10 ms·

U.S. to let airlines limit service animals on planes

210 points by hourislate 7y ago

nordsieck 7y ago
My understanding is that service animals are already limited to just dogs and miniature horses. It sounds like this is just allowing airlines to ignore ESAs as a privileged category. Edit: After some digging, apparently the Aviation Carrier Access Act[1] does not use the ADA definition for service animals, but instead uses its own definition, which is more expansive [2]. ___ 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Carrier_Access_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Carrier_Access_Act 2. https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/service-animals-including-emotional-support-animals https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer...
- tinus_hn 7y ago
  Clearly your understanding is wrong, or the new rules would not be required.
  - quickthrowman 7y ago
    His understanding is mostly correct: > Service animals are defined as dogs and miniature horses that are individually trained to do work or perform tasks for people with disabilities. [0] The headline refers to service animals, but the article refers to barring emotional support animals and removing mini-horses as service animals that can fly: > The U.S. Transportation Department on Wednesday proposed giving airlines the power to bar emotional support animals from cabins and limit the definition of a service animal to a trained dog. [0] https://www.esaregistration.org/faq/#top https://www.esaregistration.org/faq/#top
- ryan-allen 7y ago
  Horses? On a plane? I'm curious as to the... logistics.
  - justincredible 7y ago
    I have had it with these motherfucking [horses] on this motherfucking plane!
- koolba 7y ago
  In case you’re like me and didn’t believe that “miniature horses” are a real thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miniature_horse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miniature_horse Man those things are cute! No idea how you’d travel with one in a cattle class US economy seat though.
  - clouddrover 7y ago
    You'd travel like this: https://www.thedrive.com/news/29332/us-dept-of-transportation-rules-airlines-must-allow-miniature-horses-as-service-animals https://www.thedrive.com/news/29332/us-dept-of-transportatio...
  - frosted-flakes 7y ago
    They sit in the bulkhead row in front of the person. There's more in this NYT article about miniature horses being used as service animals (including photos): https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/17/travel/mini-horse-service-plane.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/17/travel/mini-horse-service... "For some blind people [...] guide horses serve as a compelling alternative to guide dogs. The animals are mild-mannered and fast learners, with nearly 360-degree vision. They may also offer balance support to individuals with physical disabilities." Also, dogs only live for 8-10 years, while miniature horses live for 35-40 years. They can easily fit in the back seat of a hatchback.
    - User23 7y ago
      The main downside for the blind guide horse user is having every single person that sees them run up and say some variant of "OMG IS THAT A HORSE!?!?!?!" Even with a dog blind persons just trying to go about their business get a ton of unwanted attention and a horse draws an order of magnitude more. One also needs to be able to pasture it. It doesn't take a ton of land, but a guide dog can live in an urban apartment and a horse can't, at least not without being miserable.
- mdasen 7y ago
  Service animals are meant to be able to help accommodate physical tasks. Most animals aren't good for these tasks and there are a few animals that work well for this. Emotional support animals can have a much broader definition because what someone derives emotional support from can vary widely. No one would argue that a turtle is likely to help someone walk down the street. However, emotional attachments could make a turtle emotionally supportive. This is why emotional support animals are such a nebulous category. Some people will argue for registration or notes from doctors. However, that really just means that people with means get what they want (whether they need it or not) while other patients might go lacking. For example, medical marijuana was a way for friends of mine to go to a doctor they knew would prescribe it, pay a little money, and get access to it. A registration system that relied on such a sign-off might similarly be a very small hoop to jump through. Plus, what happens when someone arrives with a fake registration? This isn't even a judgement on that person in particular. Unscrupulous people will create registries that are fake and get people to pay fees and provide them with a print out. This is something that's really hard to get right. Let's say that 99% of people are good people. If you're on a 300 seat plane, the likelihood of at least one crappy person is decent. I think this goes deeper into what we do about the small minority of people who think that anything they do to get what they want is ok. What do we do about the person who thinks, "I'm just running into the store for 5 minutes, I can park in the bike lane"? In that case, it's easy because there isn't a legitimate reason for that behavior. But when there are legitimate reasons, it becomes a lot more difficult. What do we do about the person who thinks, "I won't have to pay to fly my pet if I claim they're treating a psychological issue"? In that case, there's no great answer. Barriers can also harm people who need the animals. Given what I've seen with medical pot, I'm not sure that it would provide a large barrier for people with a little money/privilege. I personally find it angering when people abuse systems set up to help people. I really dislike flying with animals on a plane. At the same time, I'm not sure I could support this rule change. Emotional support isn't the same as physical assistance. It doesn't require the same training or animal types. Maybe we're going to start saying (as a society) that if you need emotional support, you'd better get it from one of the few sanctioned animal types. I think the biggest issue is requiring the same training as physical assistant animals. Service animal training costs a lot of money and that's going to put a large burden on people that might not have that kind of money. What do we do in situations where a small number of people abuse something meant to improve people's lives when there's no great way of discerning who is legitimate in their need and who is abusing it?
- drewmol 7y ago
  They are not. That's why clarification is needed here. The Americans with Disabilities Act prevents discrimination against service animals without expressly defining them. As of last time I checked there was no federally approved or recognized training requirements or certification program that is required to proclaim a pet as a service animal. For less that >$30 on amazon you get a vest and official tag, the ADA created a bit of a mess.
sushisource 7y ago
I remember being in an airport and having a woman I was sitting next to openly admit to me that her dog she was bringing on the plane she had "just went online an registered as an emotional support animal so I can take him with me". Clearly implying she did not, in fact, require an ESA. I just remember being so blown away that she assumed a stranger would be 100% on board with this tactic as to tell me about it unvarnished that I was stunned into silence. I love dogs, but you're ruining everything for the people who actually need service animals.
- allovernow 7y ago
  Probably being downvoted because it's just anecdote, but I've had at least two friends who shamelessly did the same thing with their dogs. I doubt this is uncommon given how easy the loophole is to exploit.
  - chrisseaton 7y ago
    > I doubt this is uncommon I've never seen any animal in an aircraft cabin, and I fly a fair bit. How does it work even when it is completely legitimate? Do you just ask the animal politely not to go to the toilet for 12 hours or however long? What if they have an accident? How on earth do you clean that up and deal the smell in a cramped space?
    - kelnos 7y ago
      I'm reminded of a recent flight I took where I was in the last seat of first class (yay upgrade!) and, right behind me, in the bulkhead economy seat, there was a not-small, long-haired dog (40-50 lbs maybe?) just lying on the floor in front of the owner's seat, not restrained in any way. It wasn't an excessively long flight (~5 hours), but still, not sure how they could ensure the dog wouldn't need to go to the bathroom in that time. I'm mildly allergic... it was not a pleasant flight for me at all.
      - Marsymars 7y ago
        > It wasn't an excessively long flight (~5 hours), but still, not sure how they could ensure the dog wouldn't need to go to the bathroom in that time. You have the dog do its business beforehand. Same way most dogs are able to stay indoors while its owner(s) are at work for the day.
nyolfen 7y ago
plenty of fun stories like this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/02/28/an-emotional-support-pit-bull-mauled-year-old-girl-an-airport-terminal-lawsuit-says/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/02/28/an-emotiona...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- topspin 7y ago
  what that dog actually did: https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/5163350_030119-gma-emotional-support-pitbull-attack-vid.jpg https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/5163350_030119-gma-emotio...
  - mrnobody_67 7y ago
    that needs a strong warning
- wavefunction 7y ago
  Pits and other dog breeds often require significant socialization and responsible owners or they can be dangerous to other people and animals, like any animal. Unfortunately the same sort of person who would fake a "service animal" is the sort who should not be an owner of such a dog breed.
