Top

news

Stories

 

Check Your Faux Service Dog at the Door

Seattle’s leading anti-animal rights activist turns her attention to tightening the leash on service dogs.

Ellen Taft's counterintuitive take on animal rights took root many years ago in Minnesota, where, as a 31-year-old grad student, she was violently mauled by a pair of neighborhood dogs. Taft was subsequently successful in having her attackers euthanized before moving to Seattle, where, she says, "dogs have immense social privilege." Here, she successfully helped close an off-leash area at Volunteer Park, which is near her Capitol Hill home.

While Taft has taken stands opposing the legalization of pot-bellied pigs and pygmy goats as domestic pets, screwing with the rights of canines is her true passion (see John Metcalfe's "Pygmy Goats: Not In My Neighborhood," SW, 9/26/07). Now, as a founding member of Families and Dogs Against Fighting Breeds (FDAFB), she is appealing to the United States Department of Justice to dramatically tighten the standards for what service dogs are and who can make use of them (the DOJ is currently conducting a formal review of certain ADA standards, and is accepting public input through mid-August). In particular, Taft wants all service dogs to be publicly registered and clad in easily identifiable vests, and wants certain "fighting breeds"—namely pit bulls—to be barred from being used in legally protected capacities of assistance. She also wants the authorities to come down hard on people who fraudulently claim to be using service dogs just to get their pet into a restaurant or store, something Taft claims to have witnessed in abundance.

"There are many types of bogus service dogs," she says. "Basically all [a dog owner] has to do is claim it's a service dog. And the store owners are petrified of being sued."

When the American Disabilities Act was signed into law in 1990, it devoted scant, vague language to service animals, which are guaranteed accommodation alongside their owners in any venue, public or private, that humans are granted access to. Since then, the woebegone notion of golden retrievers serving as seeing-eye dogs for the blind has expanded to multiple conditions, breeds, and even species, to the point where one of the main thrusts of the DOJ's proposed tightening is to restrict—no bullshit—the use of service iguanas, snakes, and horses, among other creatures.

The ADA does not require state-sanctioned training or registration of service animals, and did not go at great length into what afflictions, physical and otherwise, would justify a citizen's use of one. The ADA also effectively disabled more stringent local regulations concerning service dogs, such as Washington's White Cane Laws. Consequently, Americans now abide by a federal service-animal law currently vague enough to drive a truck—or at least a horse—through, with "just take their word for it" being the practical standard that quashes any suspicion of fraud.

"We give people the benefit of the doubt," says Seattle Police Department spokesperson Mark Jamieson. "Merchants have the right to refuse service to people, but [if they're alleged to have violated someone's civil rights], that would be a civil claim. The best we could do is document both sides of the story and let the lawyers and courts sort it out."

"I think [the current service-dog regulations] are pretty laissez-faire," adds Seattle Animal Shelter spokesperson Don Jordan. "You look at the federal statutes on this, and there isn't any training requirement. And a person's disability is such a wide-ranging possibility that someone could claim service-animal status for a condition that may not be evident to the human eye. I get calls from business owners quite frequently, and my advice is that if [a patron] is claiming it's a service animal, you might want to allow them into your establishment. I think business owners should play it safe in this regard."

Jordan's is a sentiment echoed by the City of Seattle's Office of Civil Rights, which in 2007 completed investigations of 10 instances in which service-dog owners alleged to have not been properly accommodated. On its Web site, the Office states that "Current law asks people to assume the sincerity of their customers." Meanwhile, King County Metro allows service and small dogs to board its buses for free, whereas larger dogs that cannot fit on a passenger's lap are supposed to be charged full adult fare. However, if there is a question as to whether a large dog is a legitimate service dog, Metro spokesperson Linda Thielke says, "Bus drivers are instructed just to believe the customer and let it ride free."

But what really gnaws at Taft is the preponderance of dogs in establishments serving food or drink. Legally, places such as this are only permitted to allow animals indoors if they are service animals, but there is no shortage of scofflaws about town.

"I stay away from all cafes, restaurants, and grocery stores where there are so-called service dogs," says Taft. "[And] when I see a pit bull, I just leave."

Mike Seaward is no dog-hater, but when a canine enters the Roosevelt Trader Joe's, which he manages, he views it as a surefire opportunity to piss someone off. When he asks a customer if his or her dog is a service animal, he or she tends to get huffy. And if he or his employees don't inquire, and a non-service dog saunters into the produce aisle undetected, his store is liable to be cited for a health-code violation.

1 | 2 | Next Page >>
 
  • GordaLoca 01/23/2012 11:54:00 AM

    The DOJ has issued guidelines for business owners re: service dogs (Google "Commonly Asked Questions About Service Dogs In Places of Business"). If you or an employee don't get a straight answer to a simple question - "What is your dog trained to do to assist you?" - you have every right to question a customer's claim that their dog is a service dog and invite them to return WITHOUT their dog should the dog's behavior be dangerous or disruptive. I urge you to take advantage of your legal right to exclude bogus "service dogs" whose thoughtless owners are giving true service dog teams a bad name. I for one won't shop at a large chain grocery store in my neighborhood because it's overrun with elderly people and their ill-mannered, poorly trained pets, which they are allowed to bring with them because their claims that they're service dogs are accepted without question. I'm in the process of training my first service dog, and the last thing he needs is these horrible beasts distracting, and even attacking, him because laws forbidding people and their dogs from interfering with service dogs and dogs being trained as service dogs (which have the same legal status here in California) because store management are cowards.

  • Chela 01/18/2012 10:04:00 PM

    Most of you people disgust me, along with the people who claim their pets to be service dogs. First off, I have PTSD which is way out of control. I'm absolutely terrified to leave home alone, enter any building alone, and especially live alone. I've had two service dogs. My first was a pitbull I had for 7 years before he passed away from cancer. My current is a German shepherd. I've raised both from puppies and trained myself under the guidance of a Petsmart trainer due to the low cost. My shepherd ihas passed the canine good citizens test. I've taught him many things to make my life bearable. I take medication that heavily sedates me to stop flashbacks of being raped, beaten, and stabbed. I don't always here the alarm, so he paws, nudges, and licks me awake. Before I enter my home and certain places, Gary is trained to enter, search, and come back to me to let me know it's safe. I have panic attacks that he helps by laying on my back so the pressure helps calm me before it progresses. He is trained to growl, bear teeth, and look ferocious if I rub the tip of his ear, yet he would never actually attack. He does so much for me, and without him, I'd probably be institutionalized. Any dog could do the things he does from me (though I doubt a Chihuahua would look ferocious) but I feel the most comfortable with my choices. Zephyr, my pit, always wore a vest and no one questioned me really. A few years ago, more and more people started questioning me when they'd see his vest. Few people were rude, and I would try and give vague answers. Even that has triggered panic attacks and flashbacks. So I stopped putting the vest on him, but now even more people ask. As for registering myself as disabled, I don't feel like that's fair. I don't want my name on a list of people anyone can access, which I'm assuming would be the case in order for business owners and employees to verify. I also will not be obligated to pay thousands of dollars that I can't afford for training that I have already accomplished myself, due to a disability I have, that I certainly never asked for. However, if the government decided to raise taxes and pay for the training they would require, I'm fine with that. If they pay for the certification my SD would require, I'm fine with that. My point being, there are real invisible disabilities, and people are able to cope with their service dogs. For most of us, these dogs double as a valuable medical tool and a beloved friend.

  • 10/16/2011 5:50:00 PM

    It's hard to believe that anyone thinks all service dogs should be registered... at taxpayers expense no less. That is asking all people with disabilities and a service dog to register themselves. I think that is overstepping the boundaries of anyone's civil rights. And, so what if someone fakes a service dog to get into a restaurant?? Really? You think the law should come down "hard" on them for such a HUGE CRIME? Get a grip on reality. I am sorry you were attacked by a dog in the past. I was attacked by a human male and almost lost my life. Should we make sure all those human males are registered and don't allow them in any place where I want to go because I don't want to be the victim of an attack again?

  • Pamela 09/13/2011 8:40:00 PM

    I am a pet owner and a restaurant owner. These days anyone can put a vest or tag - purchased online - on their pets and declare them a "Service Dog". So, now I have pitbulls, chihuahuas, akitas, rottweilers,shih-tzus, etc. coming in who are very obviuosly NOT trained service dogs. If I ask the owner to take their dogs out onto the patio, they scream at me and threaten to sue me. Then they tell me that they take their dogs to schools, hospitals - so they can take them anywhere. That is a "Therapy Dog" and they are not allowed in restaurants or grocery stores. But most of these dogs are not even that. This fast-growing group of people who think they must take their doggies everywhere with them have ruined it for the truly legitimate service dogs. Because of these people I have customers complaining and leaving. Many are allergic or fearful of dogs. I've had dog fights, constant barking, dog poop, marking, kids crying, customers yelling at me to get the dogs out, and one local business had a customer severly bitten in the face by a "service dog", which resulted in a massive law suit to the store. But if these people have these "tags" on their pet, the A.D.A. says I have to let them in or they will sue me. Since people are abusing a law that was supposed to protect those who truly needed assistance, there now needs to be strict regulations put into place to protect business owners and other customers. If anyone reading these comments is guilty of what I have described above and your dog is not a highly trained "Service Dog" and you do not truly need your dog with you, then shame on you for ruining for those who do.

