42 replies to this topic

[benjibear]

Could this be alleviated (not just on trains) if the states required a tag similar to the usual dog registration tag that says, "Service Animal"? It wouldn't have to list a medical condition if privacy is an issue; it could simply be a little yellow or red square or circle that is stamped, "Service Animal" and then some kind of registration number (like the regular dog registration). It would be easy to spot if the dog isn't already wearing one of those "Service Animal" vests, and it wouldn't reveal a medical condition. It would simply be an easy way to avoid questions.

If every state had their own tags and their own rules then it would be pretty easy to find the state with the weakest system and abuse the hell out of it. Just like with so many other state-by-state regulations. The best solution I can think of is a national tag system that is only given to recipients of professionally trained service animals and is hard to duplicate but easy to authenticate.

Yeah Maine will probably start selling them to supplement their trailer license plate industry. It still something that should be looked at. It is not just for this reason but also so people know not to go up and just start petting the dog. The dog is working and relally shouldn't be disturbed.

At a minimum Amtrak (or any place that doesn't allow animals but are required to allow service animals) should be allowed to ask the person for proof that the animal is a service animal. This may be a letter (maybe notorized) by a physician and another document showing the animal is a trained service animal should suffice. While I am sure anyone could reporduce documents in today's world, at least it would keep the semi-honest or lazy on track.

[Michigan Mom]

You can't fault the employees; Amtrak, like the airlines, has much to worry about due to abuses of the ADA that some folks have exploited. These abuses are too numerous to enumerate here, but no manager is going to take a risk that would leave their employer vulnerable to a lawsuit.

In the case of these "emotional support animals" they do require a letter, on letterhead from treating professional but let's face it, how hard would that be to obtain. Airline passengers do this to avoid paying the cabin pet charges. At one airport I saw an emotional support horse, btw, complete with poop bag. I felt sorry for the people who would be seated near that odor.

I'm glad they at least clarified the regs a little, as it will cut down on the variety of so called service animals. Note that now, as before, the animal must be controlled. The pug that was running wild could probably have been legally denied but even an experinced manager probably would not want to take on the battle.

[Devil's Advocate]

In other circumstances I might suggest that the protected group should be the most vocal about exposing abusers in order to prevent the potential loss of their own rights due to the possibility of guilt by association. However, in this case I think it's on all of us to help curb this sort of abuse by making our feelings known to those who appear to be intentionally circumventing the spirit of the law if not the letter. There is nothing I'm aware of that prevents a fellow passenger suffering from pet allergies from pointing out that that a toy-sized dog running about isn't going to be providing any life-or-death services.

Edited by Texas Sunset, 27 February 2012 - 10:30 AM.

[Sorcha]

Yeah Maine will probably start selling them to supplement their trailer license plate industry. It still something that should be looked at. It is not just for this reason but also so people know not to go up and just start petting the dog. The dog is working and relally shouldn't be disturbed.

Some of the service animals I've seen have their little neon jacket with "Service Animal" stitched onto it, but others have taken it even further and put something like, "I know I'm cute, but please don't pet me. I'm working!" on the jacket.

Those signs are mostly for people like me. It's hard for me to sit near a dog and NOT want to pet it, but I do restrain myself if it's a service animal. The only thing keeping me from petting the K9 units at CUS is the knowledge that a German Shepherd could do a lot of damage to my hand.

[Devil's Advocate]

Yeah, you probably do not want to mess with a K9 unit from a security detail. They can supposedly cause serious harm if they think you're a threat or if they think you're getting too close to their handler.

[Swadian Hardcore]

It was probably not a service animal, only a comfort pet. Those are not allowed on Amtrak. I don't think it would hurt crew members to ask what service the animal was there to provide.

Edited by Swadian Hardcore, 27 February 2012 - 02:51 PM.

[reefgeek]

1338869763[/url]' post='371616']
I have 2 pugs 1 which is a service animal he knows 6 different camands. Pugs r really quick learners if u start them young & know what ur doing when trying 2 train them. Just by looking @ me u would not know I need a service dog. Don't judge just because u can't see what is there. I do agree a service animal should be controled at all times. Mine does not wear a vest at this time as I can't afford one however I do not take him in grocery stores, resteraunts nor the food section of any store, my husband goes and gets what we need so as 2 not offend any1. I do really need him but still try 2 respect others & I limit where I go for that reason.

Sine this is basically an anonymous situation, would U mind sharing what your service dog does to help you? Just curious.

[RRrich]

Gee, my cat knows at least 6 different commands (which he obeys depending on his mood) His presence functions like an anti-anxiety medication for me - he keeps me in a good/cheery mood.

I think it would be grossly unfair to the cat to take him on Amtrak but could one use this argument?

[trainman74]

I think it would be grossly unfair to the cat to take him on Amtrak but could one use this argument?

I don't know if anyone would believe a cat could possibly be a service animal, no matter how good he makes you feel.

I can tell you that the only "service" my cat provides is verifying the continued existence of gravity by knocking items off desks and shelves.

[jimhudson]

I think it would be grossly unfair to the cat to take him on Amtrak but could one use this argument?

I don't know if anyone would believe a cat could possibly be a service animal, no matter how good he makes you feel.

I can tell you that the only "service" my cat provides is verifying the continued existence of gravity by knocking items off desks and shelves.

Naughty Fluffy!

Edited by jimhudson, 05 June 2012 - 06:44 PM.

[NorthEncantoGirl]

The problem is Amtrak has a poor policy on pets. It is the only train service which does not allow pets. If there was a policy similar to any of those in Europe, i.e., leash/box the pet and buy it a ticket, then people would not be tempted to abuse the ADA rules.

C'mon Amtrak! Let me take my dog on vacation and I'll get out of the plane and car and take the choo choo!

Well, they'd gain you as a passenger, but they'd lose me. And I say this as a card-carrying pet lover.

[Ryan]

Arguably the problem is that Amtrak doesn't allow transport of pets. There is no reason for this.

Yes there is, and it has been discussed exhaustively here.

[Sorcha]

You wouldn't even notice, actually. First, the pet would be in a proper kennel.

You can't keep a dog in a kennel for umpteen hours at a time. Some of the LD routes are three days from end to end.

Additionally, the baggage car is not climate controlled. The pets would freeze or overheat, depending on the time of year. There's also no air flow back there. Also, who's going to feed/water/walk them?

[Shawn Ryu]

Maybe pets should be allowed on short haul trains.

[Sorcha]

Annie - I don't think the debate over fakes would be an issue if the vests were required by law. My friend has an extremely well-behaved dog that acts like you described, but that's because she's trained that way. Therefore, it's hard to use that as a basis for identifying a service dog. If the service dogs had a clear marking, whether it be a vest (or even a scarf if the're a smaller breed), this whole debate about "fake or real" would be moot.

I realize those with disabilities value their privacy, but if we require handicap plates/cards to park in handicap zones, service dogs should be required to wear a vest or scarf. Much like the handicap plates/cards, it would prevent any unnecessary questions or doubts.