Noticing increasing number of "Service" animals!!!

[cbr663]

I read about this a lot, but only recall one that I thought, nope no way a service animal.

 

And when wife and I tried to engage the lady in conversation about the dog (we have been engaged in the pedigree dog world for over 30 years and are true dog lovers) she was, to say the least defensive about the dog and what it did.

 

Not surprising. Questioning someone as to the nature of their disability or training of their support animal is very inappropriate and offensive. This is a great example of the systemic discrimination that disabled people face every day.

[sparks1093]

This can go back and forth forever, but I'll weigh in on navybankerteacher side here, sparks.

 

The way I read it is:

 

"No pets or other animals, except for certain necessary service animals of a disabled Guest, are allowed on board the Ship" meaning no pets at any time.

 

And:

 

"certain necessary service animals of a disabled Guest, are allowed on board the Ship, and only allowed when Cruise embarks, disembarks or stops at a United States port" meaning service animals are only allowed for US cruises.

 

Believe me, many countries do not have protections for disabled people who use service animals like we do in the US. Viking and other European river cruise lines do not allow guide dogs onboard.

 

I did a quick research of European access laws, here:

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiw9MDnpa_OAhXJ6IMKHVFrA3gQFggpMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.egdfed.org%2Foutput%2F1%2Fimages%2Ffiles%2FGuide%2520Dogs%2520report%2520from%2520EPRS.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHfNYMhlagbmOdiLLaJdCX54zpe7A

 

and found, for example, that Austrian law:

 

"The federal law does however not contain any provisions on access rights for guide dogs."

 

Now I see it, thanks.

[cbr663]

I love animals. I do not want to see all these pets in the grocery store when I am food shopping ect... Seeing eye dogs , no problem. Emotional support ???? different story. Saw a picture of a turkey on a delta flight...emotional support.

by the way I do not park in handicapped parking spots, they are a great thing for people who truly need them. If people would not trying to keep scamming the "system" things might be a little better for everyone.

 

Great example of the issue I posted earlier of the discrimination that disabled people receive when the true nature of their disability is disclosed. We are far from being an inclusive society.

[cbr663]

Get ready as you are going to be seeing much more changes: http://www.adatitleiii.com/2015/08/justice-department-applies-ada-title-iii-to-carnivals-cruise-ships-website-and-mobile-app-in-a-landmark-settlement/

 

One of the advantages of this agreement is the appointment of an executive level ADA officer, two ADA responsibility officers and ADA shipboard officers for each ship. My hope is that Carnival Corp takes this matter seriously and not just add these responsibilities to existing staff. Hiring fully trained, knowledgeable staff who have the authority to approve and deny requests ensure that those who deserve and need full protection of the ADA receive it while those who simply wish to travel with their pets are prevented from doing so.

[SteveH2508]

This can go back and forth forever, but I'll weigh in on navybankerteacher side here, sparks.

 

The way I read it is:

 

"No pets or other animals, except for certain necessary service animals of a disabled Guest, are allowed on board the Ship" meaning no pets at any time.

 

And:

 

"certain necessary service animals of a disabled Guest, are allowed on board the Ship, and only allowed when Cruise embarks, disembarks or stops at a United States port" meaning service animals are only allowed for US cruises.

 

Believe me, many countries do not have protections for disabled people who use service animals like we do in the US. Viking and other European river cruise lines do not allow guide dogs onboard.

 

I did a quick research of European access laws, here:

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiw9MDnpa_OAhXJ6IMKHVFrA3gQFggpMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.egdfed.org%2Foutput%2F1%2Fimages%2Ffiles%2FGuide%2520Dogs%2520report%2520from%2520EPRS.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHfNYMhlagbmOdiLLaJdCX54zpe7A

 

and found, for example, that Austrian law:

 

"The federal law does however not contain any provisions on access rights for guide dogs."

 

In UK we have the Equality Act 2010. That makes general provisions to outlaw discrimination against someone with a 'protected characteristic'. Protected characteristics includes disability, age, gender, sexual orientation, race and religion. Businesses are required to make 'reasonable adjustments' to cater for those with disabilities for example. There are not (that I am aware) specific rules like you seem to have in the US about service dogs, not asking certain questions etc..

 

If a cruise line stopped someone in UK boarding with a seeing eye dog, this would almost certainly contravene the Act.