  • Shelly 09/02/2011 5:18:00 AM

    Ellen Taft sounds like an uneducated idiot. You tell my neighbor boy that he can no longer use his pitty service dog, the dog that was specifically trained to help him retain a certain amount of function and normalcy. To the fool saying that a seizure detection dog cannot be small, really? Not only does mine bring me all kinds of items, but she alerts me to an immanent oncoming seizure. She doesn't have to drag me anywhere. I doubt you even have seizures.

  • wiseone 08/19/2011 12:12:00 PM

    A service dog should have some type of ID and should be trained to be out in public owner should be extremly mindful of there dogs around food don't let there dog's nose touch things or food and be very clean and quite do what you need to do get in and out and always rember not everyone wants a animal in a house let alone in a public area.

  • Chatnuptime1 02/11/2011 5:28:00 AM

    First of all ADA does not require certication. Another loop hole in the whole vague law in and of itself. There are such things as "expectations" of owner and service animal were it concerns the public and safety therein. 2nd of all after having read tons of state and federal regulations on the matter there isn't even an "official docoument or authorizing agency that could hand you that "certification" legally because again the ADA does not ask for it. If you were to scan the internet for such (certification ) you will find that they can charge you an arm and a leg if you have still have them. I have heard horror stories on people being charged a fortune by trainer companies for such animals and their quality leaves much to be desired. Yes because of a vacuum in regards to certifcation of not only the assistant training and the given disability of its owner a large ponzy scheme of things has filled the gap in what is real and what is not. And real people those that are disabled and often on strict budgets are litterally being ripped off just to show someone that this dog or that dog is legit. Now here is how I think it should go down. I have trained animals for dog shows professionally for nearly 30 years. I have come across temperments of animals great and small. If the ADA wishes to help the disabled they could research effective means to creating a body of evidence for certification. This however is costly not only in terms of legislation but also in inforcement. From the standpoint of protecting the consumer the future owner of the trained animal there has to be a certification for them, and a watch dog agency on those that say they "train" service animals. If you don't create such a body then anyone can say that they do this and we are back to square one. Buyer beware. Thirdly but not last in its importants is uniform expecations by all agencies and the public. Just as we have laws stating that all buildings used for the public must have accessabillity to the disabled and that is automatic doors, wide enough for a wheel chair to get thru, even in the toilet. Low vision aids brail on elevator buttons and signs. Captioning for news and some T.V broadcasts although I find that the deaf are really getting the raw end of the communication stick in many areas like DMV, Social Security offices and Welfare Buildings and Public Health. Most if not all their buildings do not serve the Deaf in any way shape or form. But that is another story. If people see the need to control a commodity "service animals" then they better be ready to control the mannor that it is regulated, dispensed and purchased. If they don't the disabled are the ones that are gonna get the short straw. As for what breed of animal is suitable for the job at hand that is a question best left with the handler. I would not expect a foot long dog to pull a wheel chair but at the same time so long as the dog is physically and mentally up to the task banning the a breed is crazy and fueled by bias prejudice. A highly trained pit bull on a bus tugging its handler about in a wheel chair is a good fit. They are low in stature, and have the body type for such a task. They are easy to train and love the work out. Many such pit bulls have never been in a fight and are by reason of their jobs are very disciplined. Its not the breed you have to worry about its the handler or the lack of handling in the right mannor that is of concern. Its not its fault it has the reputation it does. People very ugly people chose to use this animal for fighting, any dog can fight and get viscious. Chickens, and even fish can do this. Self preservation is a built in instinct. When I am confronted with a dog in the park I take the dog by the merit of its owner. If the owner seems to me that he or she cannot control her animal then the animal is a threat by reason of the owners lack of disciplin and getting it under control. Dogs aren't pets in my book. They are intelegent and need disciplin and meaningful things to do. Dogs can and should be trained in the house to do things even when your not handicapped. They love to work. They are happiest when they are working and learning. I have not one ounce of respect for people that don't train their dogs basic mannors they have already jeapordized the relationship by not providing structure in its life. Thats a dangerous handler right there. Its like giving your teenager the keys to the car without teaching him how to drive, he doesn't know the rules you didn't take the time to teach him. Accidents are the least of your worries. You would not knowingly do this. Breed banning doesn't cure this. If your gonna cut down on risks with animals you have to target the problem.. its the owners. If you have need of a liscence to ge married , have a car, or have a busisness you should need to qualify to get a liscence to have a pet. Train first .. then certify that you know what your doing with your investment . Buy your pet and own up to your responsibility to it. That would cut down drastically not only in run away dogs that get lost, hungry, scared, injured, abused, end up chewing someones leg off because of all the above, it would also cut down on shelters over crowding, and slow down the market for animals all together. Dog fighters need a life sentence. I am sorry that I just can't see letting them go off so easily. They create a weapon and it was with intention to do harm.

  • Hookabooka 01/11/2011 2:04:00 AM

    Where would you report people you know have no handicap but faked it to get a certification for a service dog just so it doesn't have to stay home without the owner?

  • Marie 12/21/2010 9:52:00 PM

    Count me among the ones that thinks Ms. Taft is being ridiculous. I have an 'invisible' disability of a muscular disorder and chronic pain condition. I look fine, even robustly healthy, yet suffer daily pain and limitations to my activities. My service dog is only ten pounds and not only helps me to retrieve items I've dropped (very hard for me to bend over or squat) but also to remove clothing (tugs on socks, shirt sleeves, coat sleeves, etc). She also acts as heat therapy for whenever I have to sit for long periods...without this dog I could no longer go out to the movies or restaurants, attend church or even work where I'm required to sit for longer than fifteen minutes at a stretch. A larger service dog would not be able to aid in this capacity. I'm as disgusted as everyone else about people passing off obvious, ill-behaved pets as service animals, but to claim only people with 'obvious' disabilities or certain sized dogs should be allowed is highly ignorant, offensive, and derogatory.

  • James 11/25/2010 6:59:00 AM

    This is for All people that have Epilepsy and seizure some of the people say they use a small dog or x-small dog, think what I'm saying please! If you have a seizure and your SD calls 911 when they come to the door can your SD open the door for them, I don't think so! Check out places online that train the dog for this. They never train these small dogs. Ask yourself why is this? contact them and ask why! Then you will understand what size a true seizure dog is. Also a small dogs can't pull you out of a danger when you have a seizure. Also they can't carry your mediacation. Please! Please! don't lie and use these small dog! I have a black Labradoodle named coal. He is my seizure alert dog!

  • Pami 11/25/2010 5:52:00 AM

    I have a service dog that is a labradoodle and he always wears his vest out in public. I think all service dogs should have to wear some type of uniform, when out in public it helps business know its a service dog. Just because you are disablity dose not give you the right to make it harder on business. Get a life You should be happy that rhe United States Lets us use a dog as a service dog. Some country don't let people use a service dog! or service animal. Get a vest online or make your own and buy patches online. If you don't have a computer go to the Libaray and go online to Pup'Parel and get the phone number and order it that way. she even take money orders. Good luck! And please think on these words!

  • 09/13/2010 1:44:00 AM

    On a recent airline trip, I encountered a woman traveling with a dog. Since I love dogs, (though I really don't like bringing my own dog to cafes and such), I chatted it up with her. She told me that she had been the sole survivor of a car accident that killed her entire family, that she spent months in a psych ward curled up in a ball, and that the thing that enabled her to leave was this dog. I cringe at the thought that such a person would be required to disclose that story just to get a cup of coffee at a local cafe. By all means, if a dog is behaving inappropriately, then the dog and person should be asked to leave, service dog or no service dog. However, I am willing to put up with a few cheaters to preserve the privacy and dignity of people with invisible disabilities.

  • Hugh Taylor 09/08/2010 7:59:00 PM

    I am hugely dissapointed in the lake of ability to get varification of a patrons true need for a "service dog". I love animals but cannot allow them into my inn/restaurant without the approval of all the other patrons...twice this month I have had dogs with NSAR credentials in my building because I must. Neither of these animals was of any obvious assistance to the owners...one was to aid in hearing the emissions from a smoke detector because the owner was impaired through certain decibal ranges...this was a King Charles Spaniel..about 12 years old that couldn't here an air horn at 6 feet.....The other was a lovely golden Lab with a leather harness who's owner allowed another inn guest to take the dog from her for over two hours one afternoon. The owner was sight impaired but was able to see deer in the meadow and read the menu at the dinner table without additional lighting. These apparent abuses are enough to make me want to deny all access and take the heat if they are legitamate. It cost me two hundred fifty dollars to have the rugs dry cleaned and I haven't yet determined whether or not these accomodations are infested by any fleas or something more ominous like ticks. Any help here would be apprieciated?

