S.F. getting its fill of 'service animals'

[Liberal_in_LA]

S.F. getting its fill of 'service animals'
C.W. Nevius

Saturday, January 2, 2010

It is not your imagination. There really are more dogs strolling through public spaces with their owners. Animals are going where they have never gone before.

"In San Francisco, it is just so much more in your face," says Emily Simone, a senior field manager for Guide Dogs for the Blind. "In the '80s and especially in the '90s, I've just seen an explosion. We've become animal obsessed. The East Coast and San Francisco are particular hotbeds for advocacy."

San Francisco has become a city filled with "service animals," meaning the owner has a permit that allows him or her to take their dog, cat, or snake (seriously) into restaurants, libraries, and often even rental properties that don't allow pets. In 2004 the city's Animal Care and Control Department issued 244 permits. In 2008 the number was 500, and interim director Rebecca Katz speculates that 2009 numbers are at least as high.

Unfortunately, the practice of granting service animal permits so generously is undercutting the intent of the law. Permits that allow an animal full access to buses, restaurants and public places should go only to service animals that perform a specific task and it seems too often that's not happening. That needs to change.

A good example of the problem can be seen on Haight Street. Residents complain that many of the street bullies have intimidating dogs, often pit bulls, which they take into restaurants and stores.

"They go into a restaurant, sit down with the dog, and when the owner says he doesn't allow dogs, they show him a service animal tag," says Bill Herndon, who works for the SFPD's Vicious and Dangerous Animals Unit. "The police are called, they see the tag, and that's the end of the discussion."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/01/02/BAAL1BBKHD.DTL#ixzz0bbAeNi5o

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Service *snakes*?

[Liberal_in_LA]

3. what about 'service cats"? My cats don't lift a paw for me.

[undeterred]

4. they bite if your shopping goes over a pre-set limit

[Tesha]

15. The next big thing: The Service Mongoose! (NT)

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

17. They come in pretty handy if you have a cobra problem.

[undeterred]

2. that's right up there with getting a handicapped parking tag

when you don't really need it

[anigbrowl]

51. This is another thing frequently abused in San Francisco

parking is very expensive here so people who have a disabled relative get a parking tag on the basis of being a caregiver and then use it so they can park at their own convenience. I think this ought to incur a 2x fine myself, but it's hard to enforce unless a traffic cop just happens to be around at the time someone returns to their vehicle.

[michreject]

60. Detroit as well

Half the city has a handicap tag.

[flvegan]

5. Mmmm...pit bulls.

:popcorn:

[Liberal_in_LA]

6. Service pit bulls

[QC]

12. I once breast fed my pit bull in the local Olive Garden. n/t

[MindPilot]

20. Were you talking on your cell phone at the time?

You should be in jail.

:evilgrin:

[QC]

22. Of course, I was also smoking. n/t

[donheld]

49. Did you get a brazillion hugh complaints?

:hide:

[Ferret Annica]

7. And ferrets are banned from this state

Californians will never know the joy of seeing eye ferrets for blind Republicans.

And seeing how the ferret's eye is only good to detect movement of prey which is why they are considered and exotic, I would love to see them lead blind Republicans around any damn place they canted to wander. ;)

[msongs]

8. your out of control misbehaving child? now a service animal. bingo! nt

[Luminous Animal]

9. Even before clicking the link, I knew the article would be by C.W. Nevius.

One of San Francisco's 17 remaining Republicans and an asshole.

[depakid]

11. +1

Some folks really are THAT transparent.

[Book Lover]

23. Thank you!

Someone should tell Chuck the days of making your name in San Francisco by false muckraking are way over.

[liberal_at_heart]

30. There is such a weird undertone towards the disabled these days

Maybe it's because there just isn't as much compassion for people as there use to be. Maybe it's because of the conservative values and them not wanting to support people that can't take care of themselves. I don't know but I don't like it.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

59. Yup --

I saw the headline followed by the author and went, "I know where this is heading"! :D

[Greyhound]

62. Only a repub or repub sympathizer* would complain about .000062% of

the population "abusing" something so overwhelmingly helpful.

*Tight-ass authoritarian"

[Ignis]

64. Bingo.

A republican and an asshole? Now you're just repeating yourself.

