Service Dogs, the legal aspect.

[desertranger]

SD law is my sisters specialty. I am also aware that fed law overrides state law BUTT, this is California we're taking about, a state that can't even find itself. You're going to love this; under a new law you you may not take your SD into any facility unless it's been certified. Many businesses are placing signs to that effect. Now I have something else to educate people about as I point this out to the owners of such establishments and have written about it to my political reps. That certification BTW, comes in the form of a collar tag that doesn't cost anything and identifies your dog as an SD and registers him with the state. I don't know the purpose of said law but can give you the relevant link if you want it. A federal SD registry is also being considered as part of the new and rewritten ADA which is not finished yet.

 

I know if I have that dumb F--- tag then then when someone requires proof of service I can shove it into their face and be pissy about it. Ya see Bex. I'm willing to play the game by the rules only if I can get the rules bent my way. To date I have been banned from Indian parklands where I used to work because they are closed to dogs. I'm going to change that starting with Jin.

 

DR: I am not up to date on the most recent proposals, but certification of SDs is evil, IMO. I wouldn't mind having to register and have a doctors report on file of my disability, but NO ONE ELSE can judge how well my dog's task performance WORKS FOR ME. Most certification stuff requires hundreds of hours of training BY A PROGRAM. Sure, my dog will be a BETTER SD if you take her away from me, destroy our bond, and teach her a bunch of generic tasks that have nothing to do with my specific needs.

 

The following is my response to the above post and is cross-posted at BC-Rescue. I would like input on this from the people here.

 

 

I should have said registration not certification although the state does call what it is doing certification. I think that shall change in the future.

 

I agree with you 1000% however since you are not up to date allow me, at least as far as the state of Calif is concerned, to do so.

 

First of all Jin's training is the major part of what I'm up to. The paperwork wanted by the state is a headache but not a major problem and only takes time. It is simply a one page form requesting the both you and your dogs name rank and serial number (sic) for ID purposes. They then send you a tag no questions asked. You also certify you are making a truthful statement and if you are not yo can spend up to 6mo in jail along with a 1000USD fine. That's your registration.

Since I tend to be OCD about details I wanted to know more so I read the law and called my sister the lawyer whose currently fighting 2 SD lawsuits over what is a legitimate SD. She says the reason the state is doing it is for:

 

1. There is no national registry of "legitimate" service dogs.

2. There is no definition or registration and/or certification process.

3. To aid in identification the owner and dog in case they are separated.

4. For legal purposes and defense in court.

5. To reduce the amount of false lawsuits and claims about service dogs and to reduce the court load.

6. To provide protection for the dog not just the person under the law. As it stands right now a service dog has no protection at all and can be taken by animal control for a complaint about barking.

7. To set a minimum standard of behavior for SDs

8. and lastly to give SDITs validity and protection under the law as well. SDITs are not covered and do not have the same rights as a trained working SD even though they work as they are trained.

 

 

The state is also considering a mandatory minimum obedience level for all service dogs. But then again they want to have all dogs in the state neutered and to go through at least a basic obedience class. Right now the state is considering the standards set out in the ACK Canine Good Citizenship Certificate as that requirement. Jin gets that certificate at in Sept..

 

Basically they are doing this to protect us the people who use SDs and their dogs. There is no charge for the tag and it's good for the life of the dog. Frankly if it's going to help make my life easier I'll go for it. If it gets in the way I'll fight it. At any rate I think you're going to see this come to light nationally as the section on SDs is rewritten in the ADA. At least so sayeth my sister.

 

BTW: Victoria is a huge proponent of SDs and has suggested when I have Jin trained and I know whet I'm doing that I not only offer SD classes but hire myself out as an expert wittness with regards to SDs. The suit she is fighting right now is over two claims of SDs that were not really SDs but pets. It's a difficult suit as one of the dogs ran off during it's testing and never returned. The other dog is supposed to pull a wheelchair but balks whenever hooked up to a harness and doesn't behave well. The owners have doen nothing to show that have provided anykind of training as well. The lawyers are just carrying this on and it is a travesty that these cases are allowed to continue.