  • Sam 05/25/2010 3:54:00 AM

    This woman has no clue what she is talking about. To define service dogs to a short list of breeds and to only allow certain training agencies will lengthen the list even more for people who really need the dogs. If I hadn’t gotten a local service dog trainer to train my dog it would have cost $20,000 and I would have waited on a list for a minimum of 5yrs. Some people were waiting 7yrs + to either get a dog or raise the money. My service dog does all the services needed and he's what would be considered on her list of banned breeds. What people don’t realize is having a service dog is extremely difficult in public. My dog was injured at a Wal-Mart because an employee stopped us, didn't believe he was a service animal and actually struck him. The police were called and charges filed against the worker. Having a service dog can be very stressful due to people ignorance and her ignorance and going public isn't helping. Yes, there are people who take advantage of the system. Punish them. But don't punish those who are disabled or outlaw certain breeds. Also, it’s not up to her to decide whose disabled enough and what is worthy of being a service animal. Heaven forbid she should actually get what she wants and get the laws changed then suddenly become disabled with a non-visible disability like me and need a service animal and now not be able to get one because the large ‘approved’ agencies are overrun with applications and few breeds available to choose from, not to mention that purebreds have more health issues so you have a smaller pool to work with then before and even smaller when you consider the personality needed for service animal training. Labs cause more dog bites in the United States then Pit Bulls but they get less coverage, she’s just judgmental because she was attacked by someone with untrained dogs. Also, the Humane Society doesn’t align itself with PETA especially after they were caught killing kittens and using there bodies to get businesses in trouble that were actually in accordance with the law. In fact, our humane society help raise funds to get my dog trained for me and are always on call should I have trouble. What we need is to inform people of the law concerning service animals and also what they should do if they don’t believe the animals is a service animal. A lot of people don’t know, that if you question whether it’s a service animal you should call the police and they can check and see if it is.

  • Emily 08/29/2009 11:19:00 PM

    i was quite upset yes upset by this article . my service dog is a chihuahua and she has been trained to do a number of thing among pulling my purse to me placing my arms upon my arm rest ad and helping to alert my caregivers . I know of rottweiler and German shepherds and pit bulls that are exemplary service dogs i feel sorry for the lady trying to restricted service animal . I have to agree about reptiles . but mini horse can be very good service animals

  • Sam 08/05/2009 12:29:00 AM

    I think its time we do away with people self-training their own service dog to many people don't train them right and it makes it hard on the people that self-train their own dog right and real do need a service dog. Why let people self-train when you can get a service dog free from different programs out their. It make take a little bit of time before you get the dog. But what did you do before you had a SD. Please help get this law pass If you want to help in your city and state please write your governer and congress person and tell them why you think nobody should be able to self train service dogs anymore. Also Stop Pitbulls from being a service dog of any type!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Pami 02/26/2009 12:35:00 AM

    Its time we did something about people bring in their so called service dog in public building, I seen people put their dog in dog purse. then tell people its a service dog. come on what can a service dog do for you if its in a dog purse. All service dogs are to be walking by your side when out in public. if your dog is this small then buy a cat bell and put it on the collar so people can hear the bell and not step on the dog. American with Disablities Act says you can use any size breed you like. But make sure the very small dogs are trained well. I have a service dog and it makes me made to see people doing this and getting away with it.

  • Dr.F.D.Maloney 01/29/2009 2:03:00 AM

    Attention, These busy body Service Dog haters, had best beware of the fact by law ,you are not permitted to ask someone if there dog is a SERVICE DOG? Dr.FDM

  • Pami 12/14/2008 3:38:00 AM

    To many people are taking x-small and small dogs out in public and carrying them and they say its a service dog. I don'y think so, all service dogs of any sizes are to be walking by your side, they are working dogs not PETS! Please stop doing this it make it hard on the people that do training these breeds right! Also so many people are putting so called service dogs in a stroller what can the service dog do for you if its sleeping in the stroller, That is for PETS to be in not aservice dog and you can get 7 month or more in jail for lying and saying you have a service dog when you really don't. LETS STOP THIS NOW!!!

  • Lisa Hudson 11/11/2008 7:39:00 PM

    What a horrible article. I hope this woman doesnt have much influence on anything.

  • Pami 10/22/2008 4:47:00 AM

    I think people that have a service dog should have to wear a uniform on their service dog also I think the dog should have to wear a service dog ID badge, So people will know its not just a pet. My First service dog had a vest on and a service dog ID badge on when she was out in public I bought all my thinks for my dog online at Pup'parel if you don't see the badge email her. My service Puppy in training wears a uniform also!

  • Alvo 09/18/2008 9:41:00 PM

    What a very bitter woman this Taft is. Can't she find some meaningful way to spend her time and energy?

  • VivaDogs 09/11/2008 3:40:00 AM

    First of all, to DogOwner on Jul 31st, 2008, 16:59 pm, there are legit sevice dogs in all sizes. People who need SDs for things like seizure detection or to remind them to take medicine or calm them during an episode with a mental illness can and do use smaller dogs with great success. To suggest that these dogs aren't providing their owners with help just because they're not 70-pound labs is just as ignorant as saying pitties should be banned from SD use. That being said. I do not have a service dog because I am not disblaed and I am lucky, but if something were to happen and cause me to need the assistance of one in the future, then I, along with every other American, have that right. Just because this Taft loser doesn't like dogs isn't any reason for her to attempt to infringe on and strip millions of people of their rights. Same goes for the woman who complained of allergies to SDs. You can take a Benadryl and be fine. Don't want to take drugs? Look into holistic allergy relief. You can fix that problem fairly easily. Someone's who's blind or otherwise disabled can't take a pill and make everything better. The ADA is there to protect people that society seems to forget. Are there people who abuse it? Of course. Should we be looking to narrow the rights of an already overburdened group? Absolutely not. And I would like to know where this Taft person hangs out. I, and several of my friends, all have pits. I'd like to follow her around so that she leaves everywhere. Maybe I could follow her to the end of the earth and she could float into oblivion and spew her ignorant BS to the cosmos. We don't need her or her kind here.

  • Mary 09/06/2008 10:06:00 AM

    What a sickeningly selfish human being. I can't imagine what living such a pitifully negative life must feel like. Every day being laced with misery so strong you feel you must punish all around you for your pain. The sense of entitlement that, because you don't like dogs no one else should be able to enjoy them, or even use them as valid working animals. There is a special place in hell for bigots like you.

  • Leslie Csokasy 08/23/2008 5:45:00 AM

    As a professional in the industry, I was appalled at the local coverage recently received by Ellen Taft. Breed has nothing to do with an animal�s ability to serve a set of handicaps. Service dog�s should be judged based on their demeanor, their ability to handle a specific job � not based on the color of their fur or how long their nose is. As a professional in the industry, I have had the opportunity to witness some pretty remarkable service dogs, that to be honest, weren�t golden retrievers or labs. In fact, I have even trained a GREYHOUND as a service dog. Tall, stable dogs that have a natural inclination to lean into someone are perfect for individuals who have balance problems. They are also very capable of learning. They are tall enough to retrieve items off a counter, turn on and off light switches and are perceptive enough to be able to indicate on low blood sugar or alert on an impending grand mal seizure. As a guardian of four retired ex-racing greyhounds, of which, two are certified therapy dogs, I am well aware of the emotional support a greyhound can have on an ill child or the elderly. I don�t believe that a therapy dog is a service dog in the defined sense�but they aren�t stupid. My greyhound has beat plenty of �smart dogs� in obedience competitions! He�s probably smarter than some honor students! I also believe there needs to be more rules, regulations and standardizations revolving around what constitutes a service dog, however, to protect people�s privacy and rights, I don�t believe that the government or individuals should be able judge someone�s disability. Some disabilities aren�t visible such as diabetes or seizures or certain emotional states. I am appalled that a store owner or employee would be so insensitive as to point out and question someone�s disability. Frankly, Trader Joe�s just lost my business. The focus needs to be on certification, identification and standardization. Dogs need to be able to perform a certain set of skills in order to be an effective service dog. Banning certain breeds to do a job as well as diminishing some people�s right to claim a disability is just another form of discrimination, shows a lack of education and is a backward way of thinking.

