[nagdu] Take the menagerie off the bus

Mon Nov 3 19:44:07 UTC 2008

Ann,

I think the discussion only jumps to the banning of all non-dog species half 
the time.  the other half the discussion jumps to certification/banning all 
non-program trained animals. *smile*

None-the-less, very frustrating.
Julie

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ann Edie" <annedie at nycap.rr.com>
To: "NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 3:27 AM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Take the menagerie off the bus

> Hi, All,
>
> The death of Buddy, the Pomeranian emotional support dog, on the Portland 
> bus is certainly a tragedy for the little dog and its owner.  But it never 
> ceases to amaze me when the solution proposed jumps immediately to the 
> banning of service animals of species other than dogs from places of 
> public access.
>
> If I have the facts of the situation straight, both the victim and the 
> attacker in this case were members of the canine race.  And neither dog 
> would qualify as a service animal under the current or proposed 
> definitions of service animal in the ADA.  The victim was an emotional 
> support animal, permitted access to the bus under the local transit rules. 
> The handler of the attacking dog was not a qualified person with a 
> disability, nor was the dog a permitted emotional support animal.  The 
> owner of the offending dog misrepresented his dog as a service dog when he 
> took it onto the bus.
>
> Personally, I have no problem with transit organizations or commercial 
> establishments, stores, restaurants, hotels, etc., allowing people to 
> bring their well-behaved pets into these establishments.  I do take great 
> objection, however, to irresponsible animal handlers whose animals 
> threaten or injure either people or other animals in public places getting 
> off scott free or with a perfunctory slap on the wrist.
>
> First of all, I think that their ought to be stiff legal and civil 
> penalties for an animal owner whose animal causes injury or harm to a 
> person or another animal, whether the animals involved are service 
> animals, comfort animals, or companion animals.  The life of the little 
> Pomeranian is certainly worth something, more than the cost of 
> replacement, at the very least.  And the emotional pain and suffering 
> caused by the violent death of even a pet is certainly many thousands of 
> dollars.  The owner of the offending animal should be held responsible for 
> the harm caused by that animal, and laws should be strengthened and 
> enforced to make this a reality. Only then will animal owners think twice 
> about taking dangerous animals into public places or allowing their 
> animals to run loose in their neighborhoods.
>
> Secondly, the owner of the offending dog on the Portland bus 
> misrepresented his dog as a service animal.  Isn't this a case of fraud? 
> And shouldn't the man be held responsible for the tragic consequences of 
> the fraud, beyond being banned from the bus for 30 days?
>
> But what on earth does any of this have to do with the use of animals of 
> species other than dogs as service animals?  Where is the logic in calling 
> for the banning of rabbits, ducks, miniature horses, or ferrets from 
> public access or for the elimination of these species from eligibility as 
> service animals under the ADA, because a dog attacked another dog on a 
> public bus? Is my service animal more at risk of being injured by a duck, 
> in or out of costume, than by a dog?
>
> Personally, I can smile and proceed on my way with my miniature horse 
> guide through a gaggle of completely untrained and uncontrolled ducks--and 
> I actually do this every day, because the farm where my riding horses live 
> has a resident group of ducks who enjoy paddling in the puddles in the 
> dirt road that leads to the barn--whereas, it would cause me great anxiety 
> if we were confronted by even one or two large, uncontrolled dogs.  I 
> think I have to worry a lot more about being injured by the sharp teeth of 
> a dog than by the teeth of even a pet ferret or pet rat on a public bus.
>
> Why are these two issues--the issue of vicious or uncontrolled animals 
> causing harm to others in public places, and the issue of species other 
> than dogs being permitted as service animals-- so often confused?  How 
> would banning bunnies from busses have prevented the death of the 