[MommaBear55]

I love animals. I do not want to see all these pets in the grocery store when I am food shopping ect... Seeing eye dogs , no problem. Emotional support ???? different story. Saw a picture of a turkey on a delta flight...emotional support.

by the way I do not park in handicapped parking spots, they are a great thing for people who truly need them. If people would not trying to keep scamming the "system" things might be a little better for everyone.

 

Great example of the issue I posted earlier of the discrimination that disabled people receive when the true nature of their disability is disclosed. We are far from being an inclusive society.

 

How is this an example of discrimination? The writer acknowledges the right of ADA qualified animals to be in public spaces. ADA does not have provisions for pets or emotional support animals to be in public places in the US, as ADA is a US law. The first person I quoted also supports that the non qualified should not park in accessible parking spaces.

[chengkp75]

Get ready as you are going to be seeing much more changes: http://www.adatitleiii.com/2015/08/justice-department-applies-ada-title-iii-to-carnivals-cruise-ships-website-and-mobile-app-in-a-landmark-settlement/

 

One of the advantages of this agreement is the appointment of an executive level ADA officer, two ADA responsibility officers and ADA shipboard officers for each ship. My hope is that Carnival Corp takes this matter seriously and not just add these responsibilities to existing staff. Hiring fully trained, knowledgeable staff who have the authority to approve and deny requests ensure that those who deserve and need full protection of the ADA receive it while those who simply wish to travel with their pets are prevented from doing so.

 

I was very surprised that Carnival settled this, and would be surprised if there are "more changes". While not disagreeing that some changes needed to be made, from a customer service standpoint, and particularly with respect to reserving accessible cabins, I'm not sure whether or not the DOJ settlement with Carnival would stand up to a Supreme Court Challenge, given the language of Specter v. NCL. I think that if the DOJ tries to spread this settlement to other cruise lines, they, along with CLIA will take this to the Supreme Court, as the justices made it very clear that without further Congressional action, the ADA did not fully apply to foreign flag cruise ships. The justices were very specific in noting that Congressional action was required, not just Executive branch decisions or regulations.

[CPT Trips]

A settlement is not precedent, so it doesn't apply to other cases. Will Other cruise lines agree to the terms of this settlement if they face a similar case? Who knows?

If Carnival accepted the terms, they must have decided it made business sense and not outrageously expensive to implement.

My guess is that the shipboard ADA officer will be an additional duty rather than a dedicated individual.

All in all, I think the settlement benefits cruisers and potential cruisers with disabilities.

[xxoocruiser]

Nothing different to read - it just seems to indicate that ADA applies only when a ship embarks, disembarks or stops at a US port. By what stretch of imagination should a US statute apply to a ship which has no connection whatsoever with a US port?

 

ADA does not apply in it's entirety to ships embarking, disembarks and or stops at a US port. Chengkp75 stated it best back in post # 24 of this thread as follows:

The problem onboard cruise ships becomes more complex due to the fact that the ships do not have to fully comply with the ADA. In Specter v. NCL, the US Supreme Court ruled that accessibility is required if it does not contravene SOLAS, and if it can be done without major redesign of the ship. It also specifically states that barring a clear mandate from Congress (in other words a revision of the act to specifically include foreign flag ships as being subject to the ADA), then the ship's "internal policies and procedures" are not subject to the ADA. .

 

There is only 1 ship among the 100's in the entire cruise industry that must comply with ADA Law. That ship is NCL's Pride of America, which is registered in the USA, sails under the USA Flag, sails only within the USA and is permanently based in the USA.

[slidergirl]

Hotels that do not allow dogs are seeing more of these "service animals". Hotels who welcome dogs under 30lbs are seeing more larger dogs labeled as "service animals." Hotels who welcome all dogs (like mine) are seeing an increase in all size dogs labeled as "service animals." In some cases, the dogs are called service animals because we do not charge for those animals. If a pet arrives, we charge $150, used to provide a dog bed and bowls and treat, and to deep clean the room once the animal has departed to make it habitable for the next guest who may have an allergy to pet/pet dander/pet hair.

Had a woman check in yesterday with her service animal. First time I've had anyone plop down a piece of ID from an organization "certifying" her mixed breed small (a longhair doxie mix) dog was a service animal. The dog was very cute and very happy and VERY well behaved. No vest, no identifying harness, nothing that signaled the dog was a service animal. I'm totally OK with that, since it isn't a requirement. I've seen more Frenchies, chihuahuas, Yorkies, with the very apparent "SERVICE ANIMAL" vests that seem to imply "I'm not really a service dog, but my parents want me to say I am"...