  - fastball 7y ago
    Clearly. Not sure what your point is. We know that pitbulls often aren't well-socialized/trained. Hence why it was brought up.
    - electriclove 7y ago
      I think the point is the problem is with the people who continue bending the rules for their convenience.
djohnston 7y ago
Yeah I'm fine with this. People have been abusing ESA and IMO only actual service animals, those trained to perform a specific set of functions, should be allowed in the cabin.
- gamblor956 7y ago
  Airlines have allowed dogs and cats on planes and in cabins for decades...but they charge for it. ESA classification is being used by pet owners to avoid paying for transporting their pets.
  - djohnston 7y ago
    I guess I was mistaken. I thought there was a separate compartment for pets aboard flights. That's what I assumed people were doing when they passed their dog-in-crate to the airline employee
    - kingbirdy 7y ago
      Animals that are small enough can travel in-cabin for an extra fee, generally in a crate under the seat, while larger animals fly in hard crates in the cargo area.
Wooo0pdaddy 7y ago
people who abuse service animal privileges are always scum. send these people to work camps when they attempt this scumbaggery ;)
stared 7y ago
It seems that flying with pets in cargo space is not only traumatizing to animals - it can be deadly: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/is-taking-your-pet-on-an-airplane-worth-the-risk-6241533/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/is-taking-your-pet-on-.... For me it is hardly surprising that people who love their dogs or cats (and essentially treat them as family members) would go the extra mile to take them in the cabin, to ensure their physical and emotional safety. The alternative is to treat them as a disposable piece of luggage (which IMHO is inhumane and cruel for a life companion, human or not).
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  And I don’t trust random people’s pets to be well behaved and would rather not risk sitting next to them.
  - i_am_nomad 7y ago
    As you shouldn’t, there have been at least two horrible incidents in the last year or so where “ESA” dogs mauled another passenger.
    - mirimir 7y ago
      I've been bitten three times by dogs. Twice as a door-to-door canvasser, and once by a friend's pet. And I've seen others bitten by friends' pets. So I would not be comfortable on a plane with any dog that wasn't in a cage, or at least muzzled.
- azinman2 7y ago
  There are special services for transporting animals outside of typical flights.
- reaperducer 7y ago
  it is hardly surprising that people who love their dogs or cats (and essentially treat them as family members), would go an extra mile to take them in the cabin, People have been flying with animals in the cabin for decades. I've done it three times with cats since the 1990's. The difference is that back then, it was to transport the animal from one side of the country to the other safely, so the animal stayed in its container under the seat. Today, attention whores treat other living creatures like they're fashion accessories, and let them run around the cabin and sit in the seats and do whatever they want, as long as it gets them the attention they crave.
bthomas 7y ago
Yes there is rampant ESA abuse, but note the airlines all charge $175 each way for a pet. Isn’t that obvious collusion? It’s $350 to take my small dog to LA for the weekend when the round trip ticket for a human is $100. She is great on planes and has never had even a minor incident.
- reaperducer 7y ago
  Isn’t that obvious collusion? No, because people have been flying with pets for as long as there have been planes. The difference now is people are abusing the system.
  - bthomas 7y ago
    The problem is they all magically arrived at an exorbitant price that seems to reflect monopoly pricing. Also fees have standardized recently.
    - vageli 7y ago
      > The problem is they all magically arrived at an exorbitant price that seems to reflect monopoly pricing. Also fees have standardized recently. Playing devil's advocate, if the market determines prices then isn't settling on a price to be expected across practically indistinguishable providers of the same exact service?
- manigandham 7y ago
  What if there is a minor incident? What if it's a major incident? Animals are not people and have inherent risks. It's your choice to have a pet and fly with it.
vector_spaces 7y ago
I have a take on this that I suspect is going to be unpopular. I had a close friend who obviously had various mental health problems -- probably PTSD from a brutal childhood, major social anxiety -- but no diagnoses. I mean, I'm not a doctor, so feel free to take that with a grain of salt, but he quite clearly had issues, and limited means to go see one. Anyway, he regularly used cannabis. Although he probably would describe his use of cannabis as recreational, I think for him, and for a lot of people who use it with undiagnosed health problems, cannabis "feels good" because it's actually therapeutic. I think something similar can be said for pets and animals in general. Some people have disabilities that prevent them from living their lives to the fullest. Some people have pretty severe anxiety around travel. And some people in those categories don't even have diagnoses. All they know is their animals provide comfort. Sure, if you're someone with autism, bad social anxiety, or PTSD, it's known that there can be a lot of safety inherent to a relationship with a creature who won't judge you cruelly for being who you are. But on the less extreme side, some people are dealing with anxiety or depression driven by grief, shitty jobs, financial insecurity, or other issues, and having a loved pet close to you -- especially when you're traveling, which sucks for a lot of people -- can make an enormous difference. One thing that I see missing from discussion here is that airlines and businesses in general have a financial stake in limiting what's required of them with regard to accessibility, and historically they've fought and continue to fight tooth and nail to reduce such requirements, and even when they lose, their actual implementation is often minimal and piss-poor. So I don't think their "wins" are to be celebrated Further, I'd argue that the headline itself is sensationalized: turkeys and possums on planes are red herrings, as are the anecdotes in the comments around "so-and-so said they got their dog registered just so he could fly with her". Why did she want him to fly with her then? Sure, a passenger with a turkey or a possum might cost the airlines more money -- but to what extent is the average consumer even impacted by someone bringing a possum on the plane? Finally, to the folks who suddenly care about animal welfare when we're talking about folks with mental health related disabilities, you don't always have to fly with animals in cargo. A number of airlines allow animals to fly in the cabin with you, with certain restrictions.
- h2odragon 7y ago
  You make me wonder if i know you. I've never had one of my dogs "certified as a support animal" or any other official recognition beyond a rabies tag; but I've had a member of the pack who was "truck dog" and could go somewhere with me at need since forever. For all the reasons you mention, people who benefit from their animals presence are often worth tolerating, if not welcoming. One of my standards is that a service animal should be at least as polite and pleasant company as the person its assisting. I've never met a (formally designated or not) "familiar" that wasn't. There are however, folks who will do things like drag a terrified baby goat with them through walmart, because they just picked it up and they can say "service animal" ... I personally would like to do awful things to these folks, but thats why i have a truck dog with me, to remind me such things are impolite.
coldtea 7y ago
How we got from an era of common sense, to an era where everyone can declare all kinds of bizarro pets as a "service animal" is a mystery...
- CivBase 7y ago
  Seems pretty straightforward to me. Everyone is willing to abuse the system to an extent for personal gain (some more than others). Many systems provide special exceptions for emotional needs. It's a social taboo to question someone's assessment of their own emotional needs. Naturally, this means many people fake or exaggerate their emotional needs to get what they want. This isn't a new phenominon. The increased awareness of emotional health issues just means we keep seeing more systems implementing those exceptions. Hardening systems against exploitation is difficult and at some point not cost effective.
  - coldtea 7y ago
    Well, I'm not surprised about the "Everyone is willing to abuse the system to an extent for personal gain" part. I'm surprised about the above: >It's a social taboo to question someone's assessment of their own emotional needs. When common sense gave way to such a taboo about everybody's touchy "feelings", however far-fetched they are?
    - CivBase 7y ago
      People often confuse skepticism with dismissal. Regardless, we do not have the means to accurately disagnose someone else's mental health without relying on their own assessment. We know mental health problems are real, but anyone can get themselves diagnosed with almost any mental issue if they're a convincing liar. What can we realistically do about it?
      - tpmoney 7y ago
