Caninephiles in Colorado flout the law: service animal fraud

[RavenSky]

This is not accurate, but it is indicative of the problem. "Service animals" - as Don2 attested - are highly trained, and a lot of that training is focused on socialization. Frankly, this has nothing to do with making the animal acceptable to the general public, but rather to making sure the general public does not distract the service animal from their very important tasks.

You can somewhat compare their training to other working animals like rescue dogs and police horses. They have to have the temperament and the training to stay on task no matter what is going on around them.

The problem is that once the genuine service animals are trained, there is not an actual way of separating these from the family pet with a mail-order vest so long as those vests can be purchased by anyone without any verification whatsoever.

It depends on what they are for. The animal he's getting will be highly trained. My mother's Seeing Eye dogs were highly trained.

However, some dogs are useful without training. If the family pooch consistently reacts to an imminent seizure, presto, seizure dog--with zero training. A seizure dog is definitely useful but that doesn't mean said untrained pooch should be allowed where animals aren't allowed.

A "seizure dog" still has to be trained and socialized just like Don's dog. If it isn't, then it is not a service dog

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It depends on what they are for. The animal he's getting will be highly trained. My mother's Seeing Eye dogs were highly trained.

However, some dogs are useful without training. If the family pooch consistently reacts to an imminent seizure, presto, seizure dog--with zero training. A seizure dog is definitely useful but that doesn't mean said untrained pooch should be allowed where animals aren't allowed.

A "seizure dog" still has to be trained and socialized just like Don's dog. If it isn't, then it is not a service dog

The whole problem is that the only requirement for being a service dog is that it performs some such function. There's no training & socialization requirement!

 

[bilby]

A "seizure dog" still has to be trained and socialized just like Don's dog. If it isn't, then it is not a service dog

The whole problem is that the only requirement for being a service dog is that it performs some such function. There's no training & socialization requirement!

Perhaps.

But not all jurisdictions have the same rules that apply in your particular location.

 

[RavenSky]

A "seizure dog" still has to be trained and socialized just like Don's dog. If it isn't, then it is not a service dog

The whole problem is that the only requirement for being a service dog is that it performs some such function. There's no training & socialization requirement!

Federal ADA requirements:

Service Animals Must Be Under Control

Under the ADA, service animals must be harnessed, leashed, or tethered, unless these devices interfere with the service animal’s work or the individual’s disability prevents using these devices. In that case, the individual must maintain control of the animal through voice, signal, or other effective controls.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The whole problem is that the only requirement for being a service dog is that it performs some such function. There's no training & socialization requirement!

Federal ADA requirements:

Service Animals Must Be Under Control

Under the ADA, service animals must be harnessed, leashed, or tethered, unless these devices interfere with the service animal’s work or the individual’s disability prevents using these devices. In that case, the individual must maintain control of the animal through voice, signal, or other effective controls.

Where do you see anything about training in that?

They're required to be under control but there's nothing to ensure that the owner will actually be able to do so.

 

[RavenSky]

Federal ADA requirements:

Service Animals Must Be Under Control

Under the ADA, service animals must be harnessed, leashed, or tethered, unless these devices interfere with the service animal’s work or the individual’s disability prevents using these devices. In that case, the individual must maintain control of the animal through voice, signal, or other effective controls.

Where do you see anything about training in that?

They're required to be under control but there's nothing to ensure that the owner will actually be able to do so.

I will re-quote the specific section:

the individual must maintain control of the animal through voice, signal, or other effective controls.

Do you imagine that dogs are born knowing "voice, signal, or other effective controls" or are they perhaps trained to do so?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Federal ADA requirements:

Service Animals Must Be Under Control

Under the ADA, service animals must be harnessed, leashed, or tethered, unless these devices interfere with the service animal’s work or the individual’s disability prevents using these devices. In that case, the individual must maintain control of the animal through voice, signal, or other effective controls.

Where do you see anything about training in that?

They're required to be under control but there's nothing to ensure that the owner will actually be able to do so.

I will re-quote the specific section:

the individual must maintain control of the animal through voice, signal, or other effective controls.

Do you imagine that dogs are born knowing "voice, signal, or other effective controls" or are they perhaps trained to do so?

Which is saying that the owner must maintain control, it says nothing about training requirements to ensure they actually can. They think they can control their animal, something happens and they can't.

 

[Malintent]

Geez. Just got to this thread.

This has been going on for more than 20 years.

Here is one suit Grill vs Costco http://servicedogcentral.org/content/node/199 that went badly for the person with the fake dog designation
and
here is another Thompson versus Dover Downs http://servicedogcentral.org/content/node/234 which although initially successful was ultimately reversed because the owner did not answer a proper question asked by the company.

All of this decided back in 2004 and 2005. I'm sure we were regaled with fake service dog stories back in the late nineties in L:A while I was still there.

Since then laws have been improved so if Colorado gets its act together soon illegally tagged dogs are going to cost owners mucho bucks there.

Ebay just isn't a place to get a service dog harness.

- - - Updated - - -

I expect the "comfort dog" bullshit will be the same and will allow fuckwits into the grocery store with their ordinary mutts.

You'd be wrong. Comfort dogs are not service dogs. Laws move on especially after twenty to twenty five years.

You may have kinked the wrong article... the case you say "went badly for [the plaintiff]" had nothing to do with fake credentials.. In fact, that case reaffirms that a business cannot ask for an ID card or any other credentials.. but MAY require that the animal be dressed with clearly visible designation or apparatus as a service animal, AND the business MAY ask what tasks the animal is trained to perform. the case you sited was regarding the second requirement and they claimed it was a violation of their healthcare privacy rights... which was decided in summary judgment that it is not.