 

We had a family check in with the family rabbit (a big white one) the other week. They were on a summer road trip in an RV and stopped to get a night at a "real" hotel with showers :p The rabbit did not try to pass herself off as a service animal ;)

 

People will scam for anything. If there were a discount for disabled travelers, I'm sure there would be a surge in people self-identifying as "disabled."

Edited August 7, 2016 by slidergirl

[lahlah57]

I probably wouldn't mind as long as it wasn't trying to eat out of my plate in the MDR.......yapping in the room next door or crapping on the promenade for me to step in it;)

 

The bottom line is people feel entitled even if it means "by any means possible to do what they want" . Cheaper than spending $$ to send their "service animal" to a lovely kennel.

Edited August 7, 2016 by lahlah57
Misspelling

[NLH Arizona]

Hotels that do not allow dogs are seeing more of these "service animals". Hotels who welcome dogs under 30lbs are seeing more larger dogs labeled as "service animals." Hotels who welcome all dogs (like mine) are seeing an increase in all size dogs labeled as "service animals." In some cases, the dogs are called service animals because we do not charge for those animals. If a pet arrives, we charge $150, used to provide a dog bed and bowls and treat, and to deep clean the room once the animal has departed to make it habitable for the next guest who may have an allergy to pet/pet dander/pet hair.

Had a woman check in yesterday with her service animal. First time I've had anyone plop down a piece of ID from an organization "certifying" her mixed breed small (a longhair doxie mix) dog was a service animal. The dog was very cute and very happy and VERY well behaved. No vest, no identifying harness, nothing that signaled the dog was a service animal. I'm totally OK with that, since it isn't a requirement. I've seen more Frenchies, chihuahuas, Yorkies, with the very apparent "SERVICE ANIMAL" vests that seem to imply "I'm not really a service dog, but my parents want me to say I am"...

 

We had a family check in with the family rabbit (a big white one) the other week. They were on a summer road trip in an RV and stopped to get a night at a "real" hotel with showers :p The rabbit did not try to pass herself off as a service animal ;)

 

People will scam for anything. If there were a discount for disabled travelers, I'm sure there would be a surge in people self-identifying as "disabled."

My pet peeve is folks lying about their dog being a service animal when they just don't want to leave fluffy behind or don't want to pay the charge (airline, hotel, etc.). In some states it is illegal to claim one's dog is a service animal when it is not.

 

I go on a lot of road trips during the summer months and I take my dog. I've always stayed at hotels or rental houses that allow dogs and I tell them upfront that she is an 80 pound Old English Sheepdog and even though she is not crated at home, I crate her if I'm not in the room/house. In my travels I see so many "emotional support dogs/pets" that are going everywhere and all that does is (1) make it difficult for real service dogs, because many of these fakers are not properly trained and interfere with the true working dogs and (2) make it hard for us who are honest and clean up after are dogs to find hotels/rental homes that will willingly take our pets.

 

I think there needs to be registration for service animals, just like handicap license plates/placards. It could be a simple card that is shown (with no information about the disability, etc.) and it will cut down on those who scam the system.

[VennDiagram]

Hotels that do not allow dogs are seeing more of these "service animals". Hotels who welcome dogs under 30lbs are seeing more larger dogs labeled as "service animals." Hotels who welcome all dogs (like mine) are seeing an increase in all size dogs labeled as "service animals." In some cases, the dogs are called service animals because we do not charge for those animals. If a pet arrives, we charge $150, used to provide a dog bed and bowls and treat, and to deep clean the room once the animal has departed to make it habitable for the next guest who may have an allergy to pet/pet dander/pet hair.

Had a woman check in yesterday with her service animal. First time I've had anyone plop down a piece of ID from an organization "certifying" her mixed breed small (a longhair doxie mix) dog was a service animal. The dog was very cute and very happy and VERY well behaved. No vest, no identifying harness, nothing that signaled the dog was a service animal. I'm totally OK with that, since it isn't a requirement. I've seen more Frenchies, chihuahuas, Yorkies, with the very apparent "SERVICE ANIMAL" vests that seem to imply "I'm not really a service dog, but my parents want me to say I am"...