        With severe enough issues, it's not necessarily a matter of confusing skepticism with dismissal, it's that either one is extremely anxiety inducing on top of the main issue. I've known people with serious anxiety disorders, and for them, one of the worst parts about going out in public was not dealing with their anxiety, but dealing with how others would react to their anxiety. The last thing they wanted or needed at the time when their issues were flaring up was an interrogation from some stranger, especially if that stranger was in a position to deny or delay them access to the help they needed. ESA abuse definitely makes it harder for people with real issues and real ESAs. And while I understand the issues it causes when people abuse the system, like most "public outcries" over abuses, I worry that we're going to overcorrect on this one.
devpts11 7y ago
Entitled people who make the lives of actual disabled people harder are the worst kind of selfish. It's also why Social Security hearings take several years to get for some people who aren't visibly disabled. This is because whole extended families apply since they have shady lawyers and doctors to help them invent conditions. It's a game to them, taking help away from people who need it.
- fastball 7y ago
  Which is why, when the goal is to guarantee rights, universal programs are generally better than discretionary / means-tested ones.
heelix 7y ago
Good. I can't even believe they would allow a (mini) horse on an airplane... much less back in meat space. https://www.thedrive.com/news/29332/us-dept-of-transportation-rules-airlines-must-allow-miniature-horses-as-service-animals https://www.thedrive.com/news/29332/us-dept-of-transportatio...
- bobby_bob 7y ago
  Miniature horses can actually be trained as service animals, "guide horses" for sight impaired are even protected by the same legislation as dogs in some places. In this context though, maybe it needs it's own seat.
- quartz 7y ago
  I thought this was weird too but my understanding is that miniature horses actually make fantastic service animals. That article touches on some of the reasons, including that they're housebroken, intelligent, capable of leading the blind, can be trained to have a very calm demeanor, are often more patient than dogs, mitigate issues with allergies because they don't shed and they can't get fleas. Also the big one: miniature horses live significantly longer than dogs, reducing the number of times an owner has to re-pair and form a new relationship with a new service animal.
  - EdwardDiego 7y ago
    And some people have religious objections to dogs.
lxmorj 7y ago
I had an ESA certificate for a while and may get one again soon. I never lied to get one, either. That said, the online certification basically amounts to a long-form version of needing to answer yes to two questions: 1 - does flying stress you out? 2 - does your dog make you feel better? I never once used it for anything but flying, because things like bringing your dog to the groceries or the movies or a restaurant is just unnecessary. If you find yourself splitting your time between two cities that are >1 day drive apart, you have only a few choices: 1 - Don't have a dog over 18lbs 2 - Leave dog half the time 3 - Risk dog's life and guarantee a Very Bad Time under the plane 4 - Get ESA certificate I think airlines are leaving money on the table and should just have a relatively expensive travel-certification obedience course and charge a boatload for it. I'd happily pay $500 per year to have my dog authorized to fly in the cabin without an ESA (which incidentally cost less than half that). To pre-address the typical objections (and to steal from my own HN comment almost 3 years ago): "People are allergic!" For $100 a tiny shedding dog can ride in a very-not-dander-proof container. My dog is non-shedding. "They can be noisy!" So can your toddler. So can above tiny dog. Mine isn't. "It's like parking in a handicap spot!" No silly, my dog takes up my foot space, no one else's "The airline is losing money!" My dog & I weigh less combined than plenty of people who pay the same fare. I've also offered to buy a seat for my dog and leave her in a large crate on the seat. Not an option. "The guy next to you doesn't want a dog around!" See answer 1. Also, 90% of people are happy to be distracted from the horror of flying. Anyone who isn't can easily trade seats, since most people are happy to sit by the pup.
- scotth 7y ago
  > I think airlines are leaving money on the table and should just have a relatively expensive travel-certification obedience course and charge a boatload for it. I'd happily pay $500 per year to have my dog authorized to fly in the cabin without an ESA (which incidentally cost less than half that). Love this idea.
  - lxmorj 7y ago
    I've toyed with the idea of drafting a fake press release with Southwest branding announcing a program like this and just hoping to catch the wave: fake news -> real excitement -> free PR -> real news Alas my design chops are shit and I'm a bit over-committed on projects as it is.
crag 7y ago
I was on a flight from FTL to NYC and saw some guy bring a duck on the flight. The duck was classified as his emotional support animal. It was a good idea, but once again people ruin a good thing.
code4tee 7y ago
Legit service animals are very well behaved and never a problem. There’s no question though that this issue of pets masquerading as service animals has become a big problem. Makes sense that places are starting to crack down.
Simulacra 7y ago
It’s about time! The practice has been abused so much that it has depreciated the publics perception of actual service animals.
steelframe 7y ago
I've fostered a dog that was fully trained as a service dog, but it was disqualified from being put into service because the vet found a hip dysplasia. The dog never pulled on its leash while I was walking it, and it immediately obeyed a bunch of commands (come, sit, heel, side, quiet, leave it, etc.) without the need for me to repeat. When I eventually got a dog of my own, I worked hard to train it because it was just so awesome to have a dog that was well behaved. The last time I saw a "service dog" on a plane, it looked like it weighed about as much as its owner. As soon as the plane door opened after landing, the dog lunged toward the door, banging back and forth in the aisle. The owner could barely hold it back, and they weren't giving any commands to the dog. The flight attendant made a snarky comment, "What a wonderfully trained service animal!" I'm sure they know exactly how a genuine service animal behaves, and they are probably completely fed up with the widespread abuse of the service animal exemption.
- kohtatsu 7y ago
  This jumped out at me like an easily solvable problem because of what you describe; we could have dogs complete an obedience test to earn the service dog designation. I didn't even think pets could be "upgraded" to service dogs, I figured they all came from licensed training camps.
  - AdamJacobMuller 7y ago
    Not that I would do this, but, my dog would easily pass any of your service dog tests and he's only one year old. While there's lots of abuse by people bringing obviously untrained and unqualified animals on a flight, there is just as much abuse by people who take well trained dogs on flights and simply don't want to subject them to cargo transport -- the abuse is just much less noticed for obvious reasons. Personally, I would prefer to simply adjust the system so that any sufficiently capable dog can travel in the cabin for a fee, which would of course be waived for people with disabilities.
    - amerine 7y ago
      I find your solution wonderful, but I’m curious how to detect such trained dogs. Tests? Certifications? Licenses? Who’s and where from?
blackrock 7y ago
This culture with dogs and animals have reached nonsense proportions. It has gone to the other extreme, and it needs to be reigned back in. I was in an elevator, and some guy brought his dog to work, or something. I was surprised that I might have flinched, said WTF, and the dog flinched, and growled. At that moment I thought the dog was going to attack me, or the others in the small elevator cabin. And this was a medium to large sized dog, that was also beyond the owner’s ability to easily control. And I see more often now, people walking their bulldogs, as if they are nice and friendly pets. They are not. They are vicious attack animals. These dogs are not professionally trained. There is no certification that can guarantee that the dogs are safe to the public. And the owners are typically incompetent and irresponsible morons that shouldn’t have a dog to begin with. And there are those idiots that brings their large dogs into department stores, and walks them around as if it’s perfectly ok. It’s absolutely abnormal to be shopping at a Target, and to have to avoid some idiot’s large dog. It’s also irritating to walk through a store like Nordstrom Rack, where people bring their small dogs into the store, and let them sit inside the cart. There’s nothing worse than placing your new clothes into a shopping cart soiled by a dog’s urine or poop. But I digress, Nordstrom Rack must have a policy to allow these people that privilege to bring in their small dogs. I try to avoid the place if I can, because of this. I’ll vote with my wallet. I’m all for letting people have service animals, if they are blind, or physically handicapped. At least those service animals are professionally trained (or at least I hope there is a valid certification for that). But for all others with their supposedly “emotional support animals”, then they are just abusing the system, and taking advantage of the good graces of others. It is only a matter of time before one of these dogs violently acts out and attacks someone or a child in public. What will it take to outlaw this? Do we have to wait until one of these dogs kills a child in order to ban them?
- Ghjklov 7y ago
