chengkp75

No cruise line, nor any hotel in the US, can ask you to prove that you have a disability that requires an accessible room. All they can do is ask the customer to "attest" that they require an accessible room.

That would be fine, and that addresses the issues I mention, of the "code of conduct", but the poster I was responding to, implied that everyone onboard should be notified that any dogs seen onboard are "certified" service animals.

I don't know the exact physics of a diabetic alert dog, but I do know that the ADA specifically spells out that a service animal can be carried in the owner's arms.

If you go into a store or restaurant at home, and there is a dog sitting under the table, are you entitled to know whether the dog is a service animal or not? That is between the dog's owner and the business owner, not you. If you have a legitimate concern about the dog, such as an allergy or fear, then that is between you and the business owner, not between you and the dog's owner. How would you suggest that the "other pax" on the cruise get to "know" if the dog is a service animal or not? First you want the dog to be a service animal according to the ADA definition, but then you "don't care" about the ADA's requirement for privacy of the disabled person so that the dog has to wear a scarlet letter, just to please you? Sorry, but having been an ADA compliance officer on cruise ships, I don't like the fake animals any more than folks here, but I also respect the privacy of the disabled, and their right to live as normal a life as possible, without having to meet your requirements. Should everyone need to know if you have a colostomy bag, and can have odors around you from this disability? Should everyone know that you have Asperger's syndrome, and may frequently yell out obscenities, and are not just some drunk? It is the business owner's decision as to whether a service animal affects the essential nature of their business, but they don't have to advertise when a service animal is present in the business.

Yeah, that 3 watt USB fan (even if there are 2000 of them onboard all running at the same time), really makes a difference when you are generating 40,000,000 watts of power for propulsion, and 8,000,000 watts of power for the hotel load. Even if every cabin had a 5-6" fan, drawing about 60 watts, that would be less than 0.25% of the electrical load.

Per the ADA, there is no required documentation for a service animal, and it is illegal to ask for it. I have seen quite a few toy breeds used for diabetic detection dogs, as they need to be carried in the owner's arms or a chest carrier to sniff the owner's breath. Given that about 1 in 10 US citizens are diabetic, and that number is growing, it wouldn't surprise me to see that all four animals were diabetic alert dogs. Not saying some of them might be fake, but it wouldn't be out of consideration. As per the ADA, there is no requirement to have a vest or any other form of identification on the animal that it is a service animal. Or, should they shame the owner by making a PA announcement that "so and so" has a small service dog, that alerts when the person is having a seizure or diabetic incident. I do not want to see dogs that are not service animals, or therapy dogs (as Viking's new policy specifically calls out), allowed onboard. However, to jump to conclusions based on the breed or size of the dog is discriminatory, without knowing what the disability the person has, which is not legal for Viking to ask about, nor is it the business of anyone onboard. PTSD dogs and other psychiatric therapy dogs are covered by the ADA, and can perform tasks that no one would think of as being done by a "true" service dog, and some that the larger, more "traditional" breeds would not be a good match for. It all comes down to what I think is the only real solution to this, and that is for the cruise lines, either individually, or as an industry via CLIA, to adopt a "Service Animal Code of Conduct" (as is allowed under Spector v NCL) and remove any animals, and their owners, that don't meet this code of conduct. I have said this for years now, on many forums on CC.

If you think that Viking is the outlier with regards to having "pets" onboard masquerading as service animals, you haven't read any of the other forums here on CC, as I have responded to threads about dogs in strollers, zebra striped poodles, and the like, on every single major (and some minor) cruise line forum. It is an industry wide problem (with cruises from the US), and stems from poor training of employees in the limits of the ADA.

I basically agree with you, Andy. But, triage would dictate whether or not a service animal made it into a lifeboat (and certainly not a raft), as my duty as On Scene Commander would be, as you say, to the humans first, and then only if there is aa whole lot of room would I allow a dog in the boat. The amount of frightened energy in a lifeboat from over a hundred non-mariners would send even the best trained service animal into a frenzy, and in an enclosed boat, that is not a good place to have a panicked dog.

Did I say that? What I said was that the USPH/CDC regulations are stricter than virtually any local/state health regulation in the US. This has been confirmed by the USPH inspectors themselves, most of whom were formerly state/local health inspectors prior to joining USPH.

That may be true for pools, but the turbulence in a hot tub accelerates the off-gassing. Realize that the cruise ships do not follow your local/state health regulations, but those of the CDC, so read the Vessel Sanitation Plan for the required tests and limits. Just a note, that the CDC did a study of several hundred land pools, and found that over 80% of them would fail the CDC's requirements, and about 70% of child splash areas would be immediately closed if subject to the CDC's requirements. Are public hot tubs appealing? Not to me personally. Are they safe? Yes.

What do you mean by "electronic adapters"? If the watch was damaged, that would be a fault in the charger, which is designed to stop high voltage from being sent to the watch, and unless you are talking about thousands of volts coming from the outlet, a properly functioning charger will not allow enough through to damage the watch. Yes, the want to inspect extensions/power strips for wear and tear, and for surge protection, but even if a surge protector fails, it won't send a high voltage to the electronics plugged into it, again unless it is thousands of volts. You do not see the voltage spikes of thousands of volts (caused by lightning or failed transformers) that happen on land, on a ship. It just physically cannot happen. Are you saying that the smart watch was damaged by being plugged into a surge protector?