  • Tamandra Michaels 08/21/2008 10:46:00 AM

    I stumbled across this article, and it really raised my hackles. If someone is going to go so far as to establish an organization, and try to infringe upon the rights of others, they damn well better be knowledgeable on what they're espousing! Not conjecture, not prejudice and hysteria, not anecdotal 'evidence'. I also feel a direct conflict with Ms. Taft, as I have one of her disfavored breeds, a German Shepherd Dog. He is also trained by myself to be my Service dog. He also comes from working lines. Which means dogs bred to protect, and do the German sport, Schutzhund. He is the finest dog I have ever had. Police dogs are trained to attack, to protect, yet they go home to families at night. Are they dangerous? No, they are trained working dogs, who know how to behave in context to what the job is at hand. I have also fought in a court of law over access, and lost. I lost because I didn't have the burden of proof. All the restaurant owner had to do is claim that I caused a scene, and that my dog was smelly, mangy, and sniffing tables, and get a few others to support that lie, and poof, case lost. How humiliating. Going through the whole discrimination one time, then injustice again. Then another one, absurdly enough, at a festival that was intended to raise money for people with disabilities! They wanted to see certification. It's not required by law. Nor is a vest. I agree, if it's hot out, or even if it's inconvenient for us to put it on, it's just a courtesy to others, and makes it easier on us. But it's not required. To reinforce what others have said, the fact that any business can exclude a dog, trained, certified, or whatever, for bad behavior, is just fine. Why must people have a problem when a person in a wheelchair comes into a place of business, accompanied by a well mannered dog, who's obviously attentive to their handler, and trained...why would they even feel the need to make an issue of it?? And I don't get huffy when the right questions are asked, "Is that a Service dog", and/or "Are you disabled?" Yes, and yes, thanks, end of story. But some people treat a person with a disability like they're a kid, and they're "talking back" when questioned rudely. People often take this attitude that you are automatically trying to lie and they know better. It's BS. I'm tired of it. People like Taft just really blow my mind. Utter ignorance and fear. I urge her to take a look at a recent news story here in my city, on me and my dog. http://cbs8.com/features/your_stories/story.php?id=135535 or, read our story of jerks who try to deny my rights (and frighteningly are starting to succeed), on my dog's blog http://myheartdog.com Where I'm going to be posting more about this issue, and Taft. We need to unite against this idiocy. Tami and Borias

  • Monica L. McClain 08/20/2008 2:56:00 AM

    I am commenting on your article about Ellen Taft and her efforts to ban certain breeds from being allowed as service dog, and her efforts to ban certain individuals from having a Service Dog. I am one of these people who Ms. Taft defines as having a hidden disability. Of course now my disablilty is very visible. But when I got my first dog it was not. There are many of us nation wide who have Epilepsy,neuromuscular diseases of varing kinds, and those who have Phychological problems who need these animals. For those of us who have them, it gave us back our lives. How dare she who is a dog hater because of being attacked decide that she knows what is best for us. She is a person who doesn't like dogs and as she stated she won't shop were a service dog is allowed. Good for her let her stay away then. Most Service dog users have either gotten their dogs from a program or have trained their own dogs. I trained my own dogs both my first Service dog and then years later my second Service dog. I worked very hard to have the best trained Service dogs around. I then applied to a service dog organization to get certified. This was because my state said we had to certify our SD's. Most organizations will not do this, but this organization decided to meet with me and my first dog, and they agreed to allow me to test with them on Tasks and Public Access. They said my dog was one of the best owner trained dogs they had ever seen. They were more than happy to test and certify my second dog as well. Most owner trainers do a good job of training. We have web groups where we help one another and we actually police ourselves. There is a code of standards that our dogs need to be able to pass. If they can't then many of us wash that dog out. We get all our health care shots,preventives, just like any other dog or Service dog from an organization does. We have yearly health checks to make sure our dogs are healthy enough to do their jobs. We go out of our way to make sure our Service dogs are clean and well groomed. I agree that all service dogs should wear a vest or mobilty or pulling harness properly identifing them as Serive dogs. I agree that in accordance with ADA business brief that businesses can ask the questions is that a service dog needed for a disability, and what tasks does the dog do. If an individual cannot answer these questions adequately then they don't need to have access to that business. Most individuals do not know the law accurately. So they will say things such as you can't ask me that or I don't have to answer you. Yes they do have to answer that. That was ADA way to weed out the fakers. Plus ADA business brief clearly says that a dog who barks for no reason other than an alert, or that growls or snaps at patrons,can be removed from the business. It is all there on ADA page. Ms. Taft just needs to move on with her life and leave others who choose to have these wonderful animals alone. Sincerely, Monica L. McClain

  • Emily 08/15/2008 1:55:00 AM

    Wow that TAFT is a NUTJOB! If she feels so strongly about this why does she have to hide herself? Shame on You.

  • Social Mange 08/15/2008 1:38:00 AM

    Why should Ms. Taft's fear of dogs and her unreasoning hatred of all dogs restrict the right of disabled persons to have service dogs? The people I know with service dogs have a genuine need, and these well-trained animals ("pit bulls" among them) should be allowed into all establishments without restriction or reservation. Ms. Taft is carrying on an uninformed, ignorant and hysterical campaign against specific breeds and shapes of dogs, which makes me suspicious of this campaign's origin. Ms. Taft also appears to be uninformed about the range of disabilities for which service dogs are used, including autism, deafness and epilepsy. These ailments are not visible. One day, Ms. Taft may need a service dog for her own safety and well-being, or that of her child. If she continues on this course, there won't be any.

  • Mike 08/15/2008 1:02:00 AM

    I think the dogs who attacked her only did so because they knew she was a nasty awful person. She deserved it

  • Sarah 08/14/2008 10:23:00 PM

    This article is misleading in that it refers to this as an "animal rights" issue. The issue of service animals has nothing to do with animal rights, it is about the rights of disabled people. The ADA provisions for service animals are to preserve the rights of disabled PEOPLE to allow for needed assistance. Yes, I have occasionally heard of people trying to use this to take a pet into a place it would not otherwise be allowed. I discourage this, and would not dream of taking my own well-behaved, obedience titled dogs (who happen to be Staffordshire Bull Terriers, a breed generally lumped in as a "pit bull" in North American legislation) into places where dogs are not allowed, as I am fortunate enough to not be disabled. I am alarmed, however, at the willingness of people to trample the rights of those who ARE disabled. Disability is not necessarily immediately obvious by looking at a person. A deaf person does not "look" disabled. I work with a man who has one leg, and when he has long pants on, you would not realize he is wearing a prosthesis. He still has every valid right to handicapped parking spaces, and in my opinion, people who have all their body parts in working order should be ashamed of themselves for questioning that.

  • Katya 08/14/2008 10:15:00 PM

    Breathless in Seattle, Nordstrom is actually a pet friendly store. Dog does not need to be a service animal to come to Nordstrom. This might vary from store to store of course, but every Nordstrom that I have been to has "pets are welcome" policy.

  • Meaghan Edwards 08/14/2008 9:25:00 PM

    What BS. How the hell can this be "fake"? Some people really need to educate themselves! http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/pospress.php http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfK59ARXU2Q http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSgEcIOmojo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmBqn9njo_0

  • Breathless in Seattle 08/13/2008 2:39:00 PM

    I'm a lifelong asthma and allergy sufferer, as is my toddler. My mother died of COPD. I don't need a handicapped parking space, but I certainly don't need to breathe a bunch of animal dander when I'm trying to patronize a public place. This purse-dog trend has been a terrible development for me and my daughter. I've had to leave a store recently because I began experiencing attack symptoms, due to a large group of women toting such pets. I fully support the rights of the disabled to own and utilize well-trained service dogs. But I do agree with others on this board that some dog owners will continue to bring their dogs into public places/businesses inappropriately and inconsiderately unless clear standards for what constitutes a sevice animal and consequences for misrepresenting one's pet as such are enacted. I have voiced concerns while shopping over this on a couple of occasions. Both times the workers expressed reluctance to approach the dog owner, while saying privately they agreed with me. One incident was at Fred Meyer (in the grocery department) the other at Nordstrom. (Neither dog wore a vest, both were carried, etc.) Anyway, I'd much prefer that this issue could be settled rationally, without one group being called "anti-" or "pro" anything, but I'm aware that people are deeply emotionally attached to their pets. Let's just try to differentiate between service animals and pets. I accept that my daughter and myself (and many, many others with compromised respiratory systems) are exposed to allergens daily and take a risk going into a public place. But we deserve to breathe the safest air possible, while not infringing on the rights of those who truly need their service animals.