> Pomeranian on the Portland bus?
>
> To me, even the issue of training is a bogus one.  A "trained" dog--and 
> what is the definition of "trained"--can still bite and cause serious harm 
> to people or other animals.  It seems to me that the only reasonable 
> remedy for the problem of vicious animal attacks is to hold animal owners 
> more responsible for harm caused by their animals.  Or perhaps we should 
> return to the old days when dogs had to be muzzled when on public 
> transportation, and extend this rule to any animal which could conceivably 
> cause injury to others.
>
> Thanks for giving me the opportunity to think out loud.
>
> Ann
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Ginger Kutsch" <GingerKutsch at yahoo.com>
> To: "NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 12:45 PM
> Subject: [nagdu] Take the menagerie off the bus
>
>
>> Take the menagerie off the bus
>> A dog's fatal attack on another illustrates why the feds must tighten 
>> their definition of "service animal"
>> Thursday, October 30, 2008
>> The Oregonian
>> Editorial
>> No offense, ferret lovers. (And we know you're out there. More than a
>> million ferrets now live in U.S. homes.) Your pet may be clever and
>> adorable, in your
>> view. It may offer emotional support.
>>
>> But it shouldn't be roaming the aisles of a TriMet bus or train. And, in 
>> our
>> view, neither should any other animal with sharp teeth. The only pets 
>> that
>> should be traveling, uncaged, on buses, trains and planes are trained
>> service animals.
>>
>> These animals today -- mostly dogs -- can be trained to do truly 
>> astonishing
>> things. For them to travel with their owners is only right and fair, and
>> it's
>> also the law under the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act. But this 
>> week,
>> Portlanders learned that the law has been stretched in a loosey-goosey 
>> way.
>>
>> On TriMet and other transit systems around the country, increasingly, 
>> almost
>> any "companion animal" can go almost anywhere with few questions asked. 
>> The
>> death of Buddy, a 7-pound Pomeranian, bitten by a 50-pound Rottweiler mix 
>> on
>> a bus, is a painful reminder of all the snarling, growling, biting 
>> seatmate
>> possibilities.
>>
>> If you haven't encountered a ferret yet, well, it's just a matter of 
>> time. A
>> 2003 ruling by the U.S. Department of Transportation, in effect, propped
>> open
>> the door of the veterinarian's office by saying people with emotional
>> ailments had the same right of access for their animals as people with
>> physical ailments.
>>
>> We have no quarrel with that broad notion. It's certainly true that
>> "invisible" problems are every bit as real as visible ones. It's also 
>> true
>> that animals
>> can be trained to soothe people who have a variety of afflictions, 
>> including
>> those that come with aging. The aging of the population makes it likely 
>> that
>> we will see a boom in the training of such animals.
>>
>> Unfortunately, though, the ruling didn't say anything about training. 
>> Since
>> the 2003 ruling, "a veritable Noah's Ark of support animals" has emerged,
>> The
>> New York Times wrote. Airlines have accommodated "monkeys, miniature 
>> horses
>> and even an emotional-support duck." (Dressed up in a costume, no less.)
>>
>> In the wake of the Pomeranian's death this week, TriMet plans to take a 
>> look
>> at its rules and procedures, to see whether there's a way to tighten them
>> within
>> the confines of the Americans with Disabilities Act. We hope there is.
>> Transit agencies should lobby for tighter definitions. The operative word
>> should
>> be "training."
>>
>> Those who stand to be hurt the most by the current free-for-all include 
>> the
>> owners of the well-trained dogs. They could suffer a backlash -- or maybe 
>> we
>> should say a back bite -- from the untrained ones.
>>
>> There are 72 million pet dogs in the United States, and nearly 82 million
>> pet cats -- and all can be classified, loosely, as "companion animals." 
>> Add
>> a
>> few rabbits, rats and ferrets to the mix, and you can imagine a bus ride
>> that veers a little too uncomfortably close to the zoo.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>> nagdu:
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/annedie%40nycap.rr.com
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nagdu:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/jlcrane%40alltel.net
> 