[nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort

Tamara Smith-Kinney tamara.8024 at comcast.net
Thu Jan 14 19:20:11 UTC 2010


Julie,

Thanks for the clarification!  I'll have to check the Oregon law to see if
that's where I got that notion.  I sincerely hope I won't have to worry
about it for a good long time! /smile/

In practice, I did pretty much as you suggest and will probably do the same
next time.  It just makes sense.  Also, asking permission is a good
opportunity to let people know the dog *is* in training so that they won't
judge fully trained guide dogs by any little breaches in etiquette from the
excitement of a new place.  Or so I hoped!  /smile/  I didn't start with
busses or more advanced places of public accommodation until her guiding
skills were pretty solid, although there were a number of times I would take
her in on leash and halti to focus on manners before I had her guide in that
environment.  It seemed to be what worked best.

Tami Smith-Kinney

-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
Of Julie J
Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2009 11:23 AM
To: NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort

Tami,

This is incorrect:
*Also, service dogs in training are already covered in the ADA and (I think)
FHA.  As an owner-trainer, I had the same rights I do as a handler.*

The ADA is a civil rights law.  It guarantees disabled Americans the right 
to equal access, which includes the right to utilize a service animal.  The 
definition of a service animal is one that has been individually trained 
tasks that serve to mitigate the handler's disability.  A service dog in 
training has not been trained to mitigate the disability of it's handler, 
does not meet the definition and therefore cannot legally accompany the 
disabled handler into public places.

Now, as an owner trainer I can tell you that I have always taken my dogs 
into public places before they were fully trained.  You have to or they will

never get fully trained.  Fortunately my state has additional laws to cover 
service dogs in training.  If I didn't have those I would need to train in 
only pet friendly places or ask permission at each place.

Owner trainers only have the same access rights once the dog has been 
trained to perform tasks that mitigate the handlers disability.  Of course 
you could certainly train some very basic tasks to gain the level of service

dog to be able to have public access.  then when in public places train the 
rest.

I hope that makes sense.
Julie


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tamara Smith-Kinney" <tamara.8024 at comcast.net>
To: "'NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users'" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 11:36 AM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort


> Steve,
>
> I agree!
>
> Also, service dogs in training are already covered in the ADA and (I 
> think)
> FHA.  As an owner-trainer, I had the same rights I do as a handler.  Also,
> the same responsibilities.  Including the responsibility for my own 
> safety,
> her safety and that of others.
>
> Someone mentioned socialization apart from training...  For a service
> animal, socialization *is* pat of the training.  True, you do a lot of
> ground work and obedience and exposure to people, kids, critters, 
> everybody
> and everything you can while the dog is young.  But sooner or later, you
> have to take your pup into the milieus in which it will be working as an
> adult.  A lot of those milieux are pretty high stimulus, let me tell you!
> But the dog needs to learn to walk by the meat counter at the grocery 
> store
> without trying to snag a snack along the way!  There are some early 
> training
> techniques I'm going to use next time to cut down on potential scavenging,
> but a dog is still a dog.  /smile/
>
> Anyway, with Mitzi I did what the guide dog schools do:  I used PR when it
> was time to take my wild and woolly one into the stores in our 
> neighborhood.
> I would explain that I was training her, that I needed to work with her in
> stores, and I assured them that I would take her out immediately if she 
> got
> out of hand and would pay for any damage.  It was a ridiculously
> dog-friendly neighborhood, which helped.  /grin/  The fact that my little
> beast had *no* training until she came to me at the age of 7 months 
> didn't!
> Next time, I am starting with a baby puppy so I can start civilizing it
> while it's young and impressionable.  /smile/
>
> Still, we worked on it together so that she could learn to deal with the
> overstimulation of it all, and now she's an old pro who can take me 
> shopping
> and dining and traveling without a hitch.  Well, I still feel a bit 
> nervous
> about that scavenging nose in restaurants, but it seems to be staying 
> where
> it belongs!  Actually, it's never gotten too far out of bounds, but I know
> my dog!  It used to terrify me that I would have to buy someone's meal
> because my dog tried to help herself to it.  I would just have died if 
> that
> had happened!  /grin/
>
> Anyway, I just say "no!" to legislatively required certification, 
> especially
> when it comes to service animals for the disabled.  The whole issue is 
> just
> too fraught, and the people it is meant to protect will be the ones who 
> get
> the short end of the stick!
>
> As for unscrupulous, unqualified trainers of service dogs for others....
> Well, changing the access laws to require that they show certification to
> take a trainee on a bus will just mean they don't train the dogs to 
> travel,
> right?  If someone is going to bilk a distressed clientele to begin with,
> they can't be too long on character or concern for others.  Or is that 
> just
> my prejudices showing?
>
> Tami Smith-Kinne
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
> Of Steve Johnson
> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 11:24 AM
> To: NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>
> Well stated Rox.
>
> The other issue is cost, and this idea of certification will have a price.
> Unless legislation has direct input from an organization like the NFB for
> instance, it has the potential to be that between the constituent and the
> legislator and honestly, that leaves the door wide open for 
> interpretation.
> Tell me the last legislator who knew the difference between a guide from a
> formal agency or one that was self-trained?  Take it one step further, 
> tell
> me a legislator who knows the difference between the different dog guide
> agency names, or what they are actually trained to do?  My point, is that
> they don't have a clue, and if they really want to do something 
> impressive,
> don't run again.
>
>
> JMO
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "The Pawpower Pack" <pawpower4me at gmail.com>
> To: "NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users"
> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 12:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>
>
>> and who certifies the trainers?
>>
>> There is no certifying body for dog trainers.  If I want to call
>> myself a dog trainer, I can.  There are outfits like CPDT who are
>> trying to certify pet dog trainers but it's all voluntary.  The guide
>> and service dogs, with the exception of California, may "certify"
>> their trainers but it's about as valuable as the paper it's printed on.
>>
>> California "certifies" it's trainers but frankly, I would hate to see
>> an outfit like the California guide dog board become the norm.
>>
>> I also think it's a step awy from certifying trainers to certifying PWD.
>>
>>
>> Rox and the Kitchen Bitches
>> Bristol (retired), Mill'E SD. and Laveau Guide Dog, CGC.
>> "Struggle is a never ending process. Freedom is never really won, you
>> earn it and win it in every generation."
>> -- Coretta Scott King
>> pawpower4me at gmail.com
>>
>> Windows Live Only: Brisomania at hotmail.com
>> AIM: Brissysgirl Yahoo: lillebriss
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/stevencjohnson%40cent
> urytel.net
>>
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 9.0.722 / Virus Database: 270.14.119/2586 - Release Date: 
> 12/25/09
> 03:33:00
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/tamara.8024%40comcast
> .net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/julielj%40windstream.
net
> 



_______________________________________________
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/tamara.8024%40comcast
.net





More information about the NAGDU mailing list