  • Ahimsa Dog Training 08/05/2008 7:24:00 AM

    The direct link for commenting to the Department of Justice is http://www.regulations.gov, then search for "service dog" or some such. As mentioned above, under the current laws, store owners who notice aggression in service animals of any size can currently exclude them from their place of business. The *behavior* of the dog itself limits its ability to be an official service dog, but not the breed. I'm completely in favor of having Service Dogs get temperament and skill tests to become certified. The handlers can then carry an ID card for the dog with a picture on it. Dogs with vests could display that card, or the handler could have it. Dogs that are dangerous can then be excluded as Service Dogs. It's an expensive prospect, to do all that testing, but it's certainly more effective than just excluding dogs based on breed types. American Pit Bull Terriers had a passing rate of 84.3% when tested by the American Temperament Testing Society. Golden Retrievers had a passing rate of 84.2%. Their website is http://www.atts.org Excluding dogs for size, breed, or other physical characteristic is antithetical to supporting people with disabilities, whose needs are just as varied as the dogs that fill them. If an animal has been trained to help a person with disabilities and poses no danger to the public, then that animal should be allowed to do its job, regardless of its "race." Ahem...."breed." A final note to the woman with a fear of pit bulls...Please don't allow the overblown media image of pit bulls as evil dogs to make you into a breedist that limits other people's rights. It's not your fault, but you can fix it if you just look at how we are brainwashed every day: If a pit bull does something bad, it makes the news, and the breed is in the *headline*. When a Labrador Retriever does something bad, like kill a baby, the headline skips the breed and says, �Dog Kills 2-Month-Old Left Alone in Swing.�

  • Judy 08/05/2008 3:50:00 AM

    This woman needs to get a life. If all she has to do is wage war against animals she is pitiful. Greyhounds are incredible therapy Dogs and Service Dogs. they are not TRAINED to run, they run because they love it. I think Taft was born to be an ignorant slut. Can't help someone like that, just like you can't help stupid. I am gald she is not living in Las Vegas.

  • pitbullmeal 08/03/2008 6:58:00 AM

    2 Points: 1) There's always a potential risk for attack with any dog. I once worked in a shelter. We couldn't legally turn away anyone who claimed that their canine companion was a service animal. The issue didn't come up all the time, some of the dogs were just fine. But one dog attacked some other residents. It seems like service dogs would be less of a risk because of their training. 2) I feel unsafe around pit bulls because they attack and seriously injure people. Pit bulls are only as violent as their owners. They can be affectionate--I've seen it happen, heard about it--but they're powerful dogs and there are numerous stories about them attacking people to the point of maiming or killing them. I am a small person. A woman not much smaller than I am was mauled to death by pit bulls. Therefore, I avoid pit bulls because I'd rather not chance being mauled. Often enough, I encounter pit bulls on the bus, on the sidewalk, in the park, pretty much everywhere. A few times, the dogs have come right up to me because their owners had them off the leash. That was pretty nerve-wracking. I'm glad I was lucky enough not to be attacked. Probably, most of the dogs I see are no threat, but I have no way of knowing, as I don't know how the owners raised their dogs. I believe many people view pit bulls as weapons--they're symbols of violence and power. If you disagree, check out the covers of various ganster rap cds. I don't like that kind of aggression thrown up in my face.

  • Shannon 08/02/2008 10:29:00 PM

    Here is what I found on the proposed DOJ law with Service Animals. If you disagree with these proposed changes - Go to www.doj.gov and search on ADA. Input will be taken through August 31. Service animals. The Department wishes to clarify the obligations of public accommodations to accommodate individuals with disabilities who use service animals. The Department continues to receive a large number of complaints from individuals with service animals. It appears that many covered entities are confused regarding their obligations under the ADA with regard to individuals with disabilities who use service animals. At the same time, some individuals with impairments-- who would not be covered as individuals with disabilities--are claiming that their animals are legitimate service animals, whether fraudulently or sincerely (albeit mistakenly), to gain access to hotels, [[Page 34516]] restaurants, and other places of public accommodation. Another trend is the use of wild, exotic, or unusual species, many of which are untrained, as service animals. The Department is proposing amendments to its regulation on service animals in the hope of mitigating the apparent confusion. Minimal protection. In the Department's ADA Business Brief on Service Animals, which was published in 2002, the Department interpreted the minimal protection language within the context of a seizure (i.e., alerting and protecting a person who is having a seizure). Although the Department received comments urging it to eliminate the minimal protection language, the Department continues to believe that it should retain the ``providing minimal protection'' language and interpret the language to exclude so-called ``attack dogs'' that pose a direct threat to others. Guidance on permissible service animals. In the original regulation implementing title III, ``service animal'' was defined as ``any guide dog, signal dog, or other animal,'' and the Department believed, at the time, that leaving the species selection up to the discretion of the person with a disability was the best course of action. Due to the proliferation of animals used by individuals, including wild animals, the Department believes that this area needs some parameters. Therefore, the Department is proposing to eliminate certain species from coverage even if the other elements of the definition are satisfied. Comfort animals vs. psychiatric service animals. Under the Department's present regulatory language, some individuals and entities have assumed that the requirement that service animals must be individually trained to do work or perform tasks excluded all individuals with mental disabilities from having service animals. Others have assumed that any person with a psychiatric condition whose pet provided comfort to them was covered by the ADA. The Department believes that psychiatric service animals that are trained to do work or perform a task (e.g., reminding its owner to take medicine) for individuals whose disability is covered by the ADA are protected by the Department's present regulatory approach. Psychiatric service animals can be trained to perform a variety of tasks that assist individuals with disabilities to detect the onset of psychiatric episodes and ameliorate their effects. Tasks performed by psychiatric service animals may include reminding the handler to take medicine; providing safety checks, or room searches, or turning on lights for persons with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder; interrupting self-mutilation by persons with dissociative identity disorders; and keeping disoriented individuals from danger. The Department is proposing new regulatory text in Sec. 36.104 to formalize its position on emotional support/comfort animals, which is that ``[a]nimals whose sole function is to provide emotional support, comfort, therapy, companionship, therapeutic benefits, or promote emotional well-being are not service animals.'' The Department wishes to state, however, that the exclusion of emotional support animals from ADA coverage does not mean that individuals with psychiatric, cognitive, or mental disabilities cannot use service animals. The Department proposes specific regulatory text in Sec. 36.104 to make this clear: ``The term service animal includes individually trained animals that do work or perform tasks for the benefit of individuals with disabilities, including psychiatric, cognitive, and mental disabilities.'' This language simply clarifies the Department's longstanding position and is not a new position. The Department's rule is based on the assumption that the title II and title III regulations govern a wider range of public settings than the settings that allow for emotional support animals. The Department recognizes, however, that there are situations not governed exclusively by the title II and title III regulations, particularly in the context of residential settings and employment, where there may be compelling reasons to permit the use of animals whose presence provides emotional support to a person with a disability. Accordingly, other federal agency regulations governing those situations may appropriately provide for increased access for animals other than service animals. Modification in policies, practices, or procedures. The preamble to Sec. 36.302 of the current title III regulation states that the regulatory language was intended to provide the ``broadest feasible access'' to individuals with service animals while acknowledging that, in rare circumstances, accommodating service animals may not be required if it would result in a fundamental alteration of the nature of the goods or services the public accommodation provides or the safe operation of the public accommodation. 56 FR 35544, 35565 (July 26, 1991). In order to clarify this provision, the Department is incorporating into the proposed regulation guidance that it has provided previously through technical assistance. Proposed training standards. The Department has always required that service animals be individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability, but has never imposed any type of formal training requirements or certification process. While some groups have urged the Department to modify this position, the Department does not believe such a modification would serve the array of individuals with disabilities who use service animals. Detailed regulatory text changes and the Department's response to public comments on these issues and others are discussed below in the definition section, Sec. 36.104, and the section on modifications in policies, practices, and procedures, Sec. 36.302(c).

  • Shannon - Proud Service Dog Ow 08/02/2008 9:08:00 PM

    I am deeply hurt by Ms. Taft's article. I feel it is a personal attack on me as well as any person who has a service dog and is disabled. My disability can not be seen outward, my injuries and limitations are invisible to anyone "looking" at me. I get jeered for using handicapped parking and for using my service dog (who has given me some of my life back). I want to know who I can contact to go up against this attack on the civil rights of the disabled. Ms. Taft needs opposition and I am willing to fight for my rights. I am tired of people making comments to me like "oh yeah, you really look disabled" or " Yeah right, he really looks like a service dog, what does he do- Drive you home when you are drunk?" So tell me what does disabled look like? The public never talked to my doctors, doesn't know my medical history - nor should they. Don't I deserve privacy and the right to park in a handicapped spot if I have a permit- which you need a doctors approval and meet a criteria for? Why shouldn't I deserve the right to have a service dog that assists me? If my dog is out of control (which he wouldn't be due to the years of training that he went through before he was certified.) I would expect to be asked to leave the building. I do understand that there are people who abuse the law but I am not one of them. Can't we figure out a way to combat the abusers without attacking the truly disabled people? Does Ms. Taft realize that Pitbulls, German Shepards and other breeds that have been slated as vicious are also used in law enforcement and search and rescue? I would like her to meet the pitbulls that helped with the search for people during the OKC bombing and with the 9/11 tragedy. These dogs were heros along with their handlers and they should be banned? The problem is with people that are irresponsible and unimformed. There are no bad dogs - just really bad irresponsible dog owners. Yes, I understand Ms. Taft's fear of dogs - I almost lost my life in the jaws of a german shepard and almost lost my shepard mix to a pitbull - but I blame the owners of these dogs - not the dogs themselves for not having their dog under control. Please help direct me to who I can address this issue with before Ms. Taft gets too far. Thank you, Shannon - Proud Service Dog owner / Kent

  • Renee 08/02/2008 8:13:00 PM

    To the guy who said we're all crazy: These are not PETS we are discussing, these are WORKING DOGS, who are assisting DISABLED participans. I don't know what planet you came from, but you apparently have been living inside a box.