 

We had a family check in with the family rabbit (a big white one) the other week. They were on a summer road trip in an RV and stopped to get a night at a "real" hotel with showers :p The rabbit did not try to pass herself off as a service animal ;)

 

People will scam for anything. If there were a discount for disabled travelers, I'm sure there would be a surge in people self-identifying as "disabled."

 

Thank you for the parts that I highlighted in bold red :D

 

Rental agents and landlords face similar challenges. I met many dogs masquerading as service animals. Also, in other circumstances, many owners who brag about how they scam the system :(

[Flamencacha]

Hotels that do not allow dogs are seeing more of these "service animals". Hotels who welcome dogs under 30lbs are seeing more larger dogs labeled as "service animals." Hotels who welcome all dogs (like mine) are seeing an increase in all size dogs labeled as "service animals." In some cases, the dogs are called service animals because we do not charge for those animals. If a pet arrives, we charge $150, used to provide a dog bed and bowls and treat, and to deep clean the room once the animal has departed to make it habitable for the next guest who may have an allergy to pet/pet dander/pet hair.

Had a woman check in yesterday with her service animal. First time I've had anyone plop down a piece of ID from an organization "certifying" her mixed breed small (a longhair doxie mix) dog was a service animal. The dog was very cute and very happy and VERY well behaved. No vest, no identifying harness, nothing that signaled the dog was a service animal. I'm totally OK with that, since it isn't a requirement. I've seen more Frenchies, chihuahuas, Yorkies, with the very apparent "SERVICE ANIMAL" vests that seem to imply "I'm not really a service dog, but my parents want me to say I am"...

 

We had a family check in with the family rabbit (a big white one) the other week. They were on a summer road trip in an RV and stopped to get a night at a "real" hotel with showers :p The rabbit did not try to pass herself off as a service animal ;)

 

People will scam for anything. If there were a discount for disabled travelers, I'm sure there would be a surge in people self-identifying as "disabled."

 

 

 

Renting a wheel chair at Disney was a scam too. That way their whole party would get to the front of the line. WDW had to take of that.

 

Scamming has become so common place it's disgusting. Bless you for having a hotel that allows for pets.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cbr663]

I was very surprised that Carnival settled this, and would be surprised if there are "more changes". While not disagreeing that some changes needed to be made, from a customer service standpoint, and particularly with respect to reserving accessible cabins, I'm not sure whether or not the DOJ settlement with Carnival would stand up to a Supreme Court Challenge, given the language of Specter v. NCL. I think that if the DOJ tries to spread this settlement to other cruise lines, they, along with CLIA will take this to the Supreme Court, as the justices made it very clear that without further Congressional action, the ADA did not fully apply to foreign flag cruise ships. The justices were very specific in noting that Congressional action was required, not just Executive branch decisions or regulations.

 

I am also surprised that Carnival Corp volunteered for this settlement. Carnival Corp has a long history of fighting and resisting with regard to accommodating people with disabilities. I suspect that there are two major forces at play here.

 

The first being that Carnival must think that the risk of continuing legal actions is futile. Specter vs NCL was in 2005 and even though it noted that the ADA did not apply fully to foreign flag cruise ships, it did note that the ADA did apply when these ships are in American waters. The cruise lines have steadily been fighting litigation since then and it is obvious that the law is changing on this matter.

 

I think this statement from a 2015 case sums it up best:

 

"...at the same time it claims to be exempt from any obligation imposed by U.S. law, Carnival grants itself – in the fine print of its passenger ticket contract – “the benefit of all Statutes of the United States of America providing for limitation and exoneration from liability and the procedures provided thereby.” ...Carnival would thus have the U.S. passenger stripped of the protections of U.S. law at the same time that it assures itself the benefit of those laws."

 

The second force at play is the changing demographic in the North American market place. Carnival Corp is operating in a mature market, and it's approach of, "build it and they will come" has possibly reached its saturation point. This at the same time that baby boomers are retiring in massive numbers.

 

While I have not researched the stats for the USA, here in Canada 2015 was the first time that we saw more people 65 years of age and older than those 16 and under. A dramatic shift indeed. (I would expect the USA to be very similar).

 

Add to this the fact that it is estimated that 57% of the Canadian population currently lives with a chronic illness, and it is only a matter of time when the majority of new cruise passengers will be those living with some sort of disability.

