Field Notes for Pet Pros

Good morning and thank you for listening and downloading the Tail Wag briefing. In the first 30 days the Tail Wag briefing has been downloaded over 700 times. And I am grateful for that and hope you are finding them helpful.

This month we are looking at our Entry and Exit protocols. If you would like to follow along or add this session to your training protocals you can download the training pak at the link in the show notes.

Training Pak #5 Safe Entry/Exit Protocol

A few months ago, during Winter Storm Fern, I wrote in Field Note #30 while conditions were still unfolding. No analysis. No conclusions. Just a reminder to notice the signals—those small moments where we think I should have… I wish I had… next time I will…

This is that “next time.”

Beth Pasek is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Because those signals weren’t failures. They were indicators of where our systems—contracts, expectations, and planning—didn’t fully account for reality.

A pet parent recently took to social media to vent, three full paragraphs, about her pet sitter. Not because the sitter failed to show up, and not because the pets were harmed. The issue was something else entirely. During Winter Storm Fern, a declared State of Emergency with untreated roads and widespread shortages of basic travel necessities, the sitter made a decision.

She chose safety.

The complaint centered on shortened visits. Fifteen minutes at a time. “Not what I paid for.” “Not what I expected.” The pet parent emphasized that she had hired a professional specifically so she wouldn’t have to rely on neighbors. The expectation was clear: consistency, regardless of conditions.

But that expectation rests on a flawed assumption; that professional service remains fixed, even when the environment does not.

During the storm, the sitter reached out to request authorization to involve a neighbor, an attempt to create a secondary access point when conditions made travel unsafe. The response wasn’t relief. It was frustration. Because the original plan had intentionally excluded neighbors. The entire care model depended on one person maintaining access under conditions where access itself was compromised.

That’s a single point of failure.

When that point is stressed by weather, infrastructure, or safety constraints the system doesn’t adapt. It narrows. What looks like a service failure is often a planning failure.

There’s a legal concept for this: force majeure. It refers to unforeseeable, uncontrollable events—like natural disasters or declared emergencies—that prevent normal performance of a contract. When those conditions exist, the standard doesn’t remain “business as usual.” It shifts to what is reasonably possible under the circumstances.

Force majeure doesn’t mean care stops. It means care adapts.

Most pet sitters market themselves on one word: reliability.

It’s everywhere websites, profiles, introductions. Reliable care. Dependable service. Someone you can count on. But reliability, as it’s often presented, assumes stable conditions like clear roads, predictable access, normal operations.

That’s not reliability. That’s consistency under ideal circumstances.

Real reliability is tested when conditions are not ideal when roads are unsafe, access is compromised, and continuing “as planned” introduces risk. In those moments, reliability isn’t measured by whether a sitter shows up exactly as scheduled. It’s measured by whether they make sound decisions that preserve safety while maintaining essential care.

Sometimes that means adapting. Sometimes that means shortening visits. Sometimes that means activating a backup plan. And sometimes it means not proceeding at all when conditions make it unsafe.

That’s not unreliability. That’s professional judgment.

If your definition of reliability requires perfect conditions, it isn’t reliability, it’s a best-case scenario.

In this case, the sitter did not abandon care. She modified it. Shortened visits. Reduced exposure time. Maintained essential care tasks. That’s not neglect. That’s risk mitigation. Because a sitter stranded in a ditch helps no one, and an injured sitter creates a second emergency.

This is where clarity matters.

In my own contract, I define what I call a Code Red Event—a clear trigger point where standard operations shift due to safety, infrastructure, or environmental conditions. Clients are responsible for maintaining an emergency care plan for their pets in the event of severe weather, natural disaster, or other conditions that prevent safe access to the home. Finicky will make reasonable efforts to provide care during Code Red conditions; however, services are not guaranteed when travel or property access is deemed unsafe. Clients are required to designate a trusted local contact—neighbor, friend, or family member—who has access, or the ability to gain access, and can assume care responsibilities if Finicky is unable to safely reach the property.