  • DogOwner 08/02/2008 10:35:00 AM

    Holy crap are you guys crazy. I can't believe somebody here said she PROVOKED her attack. You guys have proved the point the article is trying to make, PET OWNERS want to be able to bring their dogs everywhere by pretending they are service dogs. Dogs are not people, they are dogs. Dogs are not children, they are dogs. Dogs are not sanitary. Dogs do not fully understand and control all of their actions, THEY ARE ANIMALS. As a dog owner myself, you guys are CRAZY!

  • v 08/02/2008 7:30:00 AM

    This person needs to return to Minniesota! Dogs are like a member of the family, why should they be banned from public places as long as they are well-behaved and clean. There are children that are more of a nusiance than dogs! As far as breed bans go-I think it is absurd because any dog can be dangerous if its owner is not responsible and does not properly train and care for their pet. The media has just focused on certain breeds more than others, so people tend to associate bad behavior with the dogs that have gotten a bad reputation. I say dogs should gain access to more places!

  • Camotim 08/02/2008 2:23:00 AM

    There is not, even at today's inflated prices, a dime's worth of difference between Taft and the Ku Klux Klan. She wants to keep Persons with Disabilities form public places dog haters want no dogs in as the Klan wanted to keep Black People from public places it wanted to keep all-white. If Taft wants to live in a society where dogs are looked down upon she ought to find an islamic country like saudi arabia. As far the alleged mauling of her, I would wager that Taft provoked this and the dogs were acting in what the viewed as self-defense. She may pay no temporal penalty for this, as I am sure her white-sheeted attitude will cost her someday when sued by a Person With Disabilities using a Service Dog, Taft will be judged harshly by the Almighty for needless killing of two of the Almighty's beloved creatures.

  • cissy 08/01/2008 11:20:00 PM

    Not all people with disabilities are born with them. Many disabilities are the result of aging, illness or accidents or other traumas. So basically it makes sense to view ourselves as all temporarily abled. Service dogs have no rights. People with disabilities who use service dogs have civil rights, and just like the general public without service dogs, we can be ejected from any place of public accommodation if our dogs or we are disruptive.The ADA is civil rights, not entitlement legislation. We do not get special passes on our or our dogs' behavior. For those who think that having a disability and working a service dog is some kind of picnic, I hope you or someone close to you is never in the position of having to deal with disability, but the chances of that are slim. Some of us got our lives back because of our use of a service dog. Those of us who learn to function with the help of an assistive device - whether it be a wheelchair, cane, walker, hearing aid, artificial limb or service dog, etc. - we are all heroes because we persevered and found a way to have meaningful lives. We do not deserve to be villified. Ms. Taft's truly vicious attack on our civil rights is based on assertion, misinformation and unmitigated arrogance. Destruction and revenge as a means of finding meaning in one's life is pitiful at best.

  • Sundog 08/01/2008 8:38:00 PM

    Wow, Ellen Taft is, in my opinion, a "very very stupid" woman. In her commentary on Komo News, she displays her phenomenal ignorance when she states "Now a greyhound is a very very stupid dog". This will certainly come as a surprise to the numerous greyhound owners who have successfully trained these fast learning, intelligent sight hounds to perform a number of tasks, including as therapy dogs at local hospitals and care facilities. For Taft to blithely dismiss an entire breed, rather than individual dogs (or more correctly, the owners) as "stupid" demonstrates the type of ignorance and dull wittedness sadly all too common among the self-important uneducated these days. Ignorant people like Taft have no business being involved in public policy. Here's the link to the video with the "stupid" comment http://www.komonews.com/home/video/26118989.html?video=pop&t=a

  • Chris 08/01/2008 5:54:00 PM

    I'm sorry to speak so strongly, but this woman is on a very distasteful mission. She hates and fears dogs so she is on the warpath to cause as much pain to dogs and dog owners as she can. How sickening.

  • DogOwner 08/01/2008 2:06:00 PM

    to:GrrSpartacus Unless the dog is really doing something, it should not outweigh the rest of the public's right to be in privately-owned locations without dogs. Also, people complain if the dogs do ANYTHING, and guess what, they can. If the dog even growls at somebody, they can be forced to leave the store. See http://www.ada.gov/qasrvc.htm . These dogs are only allowed to act as service dogs to obtain these rights, NOT as protection. As for the asthma comment, my friend is in a wheelchair and he is constantly fighting for the handicapped spots from some able-bodied idiot who has no problem walking to their car. Handicapped spots were designed for people in wheelchairs to be able to enter and exit their vehicles.

  • Greyfriend 08/01/2008 11:18:00 AM

    Re. "Check Your Faux Service Dog at the Door" You might have refuted Ellen Taft's statement that "Greyhounds, for instance, can only be trained to run." See: http://www.greyhoundfriendsforlife.org/Handi-Dog.htm There have been many others also. Additionally, your comment, "When the American Disabilities Act was signed into law in 1990, it devoted scant, vague language to service animals, which are guaranteed accommodation alongside their owners in any venue, public or private, that humans are granted access to." is not totally accurate as there are many private venues where service animal accommodation need not be made. (clubs, institutes, etc.) If you ever have interest in reviewing the facilities and operations of the largest Ex-Racer Greyhound adoption organization in the Northwest, begin at 4800 and counting. Regards, Jack Richardson Greyhound Pets, Inc.

  • GrrSpartacus 08/01/2008 6:02:00 AM

    There are all kinds of Service Dogs and I think it's a DISservice to disabled people who need a hearing dog and others that supply help but might not *look* the part (for example, the Chihuahua mentioned could very possibly be a hearing dog or seizure alert dog). The breed is NOT an indication of what kind of service it provides its owner. There probably are some *faux* SD's out there, but if the dog isn't extremely well-behaved, they aren't going to get away with it for long. And just as with any issue, it's those stupid, irresponsible owners who make life miserable for the rest of us. I can't believe the comment that folks with asthma shouldn't use handicapped parking - I hope and pray I never need it, but if I find myself incapable of breathing properly, I would like to know I could get this privilege. Let's face it - what we're talking about here is dog OWNERS. Those who care take responsibility for having good canine citizens. Those who don't give a rat's *ss won't care about any laws either. They obviously already don't.

  • Diana 08/01/2008 5:07:00 AM

    After reading this article I agree that Ms Taft is letting her fear of dogs rule her emotions and common sense. Don't we all remember not that many years ago it was Doberman's that were ostracized for being "mean" dogs? I have a friend who has used a Doberman as a service dog in the past to helo her with stability and seizure issues. My friend is 5'9" tall. She needs a large dog to help her brace herself to get back up after a fall. She currently is training a Great Dane as a service dog. Ms Taft ask yourself a question. In my friend's case what would you rather have - a large dog in your store that helps a person maintain their balance and get up if they do fall, or would you rather have that person fall in your store, have difficulty getting up and sue your business for the fall? I agree that there are "false" service dogs out there, but there are quite a few people using service dogs these days as they have been proven to help people with physical or mental issues. How do you write a law to determine who does and does not have the right to a service dog? Get over your fear - volunteer at a local shelter and get to know some of these dogs first hand.

  • DogOwner 08/01/2008 2:59:00 AM

    I own two dogs, but the service dog BS in Seattle is amazing. I have heard plenty of people brag about their "service dog" that does nothing. A chihuahua as a service dog? My opinion is that if a dog does not help you navigate or do something physical (blind or physically handicapped) it is bullshit. Just like those people with Asthma who parked in handicapped spaces.

