[nagdu] More information on Taco Bell incident

Sun Jun 7 04:41:24 UTC 2009

Hi Buddy,
I know that a harness doesn't make a guide dog - you could put one on any 
dog but if it isn't trained to guide, it won't guide.

It's more of what the harness shows visually.  You see a guide dog harness 
on a dog, you assume it is a guide dog.  You see a man wearing a military 
uniform, you assume he is a military man.

It is what the harness symbolizes as much as a military uniform symbolizes.

Reading that article, I wonder what really happened in that Taco Bell.  The 
manager's actions make no sense.  The Seeing Eye celebrates its 80th year 
and it is amazing how much access denials we still get around the country. 
And that is for guide dogs!  In comparison, there are so much more problems 
of this type with people with hidden disabilities who have service dogs. 
That's what makes it such a shame when people abuse disabled people's rights 
by bringing untrained dogs and passing them off as service dogs.  Just my 
observations.

Linda and Landon
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Buddy Brannan" <buddy at brannan.name>
To: "NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 6:45 PM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] More information on Taco Bell incident

>
> On Jun 6, 2009, at 6:09 PM, Allison Nastoff wrote:
>
>> I do wonder though if guide dog schools should stick with  traditional 
>> breeds like Labs and German Shepherds.  Maybe this would  make it easier 
>> for the public to trust that a dog is, in fact a  guide dog. 
>> Theoretically, someone could get a harness on the black  market, and put 
>> it on their pet poodle and say he's a guide dog.   The same could be true 
>> for someone's pet Lab of course, but I just  think that sticking to a few 
>> standard breeds might make the guide  dog access issue less confusing for 
>> the public.  Just my opinion.
>
> I couldn't disagree with you more. For one thing, if we stuck to 
> "traditional breeds" and started doing so at the beginning, we'd all  have 
> shepherds. But more to the point, well, actually, there are  several 
> points.
>
> 1) There are many kinds of service dogs, not just guide dogs, and if  they 
> are task trained (etc. etc. etc.), they have the protection of  Federal 
> law. Many of these dogs are non-traditional breeds, even mixed  breeds. 
> Would you deny access to handlers of such dogs only to make  the issue 
> easier for the public?
>
> 2. I've said it before and I'll say it again. There is absolutely no 
> magic in guide dog equipment. Moreover, there is no law that  stipulates 
> what constitutes proper working equipment for guide or, for  that matter, 
> any other service animal. Someone could as easily take  his pet dog 
> somewhere and as easily claim it to be a service dog. This  is a sticky 
> issue, but the issue of working equipment just clouds the  issue further. 
> A harness does not a guide dog make, nor does it prove  legitimacy. This 
> issue of "harnesses falling into the wrong hands" has  always, frankly, 
> puzzled me. A harness proves nothing, nor does it  give one service animal 
> more legal weight than another who might  require different equipment. 
> Whether or what equipment a dog wears  does not define it as a service 
> animal, and propagating statements to  the contrary can't help the larger 
> community of service dog owners,  especially those who don't require 
> specific equipment. (Besides,  anyone with the requisite skill set can 
> make a harness, this really  isn't any sort of arcane knowledge jealously 
> guarded by the guide dog  schools.)
>
> 3. None of this about sticking to "traditional breeds" takes into  account 
> the needs or desires of owner trainers. Julie? Rox'e? Marti?  Let's say 
> one of you found a dog of just the right temperament but it  wasn't a 
> "traditional breed". Would you not find it a supreme waste  that you 
> couldn't use such a dog on the basis of its not conforming to  someone 
> else's idea of the "right" kind of dog?
>
> Don't forget that Jenine was just talking about some access trouble  she 
> had when she brought her (very traditional) Golden into a store  and 
> someone thought this couldn't possibly be a guide dog, because it  wasn't 
> a GSD. Would you like to so narrowly define what constitutes a  working 
> service animal? OK, consider this. Right now, the most common  breed of 
> service dog (especially guide dog) is the Labrador Retriever.  Several 
> decades ago, it was the German Shepherd dog. In several more  decades, 
> let's suppose this changes again. If we rigidly define that  only labs, 
> Goldens, GSD's, and lab/golden crosses are legitimate  service dogs and in 
> 30 years the labradoodle becomes dominant, how  would this affect such a 
> law? What do we do about people who,for one  reason or another, need to 
> use a boxer, or a poodle, or a Doberman?  Shall we deny them use of a 
> guide dog for which they may in all other  respects be suitable?
>
> Buddy
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/linda.gwizdak%40cox.net
> 