[nagdu] Rant on fake service dogs, responsibility, and owner trainers

[Tami Jarvis]

Julie,

I think it's regional, although in the Portland Metro area, it was about 
neighborhoods or areas... Portland brags about how dog-friendly it is, 
but the flavors change depending on where you are. In areas where 
responsible dog owners were the majority, there were a lot of dogs 
everywhere and no one thought anything of it unless they came from 
somewhere more restrictive or had dog phobias or something. Dogs were 
allowed a lot of places, but people would also tie their dogs outside 
some stores without a qualm. That surprised me at first, but since 
everybody knew everybody else's dog, it's not like the dog wasn't being 
watched over in a way. Nobody felt the need to pretend their dog was a 
service dog, plus they were responsible citizens in general. If a dog 
was walking off leash, you could just figure it was safe for the dog and 
everyone else for that dog to be off leash. If your dog wasn't reliable 
enough to be offleash, you kept your dog on a leash because that made 
sense. It was pretty cool in a city neighborhood. The majority of the 
dogs were pets, pampered but well-trained and maintained.

That probably does flavor my views on the certification issue a great 
deal. When I had access issues in that area, it was because someone had 
told the business that they were to ask for ID or only let in dogs 
wearing a certain color vest. That someone was most often a guide dog 
user or a guide dog program rep, so here I am with no ID, no vest, not 
the right style of harness, trying to explain that the obvious expert 
was, you know, wrong. What fun!

Here in the small town, the dogs are primarily not working dogs, but the 
culture is not far from the ranches around, so that flavors how people 
and dogs interact, I think. Well, and there are a lot of hunting dogs, 
now that I think about it. We have leash laws and people generally 
follow them, but there's a fair amount of looking the other way when 
they don't. A lot of fenced yards have dogs in them, but we also pass a 
number of unfenced yards with dogs in them. Either way, the dogs stay in 
the yard, though the dogs with fences bark more. At first, the dogs 
without fences might trot out to say howdy to Mitzi as we walked by, but 
now I mostly forget they're there. Good boundary training! Sometimes you 
see dogs trotting around untended, but they're not causing problems. 
When I started asking around about getting access for my pup in training 
for when the time comes, I got irritated because people were acting like 
I was stupid for asking. I finally figured out that there are pets 
everywhere anyway, so why make a big deal about my dog as long as he's 
behaving? I can only assume that all these pets everywhere are behaving 
themselves, since my working dog hasn't bothered to tell me about them 
and they haven't made themselves known. /lol/ It makes discussions 
following confusing articles about so-called fake service dogs 
interesting, I guess. People are confused about the confusion and why 
people would pretend their dogs are service dogs in the first place... 
It's supposed to be a big deal, they're told, only what they see 
everyday conflicts with that. If I had figured that part of it out 
earlier, I would have said "um..." less frequently when it was time to 
ask the first "real" service dog user to come along about it. /lol/ 
Apparently, there are a couple of people who may be passing off their 
pets as service dogs. There are also people who announce it at the door, 
then tell everyone they're just saying that so their dog can come in the 
store... Occasionally, one of those will come and tell me all about it 
especially because they noticed I'm blind and my dog is a guide dog. 
Um... There's something interesting about human psychology about that, 
but beats me what it is. This is such a small town, nobody's fooling 
anybody anyway, so why pretend you're fooling anyone anyway? Especially 
if you're going to announce it where the people you're supposedly 
fooling are listening and rolling their eyes and shrugging? And why 
would any random guide dog user be especially interested when you're 
being so loud she knows you're there and what you're doing? As long as 
your dog is being quiet... Poor Fluffy, having to go to Wal-Mart in a 
purse and be waved around while Momma shows she's an idiot.

Do you have pickup dogs there? You know, dogs in the beds of pickups 
getting bored while the people are shopping and barking at your dog as 
you walk by? Or barking as the are whizzing by in the moving pickup? 
Mitzi found that to be shocking at first, but now it's old hat. Every 
now and then, someone around here will get all het up about the practice 
and try to get something done about it, but in general, it's just a 
normal thing to do with dogs and pickups. I suppose we were weird when 
we had the pickup because we had our dogs in the cab with us. /lol/

Since other people have said it, I will now confess that I would rather 
see dogs welcome everywhere with expectations that they behave and are 
handled responsibly. Well, something like that. It wouldn't be so easy 
even if it were likely.

