Given limited resources for any public or animal health policy the question on cost effectiveness of programs has to be addressed. The question is whether offering housing for pets is as cost effective as other alternatives. The best alternative is for pet owners to be self reliant in disasters, which would obliterate the need to provide care for their pets. There are, however, circumstances in which the issue of housing pets does not have alternatives. These should be viewed as exceptions rather than as policy.
Examples are overnight sheltering of evacuees from a disaster site.
Under these circumstances the management of the shelters are usually ad hoc and most people leave again within a few hours to return to their homes, or stay with friends, family, and at motels. The other example would be in a blizzard where travelers rely on shelters as their only protection from the environment and cannot be turned away. In most blizzards shelters are only likely to open for a few days and have few occupants until the roads have been cleared. Another argument has been made in favor of pet friendly community shelters is that they would help the most vulnerable disaster victims, which are senior and low income members of society. Also, although these groups are the most likely groups to request or require pet housing facilities, it is likely that these would not be the only persons who would use these services.