  • L. Goff 07/31/2008 9:34:00 PM

    The comment that greyhounds are stupid and can only be trained to run is really off the scale as far as the lack of intelligent knowledge about the breed is concerned. There have been numerous stories in newspapers about just how smart these "greyts" are. From protecting someone from attack while walking to alerting people about dangerous situations in their homes. There are greyhounds who make the rounds at hospitals and nursing homes, as well as those who are calming companions (yes, service dogs) for people with physical and psychological conditions. There are greyhounds who compete in the ring along with other obstacle course dogs. I think this lady needs to do more investigation before she labels a breed such as the greyhound as stupid. Cesar Milan is someone who is a bit more qualified to judge the temperament of a dog than someone lacking the knowledge of dog behavior. Locally Leslie Csokasy (Great Dog Day Care) can tell you about dog temperament since she deals with a lot of dogs on a daily basis. Evidently the sad story about being attacked by a couple of local dogs as a youngster has colored her attitude about dogs in general. I'm sorry for that but don't close your mind to the wonderful things any dog can do to assist one in living life. Thanks L. Goff

  • Lexie Smith 07/31/2008 7:33:00 PM

    I use a Great Dane SD and my problems are related to mobility and my difficulty in walking, as well as my ability to carry, push or pull a shoping cart. I am sometimes asked THE questions (in this an SD? What does she do for you?) I consider this completely reasonable since I too, own a business and must consider all of my customer's needs. I do not have direct knowledge of the abuses that I hear so much about since my own is the first SD in my town. I do know that I have trained my dog well, devoted countless hours to training and practicing and my community has been wonderful! I have not had a terrible incident, ever and I have travelled the southeast with my dog. I feel that certification is just something for someone to charge me for a peice of paper that says I have done what I did (ie; training the dog). The theory sounds reasonable but the application would be a nightmare and more costly than many disabled persons could ever afford. I do not know the answer for the abuses that I do know are happening but the answer MUST be resolved with sensitivity to the limited resourses (physical, financial) of the disabled public it seeks to serve. Please, consider always, the needs that are being met and not met by changes to the existing laws. Sincerely, Lexie Smith & her angel Grace

  • Vampiric Conure 07/31/2008 11:18:00 AM

    The majority of what Taft said made me roll my eyes, but it wasn't the bs comments made about 'fake' service dogs that made me laugh, it was her comment that 'greyhounds can only be trained to run'. Right then and there I knew she was a flake. It's a pity this woman has let a dog attack cloud her mind to the point of being a bigoted idiot who makes comments like these. Its obvious she's acting on under educated and selfish motives to screw over the lives of the disabled. I've been attacked three times by two different dogs and guess what - I'm a service dog handler. If I can get by my fears, this woman can at least learn more about the animals she claims to represent. Just so people know, Greyhounds can be damn fine obedience dogs. To quote the Greyhound Club of America (http://www.greyhoundclubofamerica.org/obedience.html) ' The first Companion Dog was Ch. On-Da-Way Skipper who earned his CD in 1937. Since then Greyhounds have earned 275 Companion Dog titles, 46 Companion Dog Excellent title, 8 Utility Dog titles and one Obedience Trial Championship. That was Julie Hill's red bitch Lily, OTCh The Merry Prankster UDX, TD, NA. In accumulating these titles, a number of Greyhounds have won all breed high in trial awards.' Pretty good for a breed that can only be 'trained to run'.

  • Colette 07/31/2008 11:13:00 AM

    I loved this article because it so accurately depicts Taft's lack of sensibility or knowledge of dogs as Service or companion animals. Her own words scream of ignorance and hate. As a responsible owner of 3 beautiful and well mannered, adopted Pit Bulls, I have to laugh, because with each public attempt Ellen Taft makes to discredit the breed I and so many others love, and all the wonderful dog breeds in the Puget Sound Area... ..She just unites us further. Keep it up Ms. Taft. I keep meeting great, new responsible dog people that share the same opinion I do of you. Your ignorant efforts against dogs, esp Pit Bulls and your public statememts of self-imposed victimization just validate our peaceful, sane existance even more. Thank you.

  • Concerned dog lover 07/31/2008 10:31:00 AM

    Gee, Ms. Taft is pure ignorance in action. It is a shame that ignorance does not have a literal grasp of reality or the issues pertaining to our beloved canines that work in the service industry, as therapy dogs, law dogs (search and rescue, bomb detection, etc, etc) or even just being man (or womans) best friend. It seems that Taft is blinded by her hatred of dogs, specifically pit bulls, and fails to see that all dogs are wonderful in the right hands, just as any dog can become aggressive in the wrong hands. I wonder if Ms. Taft would be so opposed to pit bulls if she was in a situation where one was required to save her life. Fortunately for her pit bulls do not judge, but except all people as they are, whether they are decent or not. That seems to be their strength and her weakness. Rather than use her hatred of pit bulls to cause many wonderful people who require service dogs to suffer, maybe those people who abuse and lie about their service dogs should be targeted. Maybe checking for service badges is an easy fix for this situation and fine those people who are found not to have service badges. Wow, how hard was that and it doesn't even target dogs or people - no fun at all for Ms. Taft. Families Against Breed Bans was formed to fight against this kind of ignorance and to ensure that both dogs and people do not become the targets of the likes of ignorant people. I vote we should ban ignorance in Seattle and move on to issues that need to be addressed like traffic, homelessness, education, crime and employment.

  • Liss 07/31/2008 8:46:00 AM

    To ScotteeM from Burke, VA Peta is anti-animal rights as well. Read the fine print. They don't believe in owning companion animals and have killed several to "save them" from people. As for the Humane Society, they don't support breed bans. Do your research before spreading lies. http://www.hsus.org/pets/issues_affecting_our_pets/dangerous_dogs.html

  • Leo 07/31/2008 5:49:00 AM

    People with service animals are frequently on a limited budget. I would be concerned that the identification and vest would put a burden on their finances. You cannot ask a person what their disability is, but you can ask what the animal is trained to do for them. If the person cannot give you specific examples, they are not a real service animal team and you can ask them to leave.

  • Dee 07/31/2008 5:28:00 AM

    All this article does is prove that Ms. Taft lets her fear of dogs in general and of specific breeds in particular cloud her judgment to such a point she's willing to take a stand - to protect herself from her fears - that will grossly impair the rights of the disabled. Ms. Taft makes arguments that shows she doesn't know the ADA or the WA state laws that apply to service animals (if she did, she'd know state laws prohibit fraudulently claiming your dog as a service animal) and she makes arguments that flagrantly flaunt the reality in Seattle. She seems to imply that "faux" service dogs are a realm belonging to those disabled by mental illness and those trying to pass of their pets as a service animal. If a "faux" service dog is to be recognized by its behavior, the worst behaving service dogs I've seen were trained by organizations or schools and often used by those visibly disabled. If they're recognized by stuff like providing comfort, I've seen that most often admitted to by people with visible disabilities. If it's by lack of a vest, neither WA law nor the ADA requires a vest so would be an example of her lack of knowledge. Same if she's thinking it would be shown by lack of certification - since this is also not required by the ADA or WA law. She's also rather mislead about removing misbehaving dogs. Both the ADA and WA law allow for the removal of a dog that's creating a nuisance or causing safety issues. For example a dog that's unruly, a dog that's barking or one that's aggressive (even without physical contact) could legally be removed even if it was a service dog to Ms. Taft's standards. However, a service animal can't be removed simply because it IS an animal or a specific type of animal or a specific breed. But I suppose she'd be happier seeing thousands or more people returned to the closets or other darkened places where the disabled were once kept rather than have to face her dog fears and accept that others have rights just like she does.

  • lil scoop(er) 07/31/2008 4:51:00 AM

    hey renee - the article is very fair and balanced. have some catnip and read it again.

  • Renee 07/31/2008 4:30:00 AM

    RE: SECOND COMMENT by christie krauszowski. Your dog is not a valid service animal and if it was, it would not be trained to attack or bite or even growl. According to the DOJ, animals who have aggression have no rights to be service animals and if you continue using this dog, and get challenged, you will LOSE. It has to make us all stop and take a look at the written article by this person. This person apparently has no concept of what the ADA was written about, nor its laws, restrictions and rules, yet claims a dog...a dacschund, used to bite people? What trained tasks does this dog provide for you? My guess is none. It is cute. It makes her feel better. She takes it everywhere to feel better. PEOPLE LIKE YOU MAKE IT HARD ON PEOPLE LIKE ME. Daily, I fight tooth and nail to get my dog into places, when he is a FULLY VALID dog, trained 55 tasks, and although my dog was trained for 3 years straight to assist me, I am willing to bet yours isn't even potty-trained. How DARE you take your dog in pubic! You have no right to take ANY aggressive dog in public, and you should be ashamed that you not only take it in public, but that you are so blatantly ignorant about the law that you had the gall to post your comments here. It is people like you who are adding to the confusion and issues, nationwide, who are also adding to the difficulty that valid dog users are having accessing restaraunts and other places your little doxie of terror may have gone prior to us coming in. Pet Peeve? (Pun intended) YEP! Although I feel we need legislation to get people like you out of public places, I think that TAFT is going about it all wrong. Wrong motivation entirely. You can read my post further up as well. Post #6.