 

I suspect that continued growth in North America will in some way require that the cruise lines amend their marketing efforts to attract those very passengers that they have a long history of excluding.

[chengkp75]

Well, if you read the decisions in Spector, you'll see that what you've said above, that "it did note that the ADA did apply when these ships are in American waters" is still not quite right.

 

"Justice Kennedy delivered the Court's controlling opinion, which held that Title III did not apply to foreign ships' internal affairs, because there was no "clear congressional statement" showing an intent to do so. A clear statement was necessary before a general law could interfere with a foreign-vessel's internal affairs." (bolding mine)

 

So, while the ships must provide accessibility (not complete accessibility on older ships if it requires major reconstruction), how they deal with disabilities with onboard policies and procedures, i.e. how they handle service animals, is not subject to the ADA.

 

And your quote of a more recent case on the limitation of liability gets into those gray areas of international law. I believe that Carnival is using the benefits of consumer liability law since the ticket sale is consummated within the US. Also, the ticket contract is between the passenger and Carnival as a corporate entity, which is based in the US. Each Carnival ship, as well as nearly every ship in the world, is owned by a separate corporation, and essentially Carnival Cruise Lines contracts with say Carnival Triumph to provide the cruise, and this contract is outside the ticket contract, as Carnival states in the ticket contract as the right to change vessels. As with many things, there is considerable jurisdiction overlap when a foreign flag ship enters a US port. Generally, international law recognizes that flag state law prevails onboard the ship, unless the actions or conditions affect the safety or peace of the port. Generally, unless Congress specifically passes a law that says it applies to foreign ships in US waters, it doesn't. The US ECA specifically states that it applies to all ships of all nations, so it is enforceable on foreign ships. As Justice Kennedy says, the ADA does not specifically state that it applies to foreign ships, so it doesn't in the case of the ship's internal practices. The Court quite obviously sent this back to Congress for their decision as to whether Congress wanted the ADA to apply to foreign ships or not, and to date, Congress has decided not. This is the "clear statement" rule that the court has used for many, many decisions, requiring a "clear statement" from Congress.

Edited August 7, 2016 by chengkp75

[ScottsSweetie]

I am also surprised that Carnival Corp volunteered for this settlement. Carnival Corp has a long history of fighting and resisting with regard to accommodating people with disabilities. I suspect that there are two major forces at play here.

 

The first being that Carnival must think that the risk of continuing legal actions is futile. Specter vs NCL was in 2005 and even though it noted that the ADA did not apply fully to foreign flag cruise ships, it did note that the ADA did apply when these ships are in American waters. The cruise lines have steadily been fighting litigation since then and it is obvious that the law is changing on this matter.

 

I think this statement from a 2015 case sums it up best:

 

"...at the same time it claims to be exempt from any obligation imposed by U.S. law, Carnival grants itself – in the fine print of its passenger ticket contract – “the benefit of all Statutes of the United States of America providing for limitation and exoneration from liability and the procedures provided thereby.” ...Carnival would thus have the U.S. passenger stripped of the protections of U.S. law at the same time that it assures itself the benefit of those laws."

 

The second force at play is the changing demographic in the North American market place. Carnival Corp is operating in a mature market, and it's approach of, "build it and they will come" has possibly reached its saturation point. This at the same time that baby boomers are retiring in massive numbers.

 

While I have not researched the stats for the USA, here in Canada 2015 was the first time that we saw more people 65 years of age and older than those 16 and under. A dramatic shift indeed. (I would expect the USA to be very similar).

 

Add to this the fact that it is estimated that 57% of the Canadian population currently lives with a chronic illness, and it is only a matter of time when the majority of new cruise passengers will be those living with some sort of disability.

 

I suspect that continued growth in North America will in some way require that the cruise lines amend their marketing efforts to attract those very passengers that they have a long history of excluding.

 

On these points, though, you must realize that while the demographic has changed, so has life expectancy and general health. Years ago, one's life span didn't go much past 65.

 

Now, 65 is the new 40. Many more 65 year old people are still in shape, still working full time, and nowhere near the physicality of a 65 year old many years ago. :)

[cherylgrrl]

Having spent 20 months raising a guide dog puppy for the blind, I can attest to the amazing amount of training these dogs go through. Not only is this training essential in executing their assistance to the blind person, but they also are trained to the point where they do not pose the typical problems experienced with pet dogs in public areas like airports, restaurants, and stores.

