Service dog

[ldubs]

1 hour ago, CPT Trips said:

Almost all dogs that live in homes are emotional support animals.

 

This!  We lost one of ours earlier this year. Our remaining dog seems lost without her.   It is a tough thing.  

[BruceMuzz]

On 10/16/2022 at 2:47 AM, ldubs said:

 

I cannot imagine a cruise line anywhere that would prohibit working service dogs.   Let us know who they are so we can avoid them in the future.  

There are several Caribbean and South Pacific Islands that do not allow Service Dogs to go ashore. Local authorities threaten to shoot any animal coming down the gangway. Some cruise lines going to those locations do not allow service animals onboard for those itineraries.

[BruceMuzz]

On 10/16/2022 at 9:34 AM, ldubs said:

 

Aw, I missed that (Sorry Andy).  

 

In my state specific training is required for a dog to be a service dog.  The law distinguishes between service dogs and the so called emotional support dogs.  The latter do not have to be accommodated.  Unfortunately, like you say,  there is no certification.  All that can really be done is to ask if the dog is needed for a disability and what it is trained to do.   

The ADA specifically forbids a cruise line from asking what the service animal is supposed to do. There is a huge fine if something like this is reported.

[BruceMuzz]

If you go online, you can find any number of so-called “organizations” that will certify any animal as a service animal - for just a few dollars.

[ldubs]

9 minutes ago, BruceMuzz said:

The ADA specifically forbids a cruise line from asking what the service animal is supposed to do. There is a huge fine if something like this is reported.

 

Earlier, out of curiosity, I visited my state's and the Dept of Justice's ADA site.  Cruise ships in US waters must comply with the ADA.  The ADA has no authority over a cruise itinerary outside the US.  

 

 The ADA and my state is very specific that two questions may be asked.  The two specific questions allowed are is the dog a service animal required because of a disability and what work or task the dog has been trained to perform.  I did not see an exception for cruise lines and would question why such an exception would exist.  That said, I can see how an establishment would avoid any issues by adopting a policy to not inquire.   

 

 

 

[ldubs]

44 minutes ago, BruceMuzz said:

There are several Caribbean and South Pacific Islands that do not allow Service Dogs to go ashore. Local authorities threaten to shoot any animal coming down the gangway. Some cruise lines going to those locations do not allow service animals onboard for those itineraries.

 

 

Holy cow, that is pretty extreme.  I think most countries have regulations about bringing pets and some are likely strict.   Shooting someone's seeing eye dog seems a little over the top.  What countries do that?  

 

And, I wonder how a ship leaving from a US port on a Caribbean itinerary, which therefore must comply with ADA, can deny boarding.  Kind of sticky.    

 

[chengkp75]

7 hours ago, BruceMuzz said:

The ADA specifically forbids a cruise line from asking what the service animal is supposed to do. There is a huge fine if something like this is reported.

Sorry, Bruce, but that is not correct.  Asking what task the dog is supposed to perform is one of the two questions allowed under the ADA.

6 hours ago, ldubs said:

 

Earlier, out of curiosity, I visited my state's and the Dept of Justice's ADA site.  Cruise ships in US waters must comply with the ADA.  The ADA has no authority over a cruise itinerary outside the US.  

 

 The ADA and my state is very specific that two questions may be asked.  The two specific questions allowed are is the dog a service animal required because of a disability and what work or task the dog has been trained to perform.  I did not see an exception for cruise lines and would question why such an exception would exist.  That said, I can see how an establishment would avoid any issues by adopting a policy to not inquire.   

 

 

 

This is not quite correct.  SCOTUS has ruled in Spector v NCL, that only certain aspects of the ADA apply to foreign flag cruise ships, and further that SOLAS can trump the ADA where necessary for safety.  SCOTUS ruled that since Congress did not specifically mention foreign flag cruise ships in the ADA, that under international law, the "internal policies and procedures" of a foreign flag cruise ship are not subject to the ADA.  This means that should a cruise line decide to enact a set of rules for service animals onboard the ship, provided the customer is made aware of these rules prior to purchasing the cruise, that are more restrictive than the ADA, then that is legal, even when in US waters.  SCOTUS gave Congress the "out" by saying that if Congress revised the ADA to mention foreign flag cruise ships, then the ADA would fully apply.  In the 17 years since Spector, Congress has not decided to amend the ADA.

6 hours ago, ldubs said:

 

 

Holy cow, that is pretty extreme.  I think most countries have regulations about bringing pets and some are likely strict.   Shooting someone's seeing eye dog seems a little over the top.  What countries do that?  

 

And, I wonder how a ship leaving from a US port on a Caribbean itinerary, which therefore must comply with ADA, can deny boarding.  Kind of sticky.    