 

In the past several months I have read a lot of SD cases that are in front of the courts. My conclusion is there are an awful lot of illegitimate SDs out there. Not trained, unable to provide the service the owners say they do and with no medical records to back them up. Whether there are laws or not a person who has an SD is certainly bound to be a papertrail. I have one. Medical records, letters from my doctor, shrink and others.

 

Unless the status of SDs is clarified there is going to be no end to the legal problems just because it's easy for people to go out and buy a vest, patch and say, "looky here, a service dog". Until Jin's fully trained his patch says in training.

 

I understand how you feel Bexie however because all of these lawsuits, and there are hundreds, it only makes things tougher on people like you and me. I'm on your side but unfortunately in this case a line has to be drawn somewhere. Otherwise we're going to wind up with a huge lot of snarky laprats claiming to be SDs.

[Pam Wolf]

The problem is that when one of these 'sub standard SD's (can't speak for the OP's dog) goes into the public and is illmannered it reflects on ALL SD's. Too many people are now calling their dogs SD's. I know I see poorly trained SD's frequently. I have known people to 'borrow' coats/tags or whatever to enable their dog to fly in the cabin when the dog was not a SD, so the system is being abused.

 

OTOH, I am currently training a hopeful SD and it is a hassel to get him into stores etc for socialization/manners without some sort of ID. If he works out thru his basics he will go thru a formal program for certification. I don't think there are any usless behaviours that a SD needs. Even if it isn't for your specific disability, it can come in handy to have a dog tug open a fridge, turn on/off lights etc even if the person in question doesn't have a specific need for these behaviours.

[Zap-n-Jo]

DR, Could you please add a little more context as to the issue with registering/certifying SD's? The service dog topic is relatively new to me, and I expect you're way along in a conversation that I'm just entering. Also, what are some examples of lawsuits over service dogs? Thanks.

[Sue R]

The problem is that when one of these 'sub standard SD's (can't speak for the OP's dog) goes into the public and is illmannered it reflects on ALL SD's. Too many people are now calling their dogs SD's. I know I see poorly trained SD's frequently. I have known people to 'borrow' coats/tags or whatever to enable their dog to fly in the cabin when the dog was not a SD, so the system is being abused.

The system is being abused.

 

People often have "self-declared" service dogs and, if they are not reasonably trained, they are no more a true service dog than my companion dog is, and often not as well-mannered. One self-declared service dog (a Border Collie that was a self-trained low-blood-sugar detector for her owner) was so excited by the sheep she saw in a demo that she turned around and jumped on my then-3-month-old pup (on lead) and bit him in the face. Her owner's reaction? Excitement that her dog was going ballistic over sheep! Nevermind my bleeding pup with a puncture by his eye.

 

I have also heard people point out that they have purchased service dog vests and so forth, simply to be able to take dogs where they would otherwise not be allowed. Not very ethical, are they?

 

I don't know what the answers are to the questions posed. I think there needs to be some sort of standard and certification but, every time things become mired in legalese, the situation if often worsened and not improved.

[Pam Wolf]

As for the AKC's CGC being used as a test, that is worthless! I know of at least 2 severe biters that passed the CGC with flying colours! One is probably an OK dog, butstill, with a bite history (at least a level 3) should ALWAYS be watched. The other was a magnificant example during the CGC, he's gladly give you a paw, but ask for that paw when you had nail clippers in your hand and he was Mr. Hyde! Same for brushing. Fine with the brush run along his back per CGC, but try to brush his tail! He too was a level 3 biter (this refers to Dr. Ian Dunbar's bite scale and level 3 and above do damage. both of these were high 3's).

 

I've known too many dogs that could easily passa CGC but werenot what I'd consider good canine citizens. And much depends on the tester. I've seen testers allow dogs to pass wearing pinch collars and with bags of hotdogs in front of their faces! And when dogs couldn't pass the old test with the dog tied while the owner was out fo sight, they weanied it down so the dog remains witha person the owner handed it to-worthless!

