[nagdu] More information on Taco Bell incident

[Buddy Brannan]

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