[nagdu] Fw: Breaking News About DOJ Changes

[Ann Edie]

Hi, Angie,

Evidently, between the Proposed  rules and the Final rules, perhaps based on 
feedback from the public during the comment period,   the DOJ changed the 
wording to "dogs" only rather than "dogs and other common domestic animals". 
In my opinion, this was actually a clarification, since I have no idea what 
animals they wished to include in "other common domestic animals"--cats, 
most likely, and birds?--they certainly live in people's houses, and perhaps 
fish?--they also live with people.  The only animals that we knew were 
excluded were those specifically mentioned as excluded:  primates, rodents, 
reptiles, farots, horses, ponies, miniature horses, goats, pigs....

At least now we know that only dogs will be allowed under the definition of 
"service animals".  However, the statements about miniature horses in the 
Final regulations are still very confusing to me.  If miniature horses 
cannot be considered service animals, then why do business owners have to 
make accommodations to allow people with disabilities to access public 
places accompanied by trained miniature horses?  And if I have no legal 
right of access with my miniature horse guide, then how can I continue to 
travel freely and have access to public accommodations when I am accompanied 
by my miniature horse guide?

Perhaps you and the other legal minds on the list can unravel the DOJ 
language and logic for us.

Best,
Ann

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Angie Matney" <leadinglabbie at mpmail.net>
To: "NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 8:50 PM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: Breaking News About DOJ Changes


> Hi Sarah,
>
> The DOJ accepted comments this past summer. I don't think they've 
> finalized anything, so perhaps they will have another comment period. 
> Also, these regs concerned only the ADA and not the Fair Housing Act, as 
> far as I know. It does seem
> they were a little too eager to exclude lots of animals. (But a cat is a 
> "common domestic animal," so if my memory of the proposed regs is correct, 
> they would be included. I freely admit it's possible that I'm 
> misremembering.)
>
> Angie
>
>