[Caroline Reichard]

SAR dogs can't get special privileges until they are certified. I'm curious why you think SDs in training ought to? Either through ignorance or lack of concern, many newbies training dogs for working tasks abuse privileges that are hand-won and highly-valued by certified, experienced handlers. Is there something so special about SDs that dogs training to carry out those tasks shouldn't have to follow the rules the rest of us do?

 

It is a mark of a trained working dog that it behaves itself on or off lead. When dogs don't behave but wear some ID, badge, vest etc.other, it makes the whole profession look bad.

[desertranger]

DR, Could you please add a little more context as to the issue with registering/certifying SD's? The service dog topic is relatively new to me, and I expect you're way along in a conversation that I'm just entering. Also, what are some examples of lawsuits over service dogs? Thanks.

 

Start with this link, it's an FAQ about SDs and a goverment brief about service dogs that should answer your questions.

 

The state of Calif want SDs registered/certified buthas not standards for certification as opposed to just registering the dog. As for examples of law suits here are 2.

 

A man was refused accomodation at a hotel dspite the fact he claimed his dog was a service dog. In fact the dog had no training at all and when given an opportunity to show the dogs training it took off after a cat and did not return when recalled.

 

In the case of another person in a wheel chair who said their dog pulled the chair. However the dog balked at pulling the chair despite the claim of the dog being trained.

 

After reading the cases if I were on a jury I would find against the plaintiffs.

 

 

The case for registering and certifying SDs is a huge argument with many people including some who work with guide dogs saying medic alert, hearing, assistance and other dogs are not legitimate as service dogs. That's something for the supreme court. In the meantime to prevent just anyone from slapping a vest on and claiming service dog some sort of certification has been talked about. What has been suggested is a minimum behavior standard, something better than the CGC, which is the currently accepted standard. Testing a dog for the "mitigating task" is impossible since there are so many tasks that can be done so my feeling is that should not be tested for. It seems the main reason for wanting a set of standards is for those dogs that go into public and would need access to where most dogs are denied now such as restaraunts and hotels.

 

SAR dogs can't get special privileges until they are certified. I'm curious why you think SDs in training ought to? Either through ignorance or lack of concern, many newbies training dogs for working tasks abuse privileges that are hand-won and highly-valued by certified, experienced handlers. Is there something so special about SDs that dogs training to carry out those tasks shouldn't have to follow the rules the rest of us do?

 

It is a mark of a trained working dog that it behaves itself on or off lead. When dogs don't behave but wear some ID, badge, vest etc.other, it makes the whole profession look bad.

 

Good Q Caroline. How do you expect to train a dog completely unless he is registered and accorded the same privileges as a certified SD. After all you have to reach that certification somehow. Besides SDiTs work while in training. It would be the same as me training a person to a level of certification and giving them their piece of paper with no On-the-Job training or experience then turning them loose without supervision. An SDiT needs OJT therefore should be allowed the same privileges once a certain level of training has been reached. currently in those places where certification is required it takes 100hrs of training to get a piece of paper. The cost to the owner can be horrendous especially if they live on disability. BTW If you don't know disability payments are less than Social Security and are taxed. I don't know anyone who can afford to pay for SD training when making much less than $1500 a month.

 

I've had trained working dogs for over 35 years SAR dogs included. If they're going to wear a vest that IDs them as an SD its plainly labeled either "In Training" or On Duty" Like you I don't want an entire section of dogdom to be looked on poorly.

[Maralynn]

So is this a CA ruling you're talking about? or a national one? I see no reason for government madated registration. It does nothing except add to buracracy and does absoluety zero for any sort of SD accountability. A certification process is a different story. Something like a therapy dog test would be a great starting point and not that hard to obtain provided one has a dog suited to the work it's supposed to do and is willing to actually train their dog. I think the training facility near where I live requires dogs that they have trained and given out to be recertified every 2-3 years and be able to perform 3-4 tasks for the person. It shows that the person using the dog is commited to keeping their training up and using the dog as they were intened to be used - as an actual service