[The Straight Story]

10. My X GF was allergic to dogs - but dogs and such are ok, pollution from cars ok,

but smoking with friends in a bar is...taboo??

[LeftyMom]

27. You need a hobby.

Just sayin'.

[The Straight Story]

40. Maybe, but I like defending choice for fun

It just seems so many are against it these days - like they are scared of people being able to make a choice as adults. Not sure why it upsets them so much, probably a control issue.

[Better Today]

52. +1M

[KamaAina]

13. Actually I don't believe The City is even allowed to issue "service animal permits" under the ADA

A business owner, train conductor, etc. is allowed to ask exactly two questions: "Is that a service animal?" and if Yes, "What does she or he do for you?" That's it. No permits required.

As it happens, I shall be meeting with my colleague from SF as well as others from around the state starting Tuesday, so this is news I can use. :thumbsup:

[Luminous Animal]

19. My friend was required to apply for a service animal tag.

One of her dogs has one but the other doesn't.

[KamaAina]

65. Apparently the service animal tag is optional

it's meant to ease interactions with the public (which a harness could do just as well for less $).

Somehow Nevius failed to mention that. Imagine! An RW hack writing for a notorious fishwrap leaving out a fact. :sarcasm:

[undeterred]

14. I wonder if these are "therapy dogs" abusing the privilege.

There are a lot of people training their dogs to be "therapy dogs" which is a different legal status than a service dog. A therapy dog does not have 24 hour privileges to go anywhere with its handler- it is allowed into certain specific situations with permission given ahead of time. And that's going to be a pretty well behaved dog to start with.

[liberal_at_heart]

37. I've thought about getting a therapy dog for my autistic son

He doesn't connect well with people and he seems to really love my husband's guide dog.

[undeterred]

41. I'm thinking of training my dog to work as a therapy dog-

one of the programs around here is for them to work with autistic children. They use cats and parrots too!

[liberal_at_heart]

42. that's great. There are many people in need of the companionship.

[hlthe2b]

16. I'm sure there are some abuses but the kneejerk reactions

that this is likely to elicit is just damned wrong. Service dogs (as intended and with appropriate training and certification) have helped so many people... This guy strikes me as very reactionary and frankly, an asshole. They can crack down on the abuses without causing problems for those who are following the intent of the law.


I have a very very well-behaved 11 yo Aussie-Lab mix who loves to go in with me to those stores that allow it (The COntainer Store, Orvis, and some of the local pet stores). She has NEVER misbehaved, sits on command and patiently allows all the children who request to pat her--even if they inadvertently poke her in the eye. She's no service dog-- just a well behaved dog. Several Container Store employees have remarked how well the dog-friendly policy has worked... (It isn't advertised-just something they tell dog owners who tie their dogs outside, if they seem well behaved) They have not had problems with the occasional dogs who come in, but could not say the same for many of the poorly supervised children that have come in. From what I have seen, I can certainly believe that to be the case.

[liberal_at_heart]

39. Your dog sounds lovely

PetSmart has a pet friendly policy and it seems to work for them. Most of the privately owned pet strores around here have their pets in the store as well.

[hlthe2b]

50. thank you....

she's my angel and I'm thankful for every day I have with her. :loveya:

[HillWilliam]

61. My partner has an 8-yo cattledog/springer X

who is a seizure-detector. We're so blessed she came into our lives. She is his freedom to move about in the world instead of being trapped at home, never knowing when or if a seizure is coming. She's dead-on accurate and thanks to her volunteering to communicate (and our good luck and wit to figure out what she was communicating when she was a pup) he's been able to ward off most of the grand mals he used to have before she came along. We thank Spirit every day for her.

Most folks don't realize there is a difference between a service animal and a therapy animal. True, there's a some abuse of both terms, but not nearly as much as the subject of the OP wants to make out. It sounds to me like another attack on the disabled, something the reich wing just love to do.

[jtuck004]

18. ask many shelters

this has been going on for years - lots of shelters exempt owners from fees for licenses for such pets, lots of people abuse it, in lots of cities.

Now that it's gang members with their dogs, its a huge problem. But laws that focus on behavior, not breed (or skin color) are almost always the answer.

[Luminous Animal]

21. A simpler answer would be that all service animals be required to be muzzled

when in restaurants, stores, buses, etc.