  • Jennifer 07/31/2008 4:17:00 AM

    As a SD handler I must point out something that another poster mentioned about their SD. It was mentioned that if a person aproaches their dog that the dog will "growl". If your SD growls at someone in a place of public accomodation, that buisness has the right (and honestly the duty) to ask you to leave. SD should NEVER growl or show any other kind of agressive behavior in a public place (or anywhere else for that matter). Yes, SD are not there for the enjoyment or benefit of the public, and yes, you should not pet a working dog, but guess what, it happens. I have a 95lb SD, and there was a situation where while my dog was in a store in a down stay (I was waiting in line for customer service), a young child (about 4 years old) came running over and jumped on the back of my dog, pulling her ears as if trying to ride her. My dog looked up at me as I gave the dog the "its ok" sign, I removed the child and the mother came runing over, explaining the child does that to their dog at home all the time. I would HATE to think what would have happened to that same child if they were to run up and start touching your dog. Please do all SD handlers a favor and stop helping to make the people who want to limit SD in publics case for them. It is people like you that make me wish that there was a certification so that dogs that do things like "growl" are kept off the streets. The ADA is clarifying the definition of "provide minimal protection" to make sure that it is clear that they do not mean act agressively to protect a person, but rather make sure that their handler is not harmed further by bumping their head on a shelf or other object. Just because your dog can let you know about a seizure before it happens does not mean that it makes thatr dog a SD.

  • Renee 07/31/2008 4:14:00 AM

    It is a SAD day when a Seattle newspaper backs and promotes civil rights infringement and advocates a woman who is terrified of dogs, because of a childhood dog attack, and then encourages her to fight to demote the civil rights of the disabled individuals using service dogs. Furthermore, the article sites that many service dog users don't "look disabled". May I ask what disabled looks like? Epilepsy is often invisible, diabetes, uncontrolled psychotic disorders are often not noticeable, and validly used dogs for these types of things exist. German Shepherds, sited on the interview on television as one breed this woman seeks to dis-admit into public places, have been used on a nationwide basis for protection of our own US soldiers in war, and are known as a highly trainable breed of dog. Only an idiot would suggest removing such a breed from activity as a service animal. Only a completely selfish person, with completely selfish motives would even consider fighting against the rights of disabled citizens, to limit us even more, when we are already so limited and only an idiot would suggest that a service dog wear a vest in all places. In our city, 120 degrees F is not uncommon. Are you telling me that in order for me to use my assistive device (service dog), I have to put a vest on him in 120 degree heat when he is a yellow lab, a breed known for having 2 coats of fur? The day that the DOJ even considers such far-fetched ideas of idiocy will be the day that America will cease to be the Land Of The Free. Please consider what I am saying. It makes no sense to limit people's lives who are already so limited. Sure, I believe we should only allow valid dogs, and we need to define a better standard of disability so people aren't taking pets into restaraunts, but assuming that a high percentage of service animal users are not valid is rather a blanket opinion and I'm very, frankly, surprised that Seattle Weekly published this article. It's a guarantee that the harder this woman lobbies, the harder people like me will lobby against her. You will not take my rights away without a fight. What a horrible horrible, terrible piece of writing your paper has published!

  • Jennifer 07/31/2008 4:11:00 AM

    So her claim to expertise on service animals rests on... being bitten? I was bitten as a kid by a labrador, and today... I use a labrador mix as a service dog. Amazing what a difference being actually disabled makes to your worldview, eh? He gave me my life back after a very traumatic incident. The ADA law by its simplicity is designed to guarantee the rights of disabled people to train and own their own dogs. The original guide dog school in the US was founded by a blind man. All the new kind of service dogs, in many cases, were also first trained by disabled people. All service dogs /qualifying for protection under the ADA/, are chosen and trained specifically so they will NOT be aggressive towards the public and to obey well, not interfere with other people inappropriately, not jump on furniture, etc. However, when I say "not be aggressive", the truth is all bets are off in case of aggressive interference and attacks by members of the public. As it should be. A disabled person does not lose the right to self-defense merely because the person has a service dog. However I would not condone the above example of the minidaschund growling at people for coming too close. The woman is not allowed to work that dog in public and any business would be within their legal rights to remove that dog immediately upon a growling complaint. Businesses are not without rights. http://www.ada.gov/svcanimb.htm "Credible assertion"... if the dog is bouncing all over the place, roaming around sniffing people, or growling, that dog can be removed immediately. As for the recent USDOJ regulations, here is the IAADP's position on service animals. http://www.iaadp.org/iaadp-short-4pos-doj-ada-nprm-2008.html I agree with most of those key positions, although I would be inclined to think a MINIMUM weight limit may be studied, because I have my concerns that any dog under 5 pounds can work safely or effectively in public, even as an alert dog. I do not support BSL for service dogs. It's the dog's behavior, training, and purpose that matters, NOT the shape or color, but it's tough some days, because most toy breed dogs are incapable of acting like service dogs. Worse, right now, 80% of fakers are carrying their purse dogs in the stores and claiming it is a service dog, which seriously undermines real service dog users. Worse, small dogs that are aggressive can change open door policies for dogs overnight, simply because they, thanks to purses and baskets, are put in situations where they can and WILL bite store employees. I would encourage all business currently having an open pet dog policy to clearly post that the dogs must be leashed and have their feet on the ground, and that all dogs exhibiting aggression may be evicted at the pleasure of management. Leash laws technically do NOT apply inside private businesses; I've had offleash dogs aggressively accosting my dog in hardware stores, phoned the police, only to be told this fact, and that the store had to file the complaint themselves.

  • Arlene Brown 07/31/2008 3:14:00 AM

    In this day and age we can no longer trust our neighbors let a loan the person trying to abuse the privilage and honor of a (true) working dog. For every rule or regualation there is always that person who is going to find a way to screw the system and end up hurting the people who truly need this right. The ADA was put in place because there was nothing to protect people with all types of disabilities. The law makers half heartly through it together not realizing that there is going to be that person to abuse the laws, then making it more difficult for the one's who truly need it's protection. I am currently a student working on expanding my education so that I can become an Advocate for ADA rights in the workplace. I am gratefull for having the foundation of ADA laws, it is better than nothing. I also feel strongly that we do need some modification to the laws the ADA has set forth. One of them is the regulation for service animals. We have lost the reality of what service animals are for and what type of animals are the best qualified for the job at hand. I sure would not want a guide snake or rodent, that make no sense. As a person of a legitimate disability, when it comes time for me to get a service animal I would hope that all I would have to do is find an agency that is specialiized and is state licensed to train service animals. Then I would show my doctors recommendations, pay a small fee to register my dog as a working dog, get proper identification tag that distiquish my working dog from Fido the family pet. So the next time you see a dog on a 20' retractable lease wandering around your business without the proper identification tag then they are the one's who should be punished not the business owner and surly not me and my working dog.

  • ScotteeM 07/31/2008 2:35:00 AM

    I think labelling this woman "anti-animal rights" is incorrect. The views she is espousing are directly in line with the leading animal rights advocates, including PeTA and the Humane Society of the United States. Both of these groups oppose the concept of Service Dogs and advocate for the killing or banning of "pit bull" breeds. They oppose keeping any animals as pets, and so oppose the designation of pot-bellied pigs as pets. It's too bad the journalist didn't take time to research these points.

  • christie krauszowski 07/31/2008 1:49:00 AM

    WHOLLY COW BATMAN!!! I have a service dog(lucy) that is trained for seizure detection and i dont make her wear a vest as its hot. she has a card with her picture on it and my name with her breed and specifics as to what she does. Will she BITE? YOU BET she was taught that she backs away and then if a person persists she will growl. People dont realize that a service dog is not a normal dog they are there for the benifit of us not the public to PET and cuddle. She is a small female SPAYED dauschand that everyone wants to play with. So leave my dog alone people. ALSO MRS TAFT WHY DONT YOU WEAR A VEST THAT SAYS I HATE PETS! YEAH they BITE!! HANDsOFF

  • Peter 07/31/2008 12:45:00 AM

    WOW! I didnt know ignorant was spelled T a f t. Its not a specific breed that attacked her, it was a specific dog. Get over it.

 

Most Popular Stories


Now Click This

Browse Voice Nation
  • Voice Places

    Voice Places

    Discover restaurants, nightlife, travel, shopping...

  • VOICE Daily Deals

    VOICE Daily Deals

    Get 50 to 90% off every day on restaurants, movies, massages...

  • Best Of

    Best Of...

    More than 10,000 of the BEST things to eat, drink, and experience

  • My Voice Nation

    My Voice Nation

    Join the Village Voice community and get exclusive deals and info

  • Happy Hour

    Happy Hour

    Your local Happy Hour guide at your fingertips

or

Log in or Sign up

Social Connect:

Use your favorite account to access My Voice Nation.


Use your My Voice Nation account to log in:





Forgot password?
or

Sign Up or Log in

Social Connect:

Sign up for My Voice Nation with your preferred network.


Sign up for a My Voice Nation account:



Privacy policy