That structure does one thing: it removes the single point of failure.

It builds in redundancy. A secondary caregiver. A defined trigger for operational change. A shared understanding that care is measured by outcome, not minutes on a clock.

Because time is a metric. Care is the outcome.

If those expectations aren’t defined in advance, clients will default to assuming nothing changes when conditions do. And when reality forces adaptation, it will feel like failure, even when it isn’t.

So what’s one thing you expect from your pet sitter?

Consistency in minutes or consistency in judgment when it matters most.

Beth Pasek is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

The employer creates the training, writes the procedures, provides the equipment, and builds the culture. All of that matters.

But none of it works in the field without the worker running it — alone, in real time, under conditions the employer never designed. That is not a passive role.

Many pet sitters treat insurance as their safety strategy. It’s not. It’s the backup plan after something has already gone wrong.

A quick Google search turns up a screen full of experts talking about their top five claims and the importance of workers’ compensation and general liability coverage. Those discussions often drift from cost to the vague idea of somehow “working safety” into your operations.

What gets discussed far less often is this: where should you look for guidance on building an actual safety program for your business?

Before you spend a dollar on safety, there’s a free resource most pet sitters have never even considered.

That is where the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, better known as OSHA, comes in. OSHA is both the starting point for preventing injuries and, when a safety program falls short, the agency employers may ultimately have to answer too.

So before you are ever asked to show OSHA what you have to offer. Let’s take a look at what OSHA has to offer you.

The OSHA Did You Knows?

On OSHA’s website, you will find information on everything from protective footwear to hazardous materials requirements, along with free resources to help you identify and address a wide range of workplace hazards.

More importantly, OSHA offers a no-cost, confidential On-Site Consultation Program for small and medium-sized businesses. That program is separate from enforcement and is designed to help employers identify hazards, improve safety and health programs, and address concerns before they become bigger problems.

Compliance Assistance Specialists in OSHA's Regional and Area Offices around the country provide outreach to a variety of groups free of charge. These groups include small businesses and other employers, trade and professional associations, union locals, and community and faith-based groups.

Yes, you really can sit down with an OSHA consultant, talk through concerns about your business, and get practical guidance without that consultation resulting in citations or penalties. And did I mention…it is free to do?

You can find free downloadable templates for things like:

Safety and Health Programs and Leading Indicators

Safety and Health Program Self-Evaluation

Job Hazard Analysis Worksheet

Example Safety and Health Program

https://www.osha.gov/safety-management

Before OSHA ever asks what your business is doing about safety,

make sure you know what OSHA is willing to do for you.

So Why Do I Need a Safety Professional?

As a safety professional, I am not afraid of OSHA. I see it as the leading authority in shaping safe workplaces and strong safety cultures. While OSHA offers extensive tools, guidance, and support, your safety program still depends on having a competent person who can design it, evaluate it, and adapt it to the realities of your business.

That is where a safety professional comes in. Recently I was speaking with a colleague from the behavior side of the pet care world and she said something very interesting.

We desperately need someone to talk about this kind of stuff.

Someone who has worked/walked in our shoes.

For some businesses, this role is assigned to an experienced team member. Others invest in a dedicated safety position. And for many in pet sitting, it may exist as a part-time function or an external consultant. The structure can vary—but the responsibility does not.

When I put on my safety professional hat, I look at pet sitting and dog walking through a very different lens. I pay attention to the conversations happening across Facebook groups, podcasts, and YouTube. I hear from solo operators and from companies managing teams of 50 or more.

And one thing is clear: building a safety culture in this industry is not simple. In some cases we are still struggling to manage remote and mobile teams.

It does takes intentional leadership to mobilize a workforce that is constantly in motion—moving from home to home, client to client—while still keeping safety top of mind in every decision they make.

Now layer in what we know from behavioral safety research. Many team members are working alone, without immediate supervision or support. That is a hazard in itself. It introduces variables like isolation, delayed response in emergencies, and increased reliance on individual decision-making under pressure.

