[VAGDU] [Blindtlk] DOT Releases Interim Enforcement Priorities concerning Service Animals and ESAs
jrelton at verizon.net
jrelton at verizon.net
Tue May 22 15:03:34 UTC 2018
Hello all,
I am concerned about the proposed changes to the regulations
for service dogs on planes. AS outlined, they do not seem horrible except
the requirement to notify the airlines in advance. I mention two things
which make me a little nervous. The fact that advance notification may not
happen doesn't mean that airlines will not, as they do, keep records of
those of us using dog guides on their computer. So, when I make a
reservation they show that I have a dog. Not only that, but, god forbid I
have to check in at the desk, I find it offensive that the agents feel it
necessary without my knowledge or consent to decide to check on the boxes in
their computer which say "hey, here's this blind lady again with the dog, so
make sure that an agent comes with a wheel chair and propells her to her
gate". The further unstated message might be "make sure that she stays put
in a chair near the gate until preboarding happens regardless of the length
of time. Obviously I am being dramatic in my description, but the point is,
that in changing the rules, they need to train agents at all levels in the
airlines and the airports. I have no problem having the airline know that
there is a dog guide or service dog who will be traveling in that particular
plane. I have no problem having assistance available, but agents need to be
trained and must remember that we are independent adults in control of our
lives and will make decisions as to what and when and by whom things are
done for, to and about us.
My second point of concern in the communication below is the idea inferred
that well trained dogs will not growl or get upset and that this is a
measure of their training. While, I have never had a dog growl at anyone in
an airport in the more than forty years I have used dog guides, I do know
that people can be unnecessarily physical and perhaps aggressive when
aproaching someone they believe to be acting inapropriately or not doing
what they should. In other words, people can come up and grab a person with
a disability or try to man handle the dog. This could be
threatening to the dog. We do not know the experience or the situation in
which this behavior arose. To me, a better indication of training is how the
situation is handled. If fido growls at agent Smith when he grabs my arm and
I quietly ask Mr. Smith to remove his hands from my arm and to step back so
that I can handle my dog. And, when I tell Fido that it is ok to be quiet
and sit and Fido does so, it demonstrates good training and handling. I have
heard and seen too many people jumping to conclusions about the level of
training or the expertise of the handler based on one incident and their
preconceived notions of that person and that dog. In a perfect world,
everyone would ask why the person is accompanied by the dog. Have a good
explanation and perhaps an id card , and then be asked how or if that
individual needs assistance, and if so, what kind of assistance. Since that
doesn't exist, the best that we can hope for is guidance in the form of a
regulation accompanied by training.
Yours,
Joy Relton, currently between dogs since I had to put Rusty down due to
cancer. In the interim Chip is my mobility tool and is doing just find,
although he doesn't have nearly the appeal of a beautiful fluffy golden
retriever.
-----Original Message-----
From: VAGDU <vagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org> On Behalf Of Peter Wolf via VAGDU
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2018 4:05 PM
To: Blind Talk Mailing List <blindtlk at nfbnet.org>
Cc: Peter Wolf <pwolf1 at wolfskills.com>; nyagdu at nfbnet.org; NAGDU Mailing
List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users <nagdu at nfbnet.org>; New
Jersey Association of Guide Dog Users <njagdu at nfbnet.org>; txagdu at nfbtx.org;
oagdu at nfbnet.org; Colorado Association of Guide Dog Users List
<coagdu at nfbnet.org>; Michigan Guide Dog Users Committee List
<micgdu at nfbnet.org>; flagdu at nfbnet.org; vagdu at nfbnet.org
Subject: Re: [VAGDU] [Blindtlk] DOT Releases Interim Enforcement Priorities
concerning Service Animals and ESAs
Marion,
My reactions to the interim plan are:
1. Yes, restrictions are needed regarding behavior of untrained (working)
PSA and ESA. This is good.
2. The same, obviously, for fake PSA and ESA.
-In both cases, I agree that a vet cannot be the informed certifier, because
they only know the animal in a very limited context. And we all know that
vet offices can have any number of effects (including extreme) on animal
behavior, such it may be far from any context of actual familiarity.
Proof of training absolutely should be required. But there's the tangle.
Many of us know about problems with one agency that appears to have co-opted
what defines an "acceptable training program" identity in other countries,
even to the point that it may prohibit travel unless you have a dog through
that agency of one of it's affiliates. It has prohibited us before. That,
for all of it's good intention, is a definition of discrimination. So what
in the end of this process, defines "trained"? Clear and simple, it one
thing: real time behavior.
My other concern about proof of training, is, what prevents just one more
layer of marketing, the sale and purchase of a bogus internet "I am trained"
certificate?
3. This brings me to the essential requirement: Agencies and staff, from
TSA to airline counter and boarding employees and air crews, need to have
training, to immediately discern in real time, case by case, that an
animal's behavior is that of a working, trained animal. There is no way
around this. Imagine how things might change if, when a boarding agent
observes an untrained animal in the act six bodies back in line barking or
snarling at someone in line, they can judge the situation and handle it?
This means however, the three things that organizations don't want:
education, inconvenience in the present moment, and the expense to make it
possible. But it is the only real thing that will actually work in the way
that policies and certifications cannot.
