[Flagdu] My Mistake: DOJ redefines service animal -- dogs only

[David Evans]

Dear Marion,

The new ruling would seem to eliminate other accepted service animals, such 
as Monkeys, that are used by Quads to feed them selves, ferrets, pot belly 
pigs that are trained to open and close doors, turn on and off lights and 
retrieve objects.
If this is true, this is a very sudden shift in policy.
The emotional support animals issues still needs to be addressed as they do 
serve a useful function, but their rightful use still needs to be better 
defined under the Law.
I deal with many of them in my area that ride on Para-transit and fixed 
route.
We have a young man, with mental disabilities who uses a emotional support 
snake to keep himself calm on the bus.  I know that it keeps him calm, but 
there are other people who ride who don't feel that way.

Regs need to be defined as to how much freedom of movement these animals 
have on our buses.
Unlike service Dogs, who must be free roaming to do their job, emotional 
support animals may not need such freedom and may need to be confined in pet 
carriers for their trips.
I will be glad to see this issue settled and regs defined as it will make 
handling of such animals easier and training of drivers, on our transit 
services easier and more uniform.

David Evans, NFBF and GD Jack.
Palm Tran Service Board
Para-transit Sub-Committee
TD LCB Board
South Florida Regional Transit Authority/Tri-Rail
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marion Gwizdala" <blind411 at verizon.net>
To: "NAGDU List" <nagdu at nfbnet.org>; "FLAGDU List" <FLAGDU at NFBNET.ORG>
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2010 2:51 PM
Subject: [Flagdu] My Mistake: DOJ redefines service animal -- dogs only


> Dear All,
>    In a previous post to the NAGDU list, I mistakenly asserted that the 
> new rule included only dogs as service animals. I based this assertion on 
> the information I had received; however, I also received a message from 
> another source that states,
>
> The rule permits the use of trained miniature horses as alternatives to 
> dogs, subject to certain limitations. To allow flexibility in situations 
> where using a horse would not be appropriate, the final rule does not 
> include miniature horses in the definition of "service animal."  See 
> http://www.ada.gov/reg
>
> I apologize for the misinformation I disseminated. As more information is 
> made available to clarify this ruling, it will be shared with the list. 
> The entire message I received concerning this new rule is pasted below.
>
> Fraternally yours,
> Marion Gwizdala, President
> National Association of Guide Dog Users
> National Federation of the Blind
> 813-626-2789
> President at NAGDU.ORG
> HTTP://NAGDU.ORG
>
>
>
>
>
> Service Animals. The rule defines "service animal" as a dog that has been 
> individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an 
> individual with a disability. The rule states that other animals, whether 
> wild or domestic, do not qualify as service animals. Dogs that are not 
> trained to perform tasks that mitigate the effects of a disability, 
> including dogs that are used purely for emotional support, are not service 
> animals. The final rule also clarifies that individuals with mental 
> disabilities who use service animals that are trained to perform a 
> specific task are protected by the ADA. The rule permits the use of 
> trained miniature horses as alternatives to dogs, subject to certain 
> limitations. To allow flexibility in situations where using a horse would 
> not be appropriate, the final rule does not include miniature horses in 
> the definition of "service animal."  See 
> http://www.ada.gov/regs2010/factsheets/title2_factsheet.html
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Flagdu mailing list
> Flagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/flagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> Flagdu:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/flagdu_nfbnet.org/drevans%40bellsouth.net