 

Just as if you tried to board a plane without the required visa for the country you are going to, the airline would deny boarding, if a country doesn't allow service dogs, even if the dog is not going to set paw on soil, the ship has entered the country, and the cruise line can deny boarding as the person not meeting the requirement for traveling to the country the cruise is purchased for.

[ldubs]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Sorry, Bruce, but that is not correct.  Asking what task the dog is supposed to perform is one of the two questions allowed under the ADA.

This is not quite correct.  SCOTUS has ruled in Spector v NCL, that only certain aspects of the ADA apply to foreign flag cruise ships, and further that SOLAS can trump the ADA where necessary for safety.  SCOTUS ruled that since Congress did not specifically mention foreign flag cruise ships in the ADA, that under international law, the "internal policies and procedures" of a foreign flag cruise ship are not subject to the ADA.  This means that should a cruise line decide to enact a set of rules for service animals onboard the ship, provided the customer is made aware of these rules prior to purchasing the cruise, that are more restrictive than the ADA, then that is legal, even when in US waters.  SCOTUS gave Congress the "out" by saying that if Congress revised the ADA to mention foreign flag cruise ships, then the ADA would fully apply.  In the 17 years since Spector, Congress has not decided to amend the ADA.

Just as if you tried to board a plane without the required visa for the country you are going to, the airline would deny boarding, if a country doesn't allow service dogs, even if the dog is not going to set paw on soil, the ship has entered the country, and the cruise line can deny boarding as the person not meeting the requirement for traveling to the country the cruise is purchased for.

 

What I understand is the SCOTUS decision to exempt foreign flagged cruise lines from the ADA  started with a suit about a ship being expected to do unreasonable structural accommodations.  It had nothing to do with service animals, but the SCOTUS ruling applied to the entire ADA section.  

 

I have learned a lot on this thread and thank you and others for sharing (and a great deal of patience).  

[ldubs]

4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

 

Just as if you tried to board a plane without the required visa for the country you are going to, the airline would deny boarding, if a country doesn't allow service dogs, even if the dog is not going to set paw on soil, the ship has entered the country, and the cruise line can deny boarding as the person not meeting the requirement for traveling to the country the cruise is purchased for.

 

The claim is some countries outright do not allow service dogs.  And some where the animal will be shot on sight.  That seems different than the obvious need to follow entry requirement regulations.  Though I am sure some places have extremely strict requirements.  

[chengkp75]

10 minutes ago, ldubs said:

 

The claim is some countries outright do not allow service dogs.  And some where the animal will be shot on sight.  That seems different than the obvious need to follow entry requirement regulations.  Though I am sure some places have extremely strict requirements.  

I think the statement wa certain countries won't allow a service dog to come ashore.  That is quite different than "do not allow service dogs".  The country may allow "native" service dogs, and even service dogs imported that have met a quarantine requirement (I know the UK used to require a 3 month quarantine for any dog), but not a dog brought on a cruise ship.  And, law enforcement in various countries have various authorities, perhaps even to shooting dogs that violate quarantine.  I know that Maine Game Wardens have the authority to shoot any dog on sight if it is running deer or moose and are close enough to cause an imminent threat to the animal's life.

 

US Dept of Agriculture has the right to "dispose" of any animal that is thought to have been imported without following the required quarantine.

[Ferry_Watcher]

Almost every sailing from Pier 91 (Seattle -Alaska) had at least one service dog on it.  The two end-of-season repositioning sailings (ending in a foreign port) we had no service dogs onboard.

[ldubs]

10 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

I think the statement wa certain countries won't allow a service dog to come ashore.  That is quite different than "do not allow service dogs".  The country may allow "native" service dogs, and even service dogs imported that have met a quarantine requirement (I know the UK used to require a 3 month quarantine for any dog), but not a dog brought on a cruise ship.  And, law enforcement in various countries have various authorities, perhaps even to shooting dogs that violate quarantine.  I know that Maine Game Wardens have the authority to shoot any dog on sight if it is running deer or moose and are close enough to cause an imminent threat to the animal's life.

 

US Dept of Agriculture has the right to "dispose" of any animal that is thought to have been imported without following the required quarantine.

 

OK, I missed the nuance about coming ashore vs not allowed. There are many instances where a dog would justifiably be shot or euthanized.   However that does not support what I believe to be a somewhat exaggerated claim that service dogs would be shot on the gangplank.  

[chengkp75]

7 minutes ago, ldubs said:

However that does not support what I believe to be a somewhat exaggerated claim that service dogs would be shot on the gangplank.  

What you think of as an exaggerated claim is likely from a US viewpoint.  Having traveled the world, and seen it from many of the least desirable locations, it would not surprise me to have a local customs agent threaten to shoot a passenger, let alone a dog.