  >Do we have to wait until one of these dogs kills a child in order to ban them? I doubt even that will be enough. I share a lot of your fears. It hasn't happened yet, but one day someone is going to lose track/control of their pit bull here in California where even small women can take them on walks and it will attack me while I'm walking/running home. So I have to make sure to walk on busy streets so if I do get attacked, I at least have someone who can help. There was one time I was walking somewhere and two different pet owners crossed paths and their dogs started barking and aggressing each other, one of the owners even fell but on the bright side he didn't lose grasp of the leash and the girl with the big ass dog was able to keep her dog under control. Another time recently, I was going home with my sister and we walked past a house where some dog owners lost control of their dog which started running for us, but luckily it was friendly and wasn't out for blood. Small cute breed. But what about when it isn't? It's fucked.
fortran77 7y ago
Misleading title. Actual service dogs, like seeing eye dogs for the blind, are still allowed. Other, self-declared "emotional support animals" are banned. > "The U.S. Transportation Department on Wednesday proposed giving airlines the power to bar emotional support animals from cabins and limit the definition of a service animal to a trained dog."
Causality1 7y ago
It's baffling to me that there's no federal or state licensing system for service animals.
Cofike 7y ago
If we fly home for a few weeks for the holidays we'll often bring our dog with us. We pay $125 to bring them in the cabin and they must remain in a carrier under a seat for the duration of the flight. Cheaper than paying a kennel/dog sitter and just easier for everyone all together. No problems at all so far after years of doing this. The last time I was checking in at special services (due to the dog), the employee told me she registered her dog as an emotional support animal to bypass the fee. This was the airline employee giving this advice. At that point it was clear this was just a big joke. From what I understand now you need to have a doctor's note from a mental health professional and a bunch of other paperwork in order to bring your emotional support dog without a fee/carrier. I figured that would stop a lot of tom foolery, I guess not.
Zelphyr 7y ago
A member of my family is a medical professional and they told me that they frequently see people who either come in because they want a work excuse (that they don't really need) or want their animal classified as an emotional support animal. I think the most absurd one I heard was they wanted their chicken classified as an emotional support animal. It's definitely time to draw a line. EDIT: They told me that 99% of the time they say no to the latter request and will only give a work excuse if that person is genuinely sick. They also told me that they work with plenty of providers who just don't care and hand out the work excuses and emotional support certifications upon request.
- jaclaz 7y ago
  As a side note, and to be fair to chicken, my dad used to have one who was a "real" pet (of course at the time even the idea of "emotional support" by a pet or else was unknown). This chick used to come when called, jumped on my dad's lap on command, made "special" sounds for my father only and (it lived with the other chickens) for some reasons was always the first one to come out the henhouse in the morning and the last one to get into it in the evening. So - bar defining it an ESA for not paying something - that particular chicken actually was companion to my dad.
someonehere 7y ago
Good. It cheapens those with real service dogs and real needs. Taking advantage of the system with improperly trained “emotional therapy” animals who misbehave makes it harder for legit service dogs to have credibility in the real world. I have a friend with a legit service animal need who always gets crap from the public or employees at restaurants/businesses. My friend reminds employees of businesses about discrimination and then politely lets them know vaguely what the dog is for. But this is all because people are abusing the system with emotional ponies, therapy snakes, etc.. I took an international flight a few months ago and overheard the flight attendant talking to a passenger and mocking how lenient our service dog rules are.
mannykannot 7y ago
"[The U.S. Transportation Department] also wants comment on whether it should allow miniature horses to serve as service animals." Putting aside my instinct that this proposal is just too ridiculous to contemplate, has anyone considered the safety implications of a 70-180 kg strong-legged hoofed animal flying around the cabin in turbulence? Or running around after a crash?
- EdwardDiego 7y ago
  Miniature horses are used as service animals in Muslim countries, as they have religious biases against dogs. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30155540/ns/health-health_care/t/seeing-eye-horse-guides-blind-muslim-woman/ http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30155540/ns/health-health_care/t/s...
  - mannykannot 7y ago
    To be clear, the only thing that strikes me as ridiculous about the proposal is having them in the cabin of airliners.
projectileboy 7y ago
Unfortunately this is a crummy situation for those who really need, say, emotional support animals, but sadly this is a situation where the bad apples ruined it for everyone. Two days ago I watched a “service animal” pee in the corner at Schiphol, and on a Delta flight I once put my bag under the seat in front of me, only to discover that I put it in a puddle of urine from yet another “service animal”. At this point it mostly feels out of control.
- parliament32 7y ago
  The funny part is nobody "needs" an ESA. Real service animals are put through a grueling multi-year training program, have a high wash-out rate, and cost tens of thousands of dollars. ESAs can be "registered" for free online with absolutely no training or assessment of any kind... because they don't actually perform any kind of "service" like real service animals do.
elamje 7y ago
The most shocking thing to me as a consumer is just how difficult it really is to fly a pet somewhere. This summer, my wife and I plan to go to Europe for a while, and want to bring our dog, so we don’t burden a friend with him for a month. I have gone on most major airlines websites, blogs, etc. and there is really no good source of information out there! In fact most US -> Europe airlines won’t even allow an animal in the cargo hold during summer months due to the heat. Okay, fine. So let’s bring him in the cabin. Is he under 15lbs? Nope, you cannot bring it with you. Instead we are currently exploring this very loophole because there is simply no other alternative. When you cross oceans there is really no way get your animal there without the help of other people. I guess the reason a solution doesn’t exist is because it’s somewhat a niche problem, and airlines are focused on volume. Any and all suggestions are welcomed. If you have a large dog that has flown internationally, please email me.
- philliphaydon 7y ago
  Why can't you put him in a doggy hotel. You would never be allowed to take a non-service dog to New Zealand, any (non-service dog) Animial going to NZ is put in quarantine for 1 month on arrival
busterarm 7y ago
This needs to be more widespread. People really abuse their animals and whole emotional support concept and I remember a few years ago the hundreds of people who thought it was okay to bring their emotional support pet to New York Comic Con. This shit has to stop.
asdff 7y ago
This whole song and dance is absurd. People are currently flying with their cat or whatever as a 'service animal'. It's pretty normalized and to be expected to see while traveling anywhere. Why not just let you fly with your pet to begin with?
easytiger 7y ago
Completely ban them [ESA] with no exceptions. It's ludicrous and very illustrative of a very American mindset. Namely to exploit every possible gap in any process or system despite the clarity that you are operating outside the intended scope of it. I know a woman who flew with her dog as an emotional support animal to assist with her anxiety. Her day job was as an air stewardess. The attitude is, if they don't stop you, it's not my fault I can exploit the system. You see it everywhere in America. Less so in Europe. Some examples of ridiculous behaviour by the owners: https://youtu.be/a5AzlCEagFY https://youtu.be/a5AzlCEagFY https://youtu.be/jCxE8BskmPE https://youtu.be/jCxE8BskmPE https://youtu.be/WkcxESqKlno https://youtu.be/WkcxESqKlno https://youtu.be/AO_mAfYM1Vo https://youtu.be/AO_mAfYM1Vo https://youtu.be/qJpREAfeluo https://youtu.be/qJpREAfeluo @17min https://youtu.be/-moq55oH5ro https://youtu.be/-moq55oH5ro https://youtu.be/GtPRrW3strM https://youtu.be/GtPRrW3strM - yes. It's a horse What you won't see on these videos is when the dog or pig needs to crap and piss. Which it will
- TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago
  > Completely ban them [ESA] with no exceptions. And what of the people who need them?
  - easytiger 7y ago
    Apparently it's impossible to differentiate between someone who does need them and someone who is exploiting the system. Id argue they perhaps don't need them and the whole thing is a farce
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
- EdwardDiego 7y ago
  I think my favourite was the woman with the emotional support peacock: https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertglatter/2018/01/31/emotional-support-peacock-and-her-owner-denied-entry-on-recent-flight/#2fcead7f6375 https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertglatter/2018/01/31/emotio...
warmfuzzykitten 7y ago
The modern definition of service dog is a dog you want to bring into places that restrict dogs. Cheating is rampant.
cafard 7y ago
The best bakery I know of in Washington, DC, is run by a lawyer of considerable experience. He takes a very firm line against emotional support animals. Anyone wishing to argue the case finds out that he knows the law.
randyrand 7y ago
Seems like we just need some small percentage of flights to allow dogs.