What do you mean by "electronic adapters"? I would be very surprised that a smart watch charger let something through that would damage the watch, unless it was the charger itself that failed, and that would not necessarily be a fault of the ship's electrical supply. And, yes, they want to inspect extension cords or power strips for wear and tear and surge protectors, but even when a surge protector fails, it does not damage the "downstream" electronics.

Have you experienced this? Because voltage spikes on ships are extremely rare (almost never), due to the design of the power system. Which is why surge protectors, in addition to being dangerous on ships, are not needed, and none of the ship's electronics are protected by them.

Yes, but you don't need a passport for a closed loop cruise out of the US. And, I agree that the only information a cruise line would possibly have is to vet the passengers against a sex offender database, and that would be the only instance of being denied boarding. The passenger does risk being denied going ashore in a country when the ship gets there, or even being taken into custody and deported by the local government.

Combined chlorine, in the form of chloramines will off-gas to the atmosphere.

See post #61.

So, the evaporation lowers the total chlorine, and the measuring sensors and dosing pumps keep replenishing it, and you have a stable chlorine level. And, neither dpd or titration give a continuous reading, which the amperometric sensors used on ships do.

Depending on what kind of test strips are used, the pink coloration that determines chlorine level can get bleached out at high chlorine levels, so the strip appears to read zero. As for total chlorine level, it is interesting that home pool and hot tub manufacturers recommend a 1-3ppm level, while the USPH/CDC requires a 1-4ppm level for a pool, and a 3-10ppm level for a hot tub, and the CDC recommends this for all public hot tubs (though they have no jurisdiction over land hot tubs). https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/swimming/aquatics-professionals/operating-public-hot-tubs.html

As I said, the maximum time between draining is 72 hours, per USPH/CDC regulation. Very typically, when the tub is full and covered with netting, they are allowing the "super-chlorination" to dissipate down to normal operating levels of chlorine, before allowing anyone in.

Actually, both NCL and RCI use DNV as their classification societies, so they must meet the exact same criteria for maintenance and structural integrity.

Chlorine generators are not approved by the USPH/CDC for use in cruise ship recreational water facilities, because they don't react to changes in bather load as quickly as the chlorine and pH meters and liquid dosing pumps do.

No, the sensors measure "residual" chlorine, which is the free chlorine level after the water comes back to the pump from the hot tub, and some of the chlorine has been used up in sanitizing. It is the amount of "free chlorine" that has not been used up. If there was 0ppm of residual chlorine, the ship would be in serious trouble at the next USPH inspection, as the recording charts are kept for a year for review.

Let's put out some facts about ship's hot tubs, both public and private. The hot tubs are kept at a constant chlorine level of 3-10ppm, much higher than the recommended 3ppm for home hot tubs. Further, it is maintained at this level constantly, since while the water is being recirculated, it passes a chlorine content meter, and the reading from this meter adjusts the chlorine dosing pump that runs all the time. The chlorine content of the hot tub is recorded on a chart, and is kept for review by the USPH, when they make their inspections. By regulation, the water in all hot tubs must be changed every 72 hours, but most lines do it nightly. When the hot tub is drained, it is washed with bleach, and then "super-chlorinated" to 20ppm, and circulated for one hour, before being diluted to normal, in order to remove any "bio-film" anywhere in the piping system. Any time there is a fecal accident, the hot tub must be drained and sanitized using 100ppm chlorine. Individual (cabin) hot tubs must be chlorinated to 10ppm, and circulated for 1 hour, between guests. One thing that can affect how well chlorine sanitizes the water is sunscreen. This forms an oily layer that coats the surface of the water, and restricts the chlorine's ability to react with the oxygen in the air, limiting the sanitizing reaction. This is why cruise ships are required to have showers on deck near pools and hot tubs, to rinse off sunscreen before going in the pools/tubs.

As I've said, the FAA changed the regulations from the CAA to restrict the types of animals that were to be considered as ESA for air travel. Since the ADA, which partially applies to cruise ships, does not allow protections for ESA in settings other than housing or air travel, it is only the fact that the cruise lines do not enforce the policies and procedures of the ADA that allow these dogs onboard. Even if the passenger comes up with a "task" that the dog is supposed to perform for them, if the dog does not meet the code of conduct, or the owner does things that affect the health and safety of others, they can be required to leave the ship, just as any business in the US can require a person to leave if the service animal disrupts the business, or misbehaves.

I will just say that this is apparently a commonly held misconception regarding service dogs. While 28CFR36.104 defines a service animal as one which does "work or tasks" for the benefit of an individual, and it has "tasks" pluralized. However, 28CFR36.302(c)(6) states that an accommodation may ask what "work or task" the animal is trained to perform, with "task" in the singular. And, in the DOJ Guidance document for the ADA, it explains that the dog: "must be trained to take a specific action" (bolding is mine, and indicates that a singular action is required under the DOJ interpretation of the law. And, further, if the dog does "work" for the benefit of the owner, it is not required to perform any tasks, though it is a little muddy as to what is "work" and what is a "task".