Which leads to the real question:

How do we meet that challenge?

Ask yourself: could your team recognize a behavior-based risk before it escalates?

Have you run into this? Reply and tell me real scenarios shape future posts

If you’re responsible for safety—whether that’s just you or a team—you need this skill set.

This is exactly what I’ll be breaking down at the PSI Focus Summit on May 6. Next week, I’ll be speaking at the PSI Focus Summit on what I consider the industry’s most important—and most overlooked—foundational skill.

Behavior knowledge is a frontline injury prevention strategy

I’ll be reframing how we think about behavior, not as a “nice-to-have” skill, but as a core safety competency. Because when you truly understand animal behavior, you gain something far more valuable than reaction, you gain predictive control. And that shift is often the difference between preventing an incident and filing an insurance claim after the fact.

In other words, behavior knowledge is not just about better care, It is a frontline injury prevention strategy.

If you haven’t signed up for the PSI Focus Summit on May 6th, it’s worth a serious look. The conversations happening there are exactly the kind that move this industry forward—not just in growth, but in professionalism and safety.

This content is for educational purposes and reflects professional experience in pet care safety. It is not a substitute for veterinary or legal advice. Always assess based on your specific client, pet, and environment.

You don’t have to be in a targeted industry to be cited.

The real question is:What would you show if someone asked for your heat plan today?

A few people already pulled the template.Because when that question gets asked…you don’t want to be figuring it out in real time.

Beth Pasek is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This week we take a short view on big responsiblities that go into a good safety culture.

Six homes, six hazard profiles...that change every single day. Can you or team actually navigate these situations?

A backup person answers:👉 “Who else can go?”

A backup system answers:👉 “What happens when going is not safe?”

Looking at the reliability promises we make through the lens of safety systems.

In this episode we unpack what to look forward to for the month April. Why Responsibilities matter and how to apply them across the spectrum from the business owner all the way to what the client is accountable for.

Training Document Module 3

Over four years ago, I sat down with Collin Funkhouser on the Pet Sitter Confessional podcast (Episode 132) and tried to explain how we onboard cats into the Finicky system.

At the time, Collin called it “holistic.”

Collin Speaking 20:10 mark: But what you do with this environmental program is you back way up, and start from the top and do a whole assessment of this cats world and just do a holistic approach to this and go, Okay, what what is this? How can we approach this and give it the best level of care by asking all these in depth questions, and, you know, these videos and doing this, you know, just looking at the cat's behavior and recognizing that each one's unique and individual, it really takes it to a different a whole different level of care. I've said that a couple times here, but it but it really is. And I love hearing about that approach to this.

Not because “holistic” was vague or philosophical, but because there wasn’t better language yet for what we were building. A process of cat care evaluation that encompassed this cats whole world to ensure not just food, water, litterbox. But an entire care plan that included the cats own comfort and anxiety levels. Enrichments from music, cat TV, foraging treat games to the favorite snuggle.

That interview feels like it was a million miles and a million years ago. It was the early moment where pet sitting learned about something at Finicky we now call ‘enrichment.’ It is found to be so valuable in our day to day work that it is now taught throughout the industry and at conferences by the experts. We know it is a wonderful part of the care plans we put together for clients, it is a professional add-on, one that many of us realize is actually essential care for cats and dogs.

What happens when the USDA Starts to Catch-up

Everyone is talking about “enrichment,” but the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is asking a different question entirely: does it actually meet the standard for dog welfare? As they review a standard of dog care that’s over 30 years old they are asking should it move into a measurable standard of care?

Those are not the same conversation. Enrichment is widely discussed, frequently marketed, and inconsistently applied, but it is not defined, not measured, or documented as a condition of care. And once it influences behavior, it stops being optional.