210 points by hourislate 7y ago

My understanding is that service animals are already limited to just dogs and miniature horses. It sounds like this is just allowing airlines to ignore ESAs as a privileged category. Edit: After some digging, apparently the Aviation Carrier Access Act[1] does not use the ADA definition for service animals, but instead uses its own definition, which is more expansive [2]. ___ 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Carrier_Access_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Carrier_Access_Act 2. https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/service-animals-including-emotional-support-animals https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer...

tinus_hn 7y ago
Clearly your understanding is wrong, or the new rules would not be required.
- quickthrowman 7y ago
  His understanding is mostly correct: > Service animals are defined as dogs and miniature horses that are individually trained to do work or perform tasks for people with disabilities. [0] The headline refers to service animals, but the article refers to barring emotional support animals and removing mini-horses as service animals that can fly: > The U.S. Transportation Department on Wednesday proposed giving airlines the power to bar emotional support animals from cabins and limit the definition of a service animal to a trained dog. [0] https://www.esaregistration.org/faq/#top https://www.esaregistration.org/faq/#top
ryan-allen 7y ago
Horses? On a plane? I'm curious as to the... logistics.
- justincredible 7y ago
  I have had it with these motherfucking [horses] on this motherfucking plane!
koolba 7y ago
In case you’re like me and didn’t believe that “miniature horses” are a real thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miniature_horse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miniature_horse Man those things are cute! No idea how you’d travel with one in a cattle class US economy seat though.
- clouddrover 7y ago
  You'd travel like this: https://www.thedrive.com/news/29332/us-dept-of-transportation-rules-airlines-must-allow-miniature-horses-as-service-animals https://www.thedrive.com/news/29332/us-dept-of-transportatio...
- frosted-flakes 7y ago
  They sit in the bulkhead row in front of the person. There's more in this NYT article about miniature horses being used as service animals (including photos): https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/17/travel/mini-horse-service-plane.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/17/travel/mini-horse-service... "For some blind people [...] guide horses serve as a compelling alternative to guide dogs. The animals are mild-mannered and fast learners, with nearly 360-degree vision. They may also offer balance support to individuals with physical disabilities." Also, dogs only live for 8-10 years, while miniature horses live for 35-40 years. They can easily fit in the back seat of a hatchback.
  - User23 7y ago
    The main downside for the blind guide horse user is having every single person that sees them run up and say some variant of "OMG IS THAT A HORSE!?!?!?!" Even with a dog blind persons just trying to go about their business get a ton of unwanted attention and a horse draws an order of magnitude more. One also needs to be able to pasture it. It doesn't take a ton of land, but a guide dog can live in an urban apartment and a horse can't, at least not without being miserable.
mdasen 7y ago
Service animals are meant to be able to help accommodate physical tasks. Most animals aren't good for these tasks and there are a few animals that work well for this. Emotional support animals can have a much broader definition because what someone derives emotional support from can vary widely. No one would argue that a turtle is likely to help someone walk down the street. However, emotional attachments could make a turtle emotionally supportive. This is why emotional support animals are such a nebulous category. Some people will argue for registration or notes from doctors. However, that really just means that people with means get what they want (whether they need it or not) while other patients might go lacking. For example, medical marijuana was a way for friends of mine to go to a doctor they knew would prescribe it, pay a little money, and get access to it. A registration system that relied on such a sign-off might similarly be a very small hoop to jump through. Plus, what happens when someone arrives with a fake registration? This isn't even a judgement on that person in particular. Unscrupulous people will create registries that are fake and get people to pay fees and provide them with a print out. This is something that's really hard to get right. Let's say that 99% of people are good people. If you're on a 300 seat plane, the likelihood of at least one crappy person is decent. I think this goes deeper into what we do about the small minority of people who think that anything they do to get what they want is ok. What do we do about the person who thinks, "I'm just running into the store for 5 minutes, I can park in the bike lane"? In that case, it's easy because there isn't a legitimate reason for that behavior. But when there are legitimate reasons, it becomes a lot more difficult. What do we do about the person who thinks, "I won't have to pay to fly my pet if I claim they're treating a psychological issue"? In that case, there's no great answer. Barriers can also harm people who need the animals. Given what I've seen with medical pot, I'm not sure that it would provide a large barrier for people with a little money/privilege. I personally find it angering when people abuse systems set up to help people. I really dislike flying with animals on a plane. At the same time, I'm not sure I could support this rule change. Emotional support isn't the same as physical assistance. It doesn't require the same training or animal types. Maybe we're going to start saying (as a society) that if you need emotional support, you'd better get it from one of the few sanctioned animal types. I think the biggest issue is requiring the same training as physical assistant animals. Service animal training costs a lot of money and that's going to put a large burden on people that might not have that kind of money. What do we do in situations where a small number of people abuse something meant to improve people's lives when there's no great way of discerning who is legitimate in their need and who is abusing it?
drewmol 7y ago
They are not. That's why clarification is needed here. The Americans with Disabilities Act prevents discrimination against service animals without expressly defining them. As of last time I checked there was no federally approved or recognized training requirements or certification program that is required to proclaim a pet as a service animal. For less that >$30 on amazon you get a vest and official tag, the ADA created a bit of a mess.

sushisource 7y ago

I remember being in an airport and having a woman I was sitting next to openly admit to me that her dog she was bringing on the plane she had "just went online an registered as an emotional support animal so I can take him with me". Clearly implying she did not, in fact, require an ESA. I just remember being so blown away that she assumed a stranger would be 100% on board with this tactic as to tell me about it unvarnished that I was stunned into silence. I love dogs, but you're ruining everything for the people who actually need service animals.

allovernow 7y ago
Probably being downvoted because it's just anecdote, but I've had at least two friends who shamelessly did the same thing with their dogs. I doubt this is uncommon given how easy the loophole is to exploit.
- chrisseaton 7y ago
  > I doubt this is uncommon I've never seen any animal in an aircraft cabin, and I fly a fair bit. How does it work even when it is completely legitimate? Do you just ask the animal politely not to go to the toilet for 12 hours or however long? What if they have an accident? How on earth do you clean that up and deal the smell in a cramped space?
  - kelnos 7y ago
    I'm reminded of a recent flight I took where I was in the last seat of first class (yay upgrade!) and, right behind me, in the bulkhead economy seat, there was a not-small, long-haired dog (40-50 lbs maybe?) just lying on the floor in front of the owner's seat, not restrained in any way. It wasn't an excessively long flight (~5 hours), but still, not sure how they could ensure the dog wouldn't need to go to the bathroom in that time. I'm mildly allergic... it was not a pleasant flight for me at all.
    - Marsymars 7y ago
      > It wasn't an excessively long flight (~5 hours), but still, not sure how they could ensure the dog wouldn't need to go to the bathroom in that time. You have the dog do its business beforehand. Same way most dogs are able to stay indoors while its owner(s) are at work for the day.

nyolfen 7y ago

plenty of fun stories like this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/02/28/an-emotional-support-pit-bull-mauled-year-old-girl-an-airport-terminal-lawsuit-says/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/02/28/an-emotiona...

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
topspin 7y ago
what that dog actually did: https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/5163350_030119-gma-emotional-support-pitbull-attack-vid.jpg https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/5163350_030119-gma-emotio...
- mrnobody_67 7y ago
  that needs a strong warning
wavefunction 7y ago
Pits and other dog breeds often require significant socialization and responsible owners or they can be dangerous to other people and animals, like any animal. Unfortunately the same sort of person who would fake a "service animal" is the sort who should not be an owner of such a dog breed.
- fastball 7y ago
  Clearly. Not sure what your point is. We know that pitbulls often aren't well-socialized/trained. Hence why it was brought up.
  - electriclove 7y ago
    I think the point is the problem is with the people who continue bending the rules for their convenience.

djohnston 7y ago

Yeah I'm fine with this. People have been abusing ESA and IMO only actual service animals, those trained to perform a specific set of functions, should be allowed in the cabin.

gamblor956 7y ago
Airlines have allowed dogs and cats on planes and in cabins for decades...but they charge for it. ESA classification is being used by pet owners to avoid paying for transporting their pets.
- djohnston 7y ago
  I guess I was mistaken. I thought there was a separate compartment for pets aboard flights. That's what I assumed people were doing when they passed their dog-in-crate to the airline employee
  - kingbirdy 7y ago
    Animals that are small enough can travel in-cabin for an extra fee, generally in a crate under the seat, while larger animals fly in hard crates in the cargo area.