[hlthe2b]

24. Sorry, but that is an ill-informed response to the issue.

Certified service dogs include those whose keen sense of smell helps them to detect oncoming seizures in their owners and thus to get them to safety before losing consciousness, To suggest muzzling them and thus interfering with their nose is ridiculous. Certified service dogs are so well trained that they are not bite threats. A very reactionary and poorly informed response to an issue that is not at all clear in terms of magnitude. It has already been pointed out that the writer of this piece is a RW reactionary hack. To the extent that it reflects some truth, the abuses (non-certified dogs or owners being issued permits for animals not recognized for reasons not recognized) needs to be addressed.

Seems some here would argue to pull the cane from a blind person, if somewhere, some blind person accidentally tripped someone with a cane. :eyes:

[Luminous Animal]

28. There are plenty of muzzles that do not interfere with the sense of smell.

And I was the one that first pointed out that Nevius is a RW hack.

And we are not talking about "certified service dogs". We are talking about companion pets that are issued an assistance dog license tag in order to accompany their owners. For instance, my friend is a bartender, she was attacked on her way home from work at 2:30 AM, she started suffering acute anxiety near the end of her shift and feared the trip home so she was able to get an assistance pet tag so she could bring her dog to work and alleviate her anxiety.

[hlthe2b]

31. So you offer a "solution" that is going to adversely impact

TRUE certified service dogs, who have NEVER been shown to be a problem? Instead of logically arguing for a crackdown of these abuses? That is a rational response to you? To license non-service dogs who have not been trained or who do not have a function under the ADA is the problem and that is where our efforts should lie.

You think it is no big deal for a dog to wear a muzzle, even when it is not required? Why, then don't YOU wear one and get back to me after, say 8 hours? Sorry, but this kind of dog and ADA ignorance just sends my BP racing.

[Luminous Animal]

35. I absolutely support non-certified assistant dogs. I support the people who need them.

Many people do not need a trained assistant dog. The solution is simple. Untrained, muzzle. Trained no muzzle. Not once did I advocate that the dog be muzzled at all times. I suggested the dog be muzzled ONLY when in a restaurant, store, or bus.

[hlthe2b]

36. I thought your concern was with the burden to business...

How, with your system will they know the difference?

[Luminous Animal]

43. When did I present any pro-argument about the needs of business?

I don't give a flying fuck about the burdens on business. What I care about is that, even is San Francisco, the needs of business often supercede that of the individual. Nevius is a big supporter of landlords and business (SF is a renter city) and landlords are the biggest lobby pushing back on issuing these licenses to pets because they have to allow their tenants to have untrained companion pets whether they want to allow pets or not.

It would be easy for them to know the difference by issuing two different tags, one for trained service dogs, the other for non-trained assistance pets.

The fear mongering by Nevius and the business and property owning community is now in its baby steps. That is why dog-rescuers are trying to come up with a pro-active solution so that people with anxiety, depression, and chronic illnesses, will still have the freedom to travel and shop about town with their pets.

[paulsby]

56. pets can lower blood pressure

i suggest a service animal

hth

[liberal_at_heart]

29. Thank you for your thoughtful response

My husband's guide dog has saved his life twice. He is better trained and better behaved than any pet I've ever met.

[Luminous Animal]

38. Yes. Your husband's dog is trained. The article refers to untrained assistant dogs.

And that is that.

There are many people who need companion dogs but not specifically trained service dogs to make it through day to day life. C.W. Nevius and the business community are advocating to restrict access to the acquisition of an untrained assistant animal license for people's pets. And they will win unless an alternative is presented. And when they win, many people who rely on their untrained pets for assistance will be denied the opportunity.

[KamaAina]

57. Not all service dogs are guide dogs

Years ago, I used to ride the train with a woman whose black Lab, Ike, was trained to do things like put money on a counter for her! How's he supposed to do that if he's muzzled? :shrug:

[Luminous Animal]

58. Yes. Trained. As I have said before...

Nevius's complaint is NOT about trained service animals, his complaint is about UNTRAINED PETS receiving a license to be companion animals. He is trying to restrict people from having their UNTRAINED PETS from being classified as exempt from certain restrictions and regulations.

Your friends lab is a TRAINED service animal and would be exempt from wearing a muzzle.