4. The proposal needs teeth, in the form of boundaries and consequences.
The boundaries, as mentioned, reside in being observed acting trained or
untrained. Consequences must include the owner personally certifying
responsibility for their trained animal's behavior. Having to submit to
giving one's signature below a warning of consequences or penalties does
remarkable things for effect. Unless sociopathic, one who must certify
personal responsibility for behavior or damage will consider twice whether
to fudge a rule, or outright lie about their dog. Imagine this in a rubber
hits the road way: What wold you do if security came and said "Either your
working dog behaves like one, or it goes in freight, or you are free to
board this aircraft today but without the animal"?
An additional point on imposing consequences: We are a body of people who
use working dogs, and have been inputting on this process over time. Some
of us have been at the effect of untrained or fake dog abuses. Therefore
the federal law outlining consequences for interrupting a service dog's
work, or harming a service dog should be part of the text of certifying
personal responsibility for PSA or ESA. If that's a discrimination issue, I
personally would have no issue in signing responsibility for my own working
guide. After all, we already have to adhere to this same standard anyway;
so what would be an issue as individuals or a discrimination to us to state
what already is our obvious behavior and responsibility as teams?
Thanks for the good work! Marion I wasn't clear. There will be a group
input process through you as I understand it. But would it would be more
effective still if we also wrote as individuals as well? Please clarify.
My best,
Peter
On May 16, 2018, at 5:40 PM, NAGDU President via blindtlk
<blindtlk at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Dear All,
>
>
>
> Earlier today, the United States Department of
> Transportation released interim enforcement priorities for the Air
> Carrier Access Act (ACAA) concerning the carriage of service animals
> and emotional support animals in the aircraft cabin. I sent a previous
> message with those priorities and promised to comment on them after I
> had the opportunity to review them. It is important to understand
> that, as the title of the attached document states, these are interim
> enforcement policies, meaning they are meant to communicate where the
> Department will temporarily focus its enforcement resources. The
> release of this document provides the public with 15 days to make
> comments, after which the Department will issue final enforcement
> priorities. In addition, this document also provides information about
> an advance notice of proposed rule making (ANPRM) which is intended to
> advise the public about the implementing regulations the Department
> intends to institute. The public has an opportunity to comment on the
> ANPRM. Once the comment period ends, the Department will then issue a
> notice of proposed rule making and afford another opportunity for
> public comment. Once this comment period closes, the Department will
> issue its implementing regulations. The instructions for filing
> comments are contained in the attached document and will be provided
> in each subsequent document. It is important to note the docket
> numbers for comments in order to be sure your input is considered. The
> National Federation of the Blind and its special interest division, the
National Association of Guide Dog Users, will create a coordinated comment
on each of these items.
>
>
>
> So, what are the enforcement priorities of the
> Department of Transportation as they pertain to service animals? Here
> are some direct excerpts from this document:
>
>
>
> 1. Requiring advance notice for service animals.violates the
> Department's regulation and may significantly harm passengers with
> disabilities as it prevents them from making last minute travel plans
> that may be necessary for work or family emergencies;
>
> 2. The Department's service animal regulation requires airlines to
> accept the following as proof of a service animal's status:
> identification cards, other written documentation, presence of
> harnesses, tags, or the credible verbal assurances of a qualified
> individual with a disability using the animal. 14 CFR 382.117(d);
>
> 3. the Enforcement Office intends to act should an airline require
> that a passenger with a service animal check-in at the ticket counter,
> thereby denying those passengers the same benefits that are available
> to other passengers;
>
> 4. carriers may refuse transportation to any service animal that
> displays behavior evidencing a lack of training in a public space;
>
>
>
> I would like to encourage everyone to read the attached document and
> invite a discussion of these enforcement priorities. As previously
> stated, the National Federation of the Blind and the National
> Asociation of Guide Dog Users will craft a coordinated comment on this
> enforcement priority and the advance notice of proposed rule making.
> We need to hear from you so that these comments reflect the wishes and
> interests of our members. A discussion on our lists is encouraged to
> help everyone process and understand these priorities; however, please
> send comments for consideration to me directly to
>
>
>
> president at nagdu.org
>
>
>
> Finally, in the very near future, I will CREATE A commentary
> specifically on the ANPRM AND INVITE discussion on it. I appreciate
> the incredible energy and advocacy of our membership and look forward
> to seeing many of you at our fabulous convention in July!
>
>
>
> Fraternally yours,
>
> Marion
>
>
>
>
>
> Marion Gwizdala, President
>
> National Association of Guide Dog Users Inc. (NAGDU)
>
> National Federation of the Blind
>
> (813) 626-2789
>
> President at NAGDU.ORG
>
> Visit our website <http://nagdu.org/>
>
> Follow us on Twitter <http://twitter.com/nagdu>
>
> The National Federation of the Blind knows that blindness is not the
> characteristic that defines you or your future. Every day we raise
> expectations because low expectations create barriers between blind
> people and our dreams. You can live the life you want! Blindness is
> not what holds you back.
>
>
>
> <DOT Interim Enforcement
> Priorities.pdf>_______________________________________________
> blindtlk mailing list
> blindtlk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindtlk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindtlk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindtlk_nfbnet.org/pwolf1%40wolfski
> lls.com
_______________________________________________
VAGDU mailing list
VAGDU at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/vagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for VAGDU:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/vagdu_nfbnet.org/jrelton%40verizon.net
More information about the VAGDU
mailing list