Wooo0pdaddy 7y ago

people who abuse service animal privileges are always scum. send these people to work camps when they attempt this scumbaggery ;)

stared 7y ago

It seems that flying with pets in cargo space is not only traumatizing to animals - it can be deadly: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/is-taking-your-pet-on-an-airplane-worth-the-risk-6241533/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/is-taking-your-pet-on-.... For me it is hardly surprising that people who love their dogs or cats (and essentially treat them as family members) would go the extra mile to take them in the cabin, to ensure their physical and emotional safety. The alternative is to treat them as a disposable piece of luggage (which IMHO is inhumane and cruel for a life companion, human or not).

lotsofpulp 7y ago
And I don’t trust random people’s pets to be well behaved and would rather not risk sitting next to them.
- i_am_nomad 7y ago
  As you shouldn’t, there have been at least two horrible incidents in the last year or so where “ESA” dogs mauled another passenger.
  - mirimir 7y ago
    I've been bitten three times by dogs. Twice as a door-to-door canvasser, and once by a friend's pet. And I've seen others bitten by friends' pets. So I would not be comfortable on a plane with any dog that wasn't in a cage, or at least muzzled.
azinman2 7y ago
There are special services for transporting animals outside of typical flights.
reaperducer 7y ago
it is hardly surprising that people who love their dogs or cats (and essentially treat them as family members), would go an extra mile to take them in the cabin, People have been flying with animals in the cabin for decades. I've done it three times with cats since the 1990's. The difference is that back then, it was to transport the animal from one side of the country to the other safely, so the animal stayed in its container under the seat. Today, attention whores treat other living creatures like they're fashion accessories, and let them run around the cabin and sit in the seats and do whatever they want, as long as it gets them the attention they crave.

bthomas 7y ago

Yes there is rampant ESA abuse, but note the airlines all charge $175 each way for a pet. Isn’t that obvious collusion? It’s $350 to take my small dog to LA for the weekend when the round trip ticket for a human is $100. She is great on planes and has never had even a minor incident.

reaperducer 7y ago
Isn’t that obvious collusion? No, because people have been flying with pets for as long as there have been planes. The difference now is people are abusing the system.
- bthomas 7y ago
  The problem is they all magically arrived at an exorbitant price that seems to reflect monopoly pricing. Also fees have standardized recently.
  - vageli 7y ago
    > The problem is they all magically arrived at an exorbitant price that seems to reflect monopoly pricing. Also fees have standardized recently. Playing devil's advocate, if the market determines prices then isn't settling on a price to be expected across practically indistinguishable providers of the same exact service?
manigandham 7y ago
What if there is a minor incident? What if it's a major incident? Animals are not people and have inherent risks. It's your choice to have a pet and fly with it.

vector_spaces 7y ago

I have a take on this that I suspect is going to be unpopular. I had a close friend who obviously had various mental health problems -- probably PTSD from a brutal childhood, major social anxiety -- but no diagnoses. I mean, I'm not a doctor, so feel free to take that with a grain of salt, but he quite clearly had issues, and limited means to go see one. Anyway, he regularly used cannabis. Although he probably would describe his use of cannabis as recreational, I think for him, and for a lot of people who use it with undiagnosed health problems, cannabis "feels good" because it's actually therapeutic. I think something similar can be said for pets and animals in general. Some people have disabilities that prevent them from living their lives to the fullest. Some people have pretty severe anxiety around travel. And some people in those categories don't even have diagnoses. All they know is their animals provide comfort. Sure, if you're someone with autism, bad social anxiety, or PTSD, it's known that there can be a lot of safety inherent to a relationship with a creature who won't judge you cruelly for being who you are. But on the less extreme side, some people are dealing with anxiety or depression driven by grief, shitty jobs, financial insecurity, or other issues, and having a loved pet close to you -- especially when you're traveling, which sucks for a lot of people -- can make an enormous difference. One thing that I see missing from discussion here is that airlines and businesses in general have a financial stake in limiting what's required of them with regard to accessibility, and historically they've fought and continue to fight tooth and nail to reduce such requirements, and even when they lose, their actual implementation is often minimal and piss-poor. So I don't think their "wins" are to be celebrated Further, I'd argue that the headline itself is sensationalized: turkeys and possums on planes are red herrings, as are the anecdotes in the comments around "so-and-so said they got their dog registered just so he could fly with her". Why did she want him to fly with her then? Sure, a passenger with a turkey or a possum might cost the airlines more money -- but to what extent is the average consumer even impacted by someone bringing a possum on the plane? Finally, to the folks who suddenly care about animal welfare when we're talking about folks with mental health related disabilities, you don't always have to fly with animals in cargo. A number of airlines allow animals to fly in the cabin with you, with certain restrictions.

h2odragon 7y ago
You make me wonder if i know you. I've never had one of my dogs "certified as a support animal" or any other official recognition beyond a rabies tag; but I've had a member of the pack who was "truck dog" and could go somewhere with me at need since forever. For all the reasons you mention, people who benefit from their animals presence are often worth tolerating, if not welcoming. One of my standards is that a service animal should be at least as polite and pleasant company as the person its assisting. I've never met a (formally designated or not) "familiar" that wasn't. There are however, folks who will do things like drag a terrified baby goat with them through walmart, because they just picked it up and they can say "service animal" ... I personally would like to do awful things to these folks, but thats why i have a truck dog with me, to remind me such things are impolite.

coldtea 7y ago

How we got from an era of common sense, to an era where everyone can declare all kinds of bizarro pets as a "service animal" is a mystery...

CivBase 7y ago
Seems pretty straightforward to me. Everyone is willing to abuse the system to an extent for personal gain (some more than others). Many systems provide special exceptions for emotional needs. It's a social taboo to question someone's assessment of their own emotional needs. Naturally, this means many people fake or exaggerate their emotional needs to get what they want. This isn't a new phenominon. The increased awareness of emotional health issues just means we keep seeing more systems implementing those exceptions. Hardening systems against exploitation is difficult and at some point not cost effective.
- coldtea 7y ago
  Well, I'm not surprised about the "Everyone is willing to abuse the system to an extent for personal gain" part. I'm surprised about the above: >It's a social taboo to question someone's assessment of their own emotional needs. When common sense gave way to such a taboo about everybody's touchy "feelings", however far-fetched they are?
  - CivBase 7y ago
    People often confuse skepticism with dismissal. Regardless, we do not have the means to accurately disagnose someone else's mental health without relying on their own assessment. We know mental health problems are real, but anyone can get themselves diagnosed with almost any mental issue if they're a convincing liar. What can we realistically do about it?
    - tpmoney 7y ago
      With severe enough issues, it's not necessarily a matter of confusing skepticism with dismissal, it's that either one is extremely anxiety inducing on top of the main issue. I've known people with serious anxiety disorders, and for them, one of the worst parts about going out in public was not dealing with their anxiety, but dealing with how others would react to their anxiety. The last thing they wanted or needed at the time when their issues were flaring up was an interrogation from some stranger, especially if that stranger was in a position to deny or delay them access to the help they needed. ESA abuse definitely makes it harder for people with real issues and real ESAs. And while I understand the issues it causes when people abuse the system, like most "public outcries" over abuses, I worry that we're going to overcorrect on this one.