Tami

On 03/03/2015 06:25 AM, Julie J. via nagdu wrote:
> Raven,
>
> LOL  Did I mention I homeschool my son?  It really is a lot the same as
> owner training.  I don't have to know  all the answers, but I sure
> better have some resources who do.    And just like owner training,
> homeschool has been a wonderful experience!  It's hard at times, but the
> challenge is what makes it so rewarding.
>
> On a different tangent...when I was in Alaska on vacation a few years
> ago, there are a lot of dogs out and about with their people.  They are
> almost all mutts and they all do actual work or accompany their owners
> while they work.  Rarely were any of them on leashes.  They were not in
> restaurants or being passed off as service dogs.  They were just dogs
> going and doing things with their owners.  They were without exception
> very well behaved. No jumping up, no barking, no begging for food and
> the owners had complete control with only verbal commands and maybe hand
> signals.
>
> I wonder if it's a regional thing?  For example I rarely get asked the
> legal questions and have only once been asked for ID.  There are no fake
> service dogs, that I know of in my general area where I go most often,
> including the other cities around here.  But it is also very solidly
> accepted that dogs have jobs.  A lot of dogs are used for hunting,
> herding, general farm use and even my tiny town has a police dog. Most
> of the dogs are pets, but it's rare that dogs are kept in dog purses or
> otherwise used as fashion accessories here.  Dogs seem to be treated
> more like dogs and I'm wondering if that is why I have less access issues?
>
> Julie
> Courage to Dare: A Blind Woman's Quest to Train her Own Guide Dog is now
> available! Get the book here:
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00QXZSMOC
> Visit my new website on developing courage and living authentically:
> http://www.falling-up.com
> -----Original Message----- From: Raven Tolliver via nagdu
> Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 9:37 PM
> To: nagdu
> Subject: [nagdu] Rant on fake service dogs, responsibility,and owner
> trainers
>
> The problem in this country is that legislation is regulating pet
> ownership to the point that people don't have to be responsible for
> their pets, or people are given too much leeway.
> Laws that mandate castration, dog licensing, and prohibit pets from
> public businesses are the laws I am talking about. People are not
> expected to have well-behaved pets. People are not expected to put
> their dogs through obedience classes, or at least train their dogs
> themselves, teach their dogs self-control, and maintain that training
> at home and in public. And so because of this here we are:
> Because the stupid public cannot be expected to have well-behaved
> pets, they bring them out to businesses, under the guise of service
> animals. Well, now it's the people with disabilities who must pick up
> the flack. We are expected to be responsible with our assistance dogs,
> so we should be okay with being grilled and carded and checked and
> proving who we are and what our dogs are.
> Sorry, but I don't think it's right. Either punish the people who are
> being insultingly ignorant, or put it on the public to be more
> responsible with their pets. I should not bare a burden because other
> people are abusing the law. I should not be punished for others
> crimes.
> If members of the public were allowed to bring their dogs in public,
> we would not be going through this fake service dog debacle. If
> everyone was expected to be responsible for and with their dogs,
> business owners and employees would have no qualms about asking a
> person with a misbehaving dog to leave.
> This issue does not need to be so complicated.
>
> To the person who said owner trainers are less likely to retire a dog
> when behavioral problems arise, I'm jumping to owner trainers'
> defense.
> There are plenty of guide dog programs and handlers from guide dog
> programs who push dogs to be a guide dog, when that dog is clearly not
> cut out for the job or for that particular handler.
> I used to be close to someone whose guide dog was clearly not meant
> for her, yet, she still has this dog. She constantly complains about
> how her dog's walking pace does not match her own; her dog walks too
> slow for her. And, her dog is always distracted. Walking with them is
> like walking in a sporting event. She has to nonstop, cheer her dog
> on, keep talking to her to keep her pace up, and all the while, she is
> physically pushing this dog to walk at a pace that she just doesn't
> want to.
> Now people from the program where she got the dog have observed her
> during class, and after she graduated, and she's still clinging to
> this dog and using her as a guide because of an emotional attachment.
> I'm sure we all know or have known someone like this, where they know
> the dog they were given isn't right for them for one reason or
> another, but they kept the dog because of the relationship. And
> because there are far more program graduates than owner trainers, I'm
> willing to bet there are far more program grads like this than there
> are owner trainers.
> And then don't even get me started on schools who push through
> adolescent dogs, and place the responsibilities of adults on the
> shoulders of teenagers.
> I have never been an owner trainer, though I think it's something I
> would like to do or be a part of one day. But I will say that because
> owner trainers don't have a program to fall back on, because they
> themselves are responsible for all or some of their dog's foundational
> training, they strive to have extremely well-behaved dogs. When they
> pick out a dog, they go into it knowing that there is a possibility
> that it might not work out.
> When you read literature for owner trainers on the net, this is one of
> the many warnings. You'd better have something in place just in case
> the dog doesn't turn out to meet the job requirements. Be ready to
> keep the dog,, return it to the breeder, or have a trusted person who
> will care for it if you can't for whatever reason.
> In a sense, I compare owner trainers to those parents who home school
> their children. They know that because they are choosing the
> alternative route, to be completely responsible for the education
> received by their child, that because they are going with the
> nonstandard option, that they'd better turn out well-educated
> children, or children who are more advanced in their education than
> their school-attending counterparts.
> Also, just because owner trainers don't have a school to call does not
> mean they don't have a source or soundboard for helping them make
> objective decisions. I argue that owner trainers have more resources
> at their disposal because they have not been taught to trust and obey
> a certain authority. Owner trainers can call obedience trainers,
> former or current service dog instructors they might know, private
> service dog trainers, and other owner trainers. There are other
> sources I'm sure, but my point is that they are not limited to one or
> two phone numbers, or one person or location.
> And just because you graduated from a school doesn't mean you'll
> recognize when to call the school, or call anyone for help. Many
> people, in addition to those with service dogs, don't know when
> they're having problems that require help.
> There are poor examples of people in every group. And so what? The
> good examples cannot control or always focus on mothering and
> improving the poor examples. The best thing they can do is demonstrate
> excellence by letting others see their successes.