And again the law is looking at outcome based care. A way of looking at what we do as pet sitters and dog walkers that I have been exploring with you for nearly 40 weeks. If you’ve been reading along here on Substack we have been working our way through a soft landing into the regulatory world and just what does that look like for the pet care industry.

The industry may still describe enrichment as an added benefit. But as the broader animal welfare framework evolves, the question will shift from whether it is offered…to how it is being used, and whether that use is sufficient.

There is no shared language for what “adequate” exercise looks like, no consistent way to evaluate socialization outcomes, and no framework for understanding how insufficient stimulation affects behavior in real-world handling conditions.

That absence matters because behavior is not neutral. It is responsive. It shifts based on inputs, and those inputs include stimulation, routine, environment, and change. When those inputs are inconsistent, behavior becomes less predictable. When behavior becomes less predictable, risk increases. That progression is not theoretical; it is observable in everyday pet care work, especially in the moments that precede incidents—the hesitation at the door, the stiffness during feeding, the dog that watches instead of relaxes.

Once enrichment is understood as an input that influences behavioral stability, it moves categories.

The industry talks about enrichment. Regulators are asking what counts.

How ‘enrichment’ becomes a legal standard

Right now, the industry treats enrichment as a benefit. It is positioned as an enhancement to care, something that improves quality of life but sits outside the core structure of pet sitting service delivery. But once it influences behavior, it becomes a variable that affects outcomes. And variables that affect outcomes require control.

And control, when questioned, requires evidence.

Without that shift, enrichment remains subjective, dependent on individual interpretation rather than consistent practice. That is exactly what USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and federal regulators are trying to understand right now, before any rulemaking begins.

This is where the regulatory question becomes sharper. If exercise and socialization are tied to welfare outcomes, then they are no longer optional features of good care; they are conditions of care. And conditions of care carry an expectation of consistency, documentation, and defensibility. It is not enough to say enrichment was provided. The question becomes how it was provided, whether it was sufficient, and what impact it had on the animal’s behavioral state.

Where the Pet Care Industry Lives

The pet care industry, as it currently operates, does not have a standardized way to answer those questions. Most providers rely on experience, intuition, and informal notes. Those are valuable, but they are not structured systems. They do not produce consistent data, and they do not demonstrate control over the variables that influence behavior. As even the federal government begins to ask the question…does enrichment matter in a regulatory or liability context, that gap becomes significant.

What is emerging, whether intentionally or not, is a shift from philosophy to measurement. The conversation is moving away from what good care looks like and toward what can be evaluated, compared, and verified. That shift does not require abandoning enrichment. It requires reframing it. Not as an optional add-on, but as a behavioral input that must be understood in terms of its effect on stability, predictability, and risk. Those factors are what affects animal welfare obligations.

Because once a variable influences behavior, and behavior influences outcomes, the question is no longer whether it matters.

Pet sitters already understand the value of enrichment. What they may not realize is that the moment it is recognized as a factor in animal welfare at the federal level, it begins the transition from something you offer…to something that is the baseline to good pet care and husbandry.

Years ago, we described this as holistic care. Looking at the animal’s whole world and adjusting it to support comfort and reduce stress. Today, those same inputs are being examined through a different lens—not as philosophy, but as factors that influence measurable welfare outcomes.

The comment period is open until April 20, 2026

Pet Sitter Confessional Episode 132

USDA Seeks Public Input on Updating Dog Welfare Regulations; Comment Period Extended to April 20, 2026

This effort reflects USDA’s commitment to strengthening dog welfare nationwide, a top priority for Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins. The review will focus on care standards for breeding females, as well as requirements for exercise and socialization—areas where science and best practices have advanced significantly since the early 1990s.

This conversation is not theoretical. It is already shaping how care is being evaluated, both in the field and at the regulatory level.

I’ll be continuing this discussion in more detail during an upcoming Pet Sitters International FOCUS Summit session this May, where we’ll look at how behavior, environment, and decision-making come together in real-time care and how behavior knowledge, when applied consistently, protects the pet, the client, and the professional providing the service.