devpts11 7y ago

Entitled people who make the lives of actual disabled people harder are the worst kind of selfish. It's also why Social Security hearings take several years to get for some people who aren't visibly disabled. This is because whole extended families apply since they have shady lawyers and doctors to help them invent conditions. It's a game to them, taking help away from people who need it.

fastball 7y ago
Which is why, when the goal is to guarantee rights, universal programs are generally better than discretionary / means-tested ones.

heelix 7y ago

Good. I can't even believe they would allow a (mini) horse on an airplane... much less back in meat space. https://www.thedrive.com/news/29332/us-dept-of-transportation-rules-airlines-must-allow-miniature-horses-as-service-animals https://www.thedrive.com/news/29332/us-dept-of-transportatio...

bobby_bob 7y ago
Miniature horses can actually be trained as service animals, "guide horses" for sight impaired are even protected by the same legislation as dogs in some places. In this context though, maybe it needs it's own seat.
quartz 7y ago
I thought this was weird too but my understanding is that miniature horses actually make fantastic service animals. That article touches on some of the reasons, including that they're housebroken, intelligent, capable of leading the blind, can be trained to have a very calm demeanor, are often more patient than dogs, mitigate issues with allergies because they don't shed and they can't get fleas. Also the big one: miniature horses live significantly longer than dogs, reducing the number of times an owner has to re-pair and form a new relationship with a new service animal.
- EdwardDiego 7y ago
  And some people have religious objections to dogs.

lxmorj 7y ago

I had an ESA certificate for a while and may get one again soon. I never lied to get one, either. That said, the online certification basically amounts to a long-form version of needing to answer yes to two questions: 1 - does flying stress you out? 2 - does your dog make you feel better? I never once used it for anything but flying, because things like bringing your dog to the groceries or the movies or a restaurant is just unnecessary. If you find yourself splitting your time between two cities that are >1 day drive apart, you have only a few choices: 1 - Don't have a dog over 18lbs 2 - Leave dog half the time 3 - Risk dog's life and guarantee a Very Bad Time under the plane 4 - Get ESA certificate I think airlines are leaving money on the table and should just have a relatively expensive travel-certification obedience course and charge a boatload for it. I'd happily pay $500 per year to have my dog authorized to fly in the cabin without an ESA (which incidentally cost less than half that). To pre-address the typical objections (and to steal from my own HN comment almost 3 years ago): "People are allergic!" For $100 a tiny shedding dog can ride in a very-not-dander-proof container. My dog is non-shedding. "They can be noisy!" So can your toddler. So can above tiny dog. Mine isn't. "It's like parking in a handicap spot!" No silly, my dog takes up my foot space, no one else's "The airline is losing money!" My dog & I weigh less combined than plenty of people who pay the same fare. I've also offered to buy a seat for my dog and leave her in a large crate on the seat. Not an option. "The guy next to you doesn't want a dog around!" See answer 1. Also, 90% of people are happy to be distracted from the horror of flying. Anyone who isn't can easily trade seats, since most people are happy to sit by the pup.

scotth 7y ago
> I think airlines are leaving money on the table and should just have a relatively expensive travel-certification obedience course and charge a boatload for it. I'd happily pay $500 per year to have my dog authorized to fly in the cabin without an ESA (which incidentally cost less than half that). Love this idea.
- lxmorj 7y ago
  I've toyed with the idea of drafting a fake press release with Southwest branding announcing a program like this and just hoping to catch the wave: fake news -> real excitement -> free PR -> real news Alas my design chops are shit and I'm a bit over-committed on projects as it is.

crag 7y ago

I was on a flight from FTL to NYC and saw some guy bring a duck on the flight. The duck was classified as his emotional support animal. It was a good idea, but once again people ruin a good thing.

code4tee 7y ago

Legit service animals are very well behaved and never a problem. There’s no question though that this issue of pets masquerading as service animals has become a big problem. Makes sense that places are starting to crack down.

Simulacra 7y ago

It’s about time! The practice has been abused so much that it has depreciated the publics perception of actual service animals.

steelframe 7y ago

I've fostered a dog that was fully trained as a service dog, but it was disqualified from being put into service because the vet found a hip dysplasia. The dog never pulled on its leash while I was walking it, and it immediately obeyed a bunch of commands (come, sit, heel, side, quiet, leave it, etc.) without the need for me to repeat. When I eventually got a dog of my own, I worked hard to train it because it was just so awesome to have a dog that was well behaved. The last time I saw a "service dog" on a plane, it looked like it weighed about as much as its owner. As soon as the plane door opened after landing, the dog lunged toward the door, banging back and forth in the aisle. The owner could barely hold it back, and they weren't giving any commands to the dog. The flight attendant made a snarky comment, "What a wonderfully trained service animal!" I'm sure they know exactly how a genuine service animal behaves, and they are probably completely fed up with the widespread abuse of the service animal exemption.

kohtatsu 7y ago
This jumped out at me like an easily solvable problem because of what you describe; we could have dogs complete an obedience test to earn the service dog designation. I didn't even think pets could be "upgraded" to service dogs, I figured they all came from licensed training camps.
- AdamJacobMuller 7y ago
  Not that I would do this, but, my dog would easily pass any of your service dog tests and he's only one year old. While there's lots of abuse by people bringing obviously untrained and unqualified animals on a flight, there is just as much abuse by people who take well trained dogs on flights and simply don't want to subject them to cargo transport -- the abuse is just much less noticed for obvious reasons. Personally, I would prefer to simply adjust the system so that any sufficiently capable dog can travel in the cabin for a fee, which would of course be waived for people with disabilities.
  - amerine 7y ago
    I find your solution wonderful, but I’m curious how to detect such trained dogs. Tests? Certifications? Licenses? Who’s and where from?

blackrock 7y ago

This culture with dogs and animals have reached nonsense proportions. It has gone to the other extreme, and it needs to be reigned back in. I was in an elevator, and some guy brought his dog to work, or something. I was surprised that I might have flinched, said WTF, and the dog flinched, and growled. At that moment I thought the dog was going to attack me, or the others in the small elevator cabin. And this was a medium to large sized dog, that was also beyond the owner’s ability to easily control. And I see more often now, people walking their bulldogs, as if they are nice and friendly pets. They are not. They are vicious attack animals. These dogs are not professionally trained. There is no certification that can guarantee that the dogs are safe to the public. And the owners are typically incompetent and irresponsible morons that shouldn’t have a dog to begin with. And there are those idiots that brings their large dogs into department stores, and walks them around as if it’s perfectly ok. It’s absolutely abnormal to be shopping at a Target, and to have to avoid some idiot’s large dog. It’s also irritating to walk through a store like Nordstrom Rack, where people bring their small dogs into the store, and let them sit inside the cart. There’s nothing worse than placing your new clothes into a shopping cart soiled by a dog’s urine or poop. But I digress, Nordstrom Rack must have a policy to allow these people that privilege to bring in their small dogs. I try to avoid the place if I can, because of this. I’ll vote with my wallet. I’m all for letting people have service animals, if they are blind, or physically handicapped. At least those service animals are professionally trained (or at least I hope there is a valid certification for that). But for all others with their supposedly “emotional support animals”, then they are just abusing the system, and taking advantage of the good graces of others. It is only a matter of time before one of these dogs violently acts out and attacks someone or a child in public. What will it take to outlaw this? Do we have to wait until one of these dogs kills a child in order to ban them?

