointed: I think there is no way to indulge this line of reasoning without emerging worse for it on multiple levels — while having nothing whatsoever to gain. You introduce judging, cherry-picking, materialism and petty bean-counting (just for starters) into what you describe as 'very close friendships' for what — a few hundred bucks on a gift card? I've seen some wastefulness around weddings, but this might take the bouquet. It's like giving your 'very close friends' a friendship test they're never made aware they're taking, without benefit of study materials, and there's no objective basis for the right answers. I can see, to be fair, how it makes sense in your mind. When their kids got married, whether you attended or not, you made an effort (in dollars, and I'm sure in thought) — so where is the friends' effort in this analogous situation? But I also have one idea how they might see it: It's not just that they 'couldn't attend' your daughter's wedding, they weren't invited. After they watched her (helped her?) grow up. So it seems as if it's not analogous. You assured them it was immediate-family only, no doubt, but maybe that was tough for them to square with photos of 100-plus(!) people. In other words, maybe you didn't pass their double-secret friendship test that you didn't know you were taking, weren't allowed to prepare for and were graded on subjectively. If they value inclusion above gifts as markers of enduring friendship, then they could be carrying around their own year-old hurt feelings about this. To no one's benefit in this case, either, also to be fair. In which case, why are you off the hook for stiffing them on an invitation but they're not for stiffing your kid on a gift? Cheap shots all around! Kidding, nothing was owed except benefits of doubts. (Remember, gifts aren't ever required, or else they're fees, not gifts.) I've got alternate theories, too: They were low on cash; they've always been more about giving time, effort and meaning than material gifts, and you lost sight of that; they're over in Miss Manners' queue, asking whether, ah, that shower invitation without a wedding invitation was a faux pas?; this is part of a larger drifting-apart in your friendships and it took a gift imbalance for you to notice; they thought the shower gift covered it and would be stunned you're so enduringly bent over this. A common thread in all of these is that prosecuting your snit about the gift, even just in your heart, takes you If these friends are a longtime, treasured, integral part of your life, then have the courage to live that fully — without small-dollar scorekeeping toward perfect reciprocity. If instead you have a genuine emotional obstacle to doing so, of which the non-gift is simply a visible sign, then that would explain why you can't get past it — and that's the thing you address with your friends. But with the gift as one piece of evidence, not as the central point.