 

Yes, they are trained to potty on command on whatever surface is available--and not go again until their owner locates an appropriate place, removes their jacket, and gives them a command. Typically on cruise ships they are provided a small square of turf which is cleaned frequently by the staff. They do not lift their legs wherever they go (as did a "service" dog I was watching in the beautiful Banff Springs Hotel), beg food off of the table (as did a "service" dog seated with a couple near us in a Yosemite restaurant) or start fights with other animals. Even legitimate service animals do not generally receive this training, and so are problematic in travel situations. I agree that it is nice that more people are able to travel more easily with service animals, but there is a downside to their increased presence.

 

Air travel seems to have been more impacted than cruise travel thus far, but the number of people who have brought service miniature horses, service snakes, service kangaroos, service tortoises, service pot belly pigs, etc. into airline cabins attest to the possibility that cruise lines will have to deal with these requests in the future under the U.S. ADA regulations.

[CPT Trips]

SNIP

 

We had a family check in with the family rabbit (a big white one) the other week. They were on a summer road trip in an RV and stopped to get a night at a "real" hotel with showers :p The rabbit did not try to pass herself off as a service animal ;)

 

SNIP

 

 

;) :)

 

Did the rabbit have pills? One to make it larger and one to make it small? Did mother's pill do anything at all?

Edited August 7, 2016 by CPT Trips

[CPT Trips]

 

SNIP

 

Air travel seems to have been more impacted than cruise travel thus far, but the number of people who have brought service miniature horses, service snakes, service kangaroos, service tortoises, service pot belly pigs, etc. into airline cabins attest to the possibility that cruise lines will have to deal with these requests in the future under the U.S. ADA regulations.

 

Other than dogs, miniature horses are the only animal that can be a service animal under the ADA.

 

Perhaps by the Carnival settlement and accessibility "specialists" they will cut down on the bs some people try to pull.

Edited August 7, 2016 by CPT Trips

[Ex techie]

Other than dogs, miniature horses are the only animal that can be a service animal under the ADA.

 

Perhaps by the Carnival settlement and accessibility "specialists" they will cut down on the bs some people try to pull.

 

Yep!

And hopefully it will help! :)

A specialist in the terminal would also help prevent the animal even being brought aboard in the first place if they can identify characteristics and behavior's beforehand.

Someone able to differentiate between a true service animal and bogus comfort or support animal's that have owners who claim otherwise.

 

Time to clamp down on the abusers, and support the real users IMO.

 

ex techie

[NLH Arizona]

Yep!

And hopefully it will help! :)

A specialist in the terminal would also help prevent the animal even being brought aboard in the first place if they can identify characteristics and behavior's beforehand.

Someone able to differentiate between a true service animal and bogus comfort or support animal's that have owners who claim otherwise.

 

Time to clamp down on the abusers, and support the real users IMO.

 

ex techie

I wish when a dog misbehaves on a ship, they would be told to leave. I've read stories on Cruise Critic of dogs pooping in pubic areas (and even though someone told the owners, they didn't pick up after them), excessive barking, snapping at people walking past them, sitting on tables at the buffet, sitting on chairs in the MDR and being fed off the table, etc.

[lahlah57]

;) :)

 

Did the rabbit have pills? One to make it larger and one to make it small? Did mother's pill do anything at all?

 

Alice certainly had her doubts;)

[Ex techie]

I wish when a dog misbehaves on a ship, they would be told to leave. I've read stories on Cruise Critic of dogs pooping in pubic areas (and even though someone told the owners, they didn't pick up after them), excessive barking, snapping at people walking past them, sitting on tables at the buffet, sitting on chairs in the MDR and being fed off the table, etc.

 

Me too.

I has to stop. For everyones benefit.

Someone will get bitten, or injured worse.

 

ex techie

[Ex techie]

IMO, the safety officer and environmental officer aboard any ship should both be trained in ADA requirements for foreign flagged cruise ships, and equipped to not only monitor service animals, but document via video the behavior of these animals.

Then remove the owners of the animal if they blatantly endorse and encourage behavior that is not within the regulations.

 

With such evidence, it would not be hard for shoreside to contest any complaints or legal action.

 

ex techie