Ghjklov 7y ago
>Do we have to wait until one of these dogs kills a child in order to ban them? I doubt even that will be enough. I share a lot of your fears. It hasn't happened yet, but one day someone is going to lose track/control of their pit bull here in California where even small women can take them on walks and it will attack me while I'm walking/running home. So I have to make sure to walk on busy streets so if I do get attacked, I at least have someone who can help. There was one time I was walking somewhere and two different pet owners crossed paths and their dogs started barking and aggressing each other, one of the owners even fell but on the bright side he didn't lose grasp of the leash and the girl with the big ass dog was able to keep her dog under control. Another time recently, I was going home with my sister and we walked past a house where some dog owners lost control of their dog which started running for us, but luckily it was friendly and wasn't out for blood. Small cute breed. But what about when it isn't? It's fucked.

fortran77 7y ago

Misleading title. Actual service dogs, like seeing eye dogs for the blind, are still allowed. Other, self-declared "emotional support animals" are banned. > "The U.S. Transportation Department on Wednesday proposed giving airlines the power to bar emotional support animals from cabins and limit the definition of a service animal to a trained dog."

Causality1 7y ago

It's baffling to me that there's no federal or state licensing system for service animals.

Cofike 7y ago

If we fly home for a few weeks for the holidays we'll often bring our dog with us. We pay $125 to bring them in the cabin and they must remain in a carrier under a seat for the duration of the flight. Cheaper than paying a kennel/dog sitter and just easier for everyone all together. No problems at all so far after years of doing this. The last time I was checking in at special services (due to the dog), the employee told me she registered her dog as an emotional support animal to bypass the fee. This was the airline employee giving this advice. At that point it was clear this was just a big joke. From what I understand now you need to have a doctor's note from a mental health professional and a bunch of other paperwork in order to bring your emotional support dog without a fee/carrier. I figured that would stop a lot of tom foolery, I guess not.

Zelphyr 7y ago

A member of my family is a medical professional and they told me that they frequently see people who either come in because they want a work excuse (that they don't really need) or want their animal classified as an emotional support animal. I think the most absurd one I heard was they wanted their chicken classified as an emotional support animal. It's definitely time to draw a line. EDIT: They told me that 99% of the time they say no to the latter request and will only give a work excuse if that person is genuinely sick. They also told me that they work with plenty of providers who just don't care and hand out the work excuses and emotional support certifications upon request.

jaclaz 7y ago
As a side note, and to be fair to chicken, my dad used to have one who was a "real" pet (of course at the time even the idea of "emotional support" by a pet or else was unknown). This chick used to come when called, jumped on my dad's lap on command, made "special" sounds for my father only and (it lived with the other chickens) for some reasons was always the first one to come out the henhouse in the morning and the last one to get into it in the evening. So - bar defining it an ESA for not paying something - that particular chicken actually was companion to my dad.

someonehere 7y ago

Good. It cheapens those with real service dogs and real needs. Taking advantage of the system with improperly trained “emotional therapy” animals who misbehave makes it harder for legit service dogs to have credibility in the real world. I have a friend with a legit service animal need who always gets crap from the public or employees at restaurants/businesses. My friend reminds employees of businesses about discrimination and then politely lets them know vaguely what the dog is for. But this is all because people are abusing the system with emotional ponies, therapy snakes, etc.. I took an international flight a few months ago and overheard the flight attendant talking to a passenger and mocking how lenient our service dog rules are.

mannykannot 7y ago

"[The U.S. Transportation Department] also wants comment on whether it should allow miniature horses to serve as service animals." Putting aside my instinct that this proposal is just too ridiculous to contemplate, has anyone considered the safety implications of a 70-180 kg strong-legged hoofed animal flying around the cabin in turbulence? Or running around after a crash?

EdwardDiego 7y ago
Miniature horses are used as service animals in Muslim countries, as they have religious biases against dogs. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30155540/ns/health-health_care/t/seeing-eye-horse-guides-blind-muslim-woman/ http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30155540/ns/health-health_care/t/s...
- mannykannot 7y ago
  To be clear, the only thing that strikes me as ridiculous about the proposal is having them in the cabin of airliners.

projectileboy 7y ago

Unfortunately this is a crummy situation for those who really need, say, emotional support animals, but sadly this is a situation where the bad apples ruined it for everyone. Two days ago I watched a “service animal” pee in the corner at Schiphol, and on a Delta flight I once put my bag under the seat in front of me, only to discover that I put it in a puddle of urine from yet another “service animal”. At this point it mostly feels out of control.

parliament32 7y ago
The funny part is nobody "needs" an ESA. Real service animals are put through a grueling multi-year training program, have a high wash-out rate, and cost tens of thousands of dollars. ESAs can be "registered" for free online with absolutely no training or assessment of any kind... because they don't actually perform any kind of "service" like real service animals do.

elamje 7y ago

The most shocking thing to me as a consumer is just how difficult it really is to fly a pet somewhere. This summer, my wife and I plan to go to Europe for a while, and want to bring our dog, so we don’t burden a friend with him for a month. I have gone on most major airlines websites, blogs, etc. and there is really no good source of information out there! In fact most US -> Europe airlines won’t even allow an animal in the cargo hold during summer months due to the heat. Okay, fine. So let’s bring him in the cabin. Is he under 15lbs? Nope, you cannot bring it with you. Instead we are currently exploring this very loophole because there is simply no other alternative. When you cross oceans there is really no way get your animal there without the help of other people. I guess the reason a solution doesn’t exist is because it’s somewhat a niche problem, and airlines are focused on volume. Any and all suggestions are welcomed. If you have a large dog that has flown internationally, please email me.

philliphaydon 7y ago
Why can't you put him in a doggy hotel. You would never be allowed to take a non-service dog to New Zealand, any (non-service dog) Animial going to NZ is put in quarantine for 1 month on arrival

busterarm 7y ago

This needs to be more widespread. People really abuse their animals and whole emotional support concept and I remember a few years ago the hundreds of people who thought it was okay to bring their emotional support pet to New York Comic Con. This shit has to stop.

asdff 7y ago

This whole song and dance is absurd. People are currently flying with their cat or whatever as a 'service animal'. It's pretty normalized and to be expected to see while traveling anywhere. Why not just let you fly with your pet to begin with?

easytiger 7y ago

Completely ban them [ESA] with no exceptions. It's ludicrous and very illustrative of a very American mindset. Namely to exploit every possible gap in any process or system despite the clarity that you are operating outside the intended scope of it. I know a woman who flew with her dog as an emotional support animal to assist with her anxiety. Her day job was as an air stewardess. The attitude is, if they don't stop you, it's not my fault I can exploit the system. You see it everywhere in America. Less so in Europe. Some examples of ridiculous behaviour by the owners: https://youtu.be/a5AzlCEagFY https://youtu.be/a5AzlCEagFY https://youtu.be/jCxE8BskmPE https://youtu.be/jCxE8BskmPE https://youtu.be/WkcxESqKlno https://youtu.be/WkcxESqKlno https://youtu.be/AO_mAfYM1Vo https://youtu.be/AO_mAfYM1Vo https://youtu.be/qJpREAfeluo https://youtu.be/qJpREAfeluo @17min https://youtu.be/-moq55oH5ro https://youtu.be/-moq55oH5ro https://youtu.be/GtPRrW3strM https://youtu.be/GtPRrW3strM - yes. It's a horse What you won't see on these videos is when the dog or pig needs to crap and piss. Which it will

TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago
> Completely ban them [ESA] with no exceptions. And what of the people who need them?
- easytiger 7y ago
  Apparently it's impossible to differentiate between someone who does need them and someone who is exploiting the system. Id argue they perhaps don't need them and the whole thing is a farce
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
EdwardDiego 7y ago
I think my favourite was the woman with the emotional support peacock: https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertglatter/2018/01/31/emotional-support-peacock-and-her-owner-denied-entry-on-recent-flight/#2fcead7f6375 https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertglatter/2018/01/31/emotio...

warmfuzzykitten 7y ago

The modern definition of service dog is a dog you want to bring into places that restrict dogs. Cheating is rampant.

cafard 7y ago

The best bakery I know of in Washington, DC, is run by a lawyer of considerable experience. He takes a very firm line against emotional support animals. Anyone wishing to argue the case finds out that he knows the law.

randyrand 7y ago

Seems like we just need some small percentage of flights to allow dogs.