[liberal_at_heart]

26. Ignorance plain and simple

There are more pets that attack people than service animals. The prejudice against the disabled and their service animals in this country is like a plague. We need more public education about service animals.

[hlthe2b]

32. Amen... n/t

[Luminous Animal]

33. These so-called service animals are pets!!!!!!!! Holy fucking hell.

They are NOT trained certified service animals!!!!! They are pets that are given a personal assistance license. No training is necessary or required.

Nevius and other reactionaries in the city want to restrict these pets from acquiring an assistance license. And they will win because the majority of complaints are coming from the business community. There is a simple way to beat them at the pass and that is a requirement for a simple soft muzzle.

This entire "restrict assistant pets movement" started in the summer with an article in the lame-o SF Weekly and it has gained momentum. The idea of a muzzle did not originate with me on this site but with many animal rescue and foster groups and individuals in the city.

[hlthe2b]

34. Sounds like some of the "solutions" offered for airline security

:eyes:

[liberal_at_heart]

44. I'm sorry

I did not mean to attack you. But along with the concern about permit abuses there is alot of prejudice intertwined and it is hard to figure out the motive of some of the people who complain about the animals whether trained or not. I think we could have a discussion about how to address the permit problems. But it will have to be done in a way that does not permit prejudice ideas to permeate the discussion.

[Luminous Animal]

47. There are no permit problems.

As far as the animal rescue community and me are concerned, people should be allowed to get service animal permits for their pets if there doctor determines it to be necessary, and that is that.

I live here and the complaints are coming from restaurateurs and landlords. Both are consistently boosted by Nevius over the years. He is featured by San Francisco's ridiculously stupid newspaper in order to broadcast the desires of the business community by inflating "concerns" from "ordinary" citizens. I suspect there will be a biting incident reported soon, tehn I there will be an oped on the editorial page within the next month or so. Then a petition for a ballot initiative to restrict access for these animals. The ultimate goal of this "false flag" will be to reduce permits and thus keep companion animals from apartment dwellers who need them.

The animal rescue and foster people that I work with have come up with a simple solution of requiring businesses to post that they require that people who receive these companion animal permits (not certified service animal permits) soft muzzle their dogs when eating in a restaurant or visiting shops, etc.

There are plenty of businesses that allow dogs already. For them, they won't even require it or bat an eye. For those who are trying to restrict companion animals through a few scary stories, they'll be nipped in the bud.

[liberal_at_heart]

25. My husband has a guide dog from Guide Dogs for the Blind

Guide Dogs for the Blind are one of the strictest service animal providers in the country. They have very strict standards and guidelines. If the dogs don't pass the training process the dogs are adopted out to families as pets. But even the ones the drop out of the training are usually so well behaved and just the sweetest animals. I tell you if you ever want a well behaved pet you can get one that has failed the training at Guide Dogs for the Blind and you will have one of the best pets you've ever had in your life. Sounds to me like there needs to be stricter laws on training. If an animal can't behave, is disruptive, or is violent then they absolutely shouldn't be allowed to be a service animal. As for what animals are allowed to be service animals I think there can be a wide range of animals that can serve humans. This is where we need more education for the public so the public will be more accepting. Personally I've always wanted to meet a guide pony. I've heard of them but never seen one.

[AlienGirl]

53. Guide horses (as well as "helping hands" monkeys) are no longer allowed under DOJ guidelines.

[D-Lee]

45. 500 service animals isn't so much -- what a dorky complaint (nt)

[liberal_at_heart]

46. There have always been more people in need of a companion animal than organizations can provide

500 service animals really isn't that much.

[Luminous Animal]

48. That is 500 this year. Dogs live more than a year.

[Lorien]

54. Yeah, and how many people live in SF?

They're being used for the blind, disabled, and even vets with PTSD.How manyhandicapped parking permits were issued at the same time?

[Luminous Animal]

55. What is your problem? I'd be okay with 10,000 a year being issued

if there were people who needed them.

I was making a factual point. 500 a year does not mean only 500 people hold these licenses.

[blondeatlast]

63. 500 permits a year to: guide dogs for the blind and deaf, seizure sniffing dogs,

dogs for autistics, etc.

In a city the size of SF, seems reasonable.

Mr. Nevius sounds a bit peeved about nothing.