[ldubs]

6 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

What you think of as an exaggerated claim is likely from a US viewpoint.  Having traveled the world, and seen it from many of the least desirable locations, it would not surprise me to have a local customs agent threaten to shoot a passenger, let alone a dog.

 

 If you are agreeing that a service dog could be shot on a cruise ship gangway in some Caribbean or South Pacific Islands, then I really don't know what else to say.  

[chengkp75]

Heck, I've been roughed up, physically, by US Customs officers (long before it was CBP), as a US citizen, walking in a US city, towards a US flag ship, and when presented with a US Merchant Mariners Card, was roughed up for "not having any ID", even though at the time, Customs and USCG (the issuing agency of the documents) were both under the Treasury Dept.  I've seen people in an airport immigration line in Jordan, where the Immigration official took his military web belt off and started striking a passenger around the head and face with it (they were speaking in Arabic, so I could not tell what it was about).  So, no, a customs official in another country shooting a dog that had violated entry quarantine would not surprise me.

[navybankerteacher]

15 hours ago, BruceMuzz said:

The ADA specifically forbids a cruise line from asking what the service animal is supposed to do. There is a huge fine if something like this is reported.

The cruise line certainly has a right to discuss pets.  The term   “Service animal” means many things.  Many people seem to think that if having Bowser with him makes him feel happy ( whether bowser is a dog, ferret or peacock) that makes Bowser a service animal. 
 

The only legitimate concerns ADA has are in regard to trained and qualified service animals - pursuant to their own definition.

[Ferry_Watcher]

6 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Heck, I've been roughed up, physically, by US Customs officers (long before it was CBP), as a US citizen, walking in a US city, towards a US flag ship, and when presented with a US Merchant Mariners Card, was roughed up for "not having any ID", even though at the time, Customs and USCG (the issuing agency of the documents) were both under the Treasury Dept.

Sorry that this happened to you.

[navybankerteacher]

On 10/17/2022 at 12:54 PM, CPT Trips said:

…
Almost all dogs that live in homes are emotional support animals.

As is virtually every teddy bear that a toddler cannot go to sleep without.

 

But it takes more than just being needed by a needy person to justify giving special accommodation for such an “emotional support animal”.

[sanger727]

22 hours ago, ldubs said:

 

 If you are agreeing that a service dog could be shot on a cruise ship gangway in some Caribbean or South Pacific Islands, then I really don't know what else to say.  

 

I don't think the argument is that Customs is lined up with a sniper trained on the gangway looking for a dog to shoot. But, yeah, at the point where there is a customs official giving you commands to return your dog to the ship and you don't; or if the dog is apparently alone and off lead; sure that could happen. 

[ldubs]

35 minutes ago, sanger727 said:

 

I don't think the argument is that Customs is lined up with a sniper trained on the gangway looking for a dog to shoot. But, yeah, at the point where there is a customs official giving you commands to return your dog to the ship and you don't; or if the dog is apparently alone and off lead; sure that could happen. 

 

Understood.  But could happen vs happens are two different things.   Just sayin . . . 

[Elaine5715]

On 10/18/2022 at 9:56 PM, navybankerteacher said:

As is virtually every teddy bear that a toddler cannot go to sleep without.

 

But it takes more than just being needed by a needy person to justify giving special accommodation for such an “emotional support animal”.

It should but functionally, it doesn't.  All it takes is the ability to make claims with a disregard of the truth.  As long as service animals and emotional support animals are exempt from fees charges to pets, people are incentivized. 

[Elaine5715]

On 10/19/2022 at 11:25 AM, sanger727 said:

 

I don't think the argument is that Customs is lined up with a sniper trained on the gangway looking for a dog to shoot. But, yeah, at the point where there is a customs official giving you commands to return your dog to the ship and you don't; or if the dog is apparently alone and off lead; sure that could happen. 

Or on the piers where there are K-9 present with local law enforcement.  They will put down a strange dog before it gets close.

[Elaine5715]

On 10/18/2022 at 12:26 PM, Ferry_Watcher said:

Almost every sailing from Pier 91 (Seattle -Alaska) had at least one service dog on it.  The two end-of-season repositioning sailings (ending in a foreign port) we had no service dogs onboard.

Yet in my field where we serve 1000s of adults with special needs, there is one person with a service dog.  That dog is trained to assist his guy in his home to live independently. When he leaves home, he travels with an aide so the dog is not needed and remains behind.   

[AKJonesy]

On 10/15/2022 at 10:21 AM, ldubs said:

 

No no, I'm talking about real working service dogs.  Forget the emotional support ones in the baby buggies.  

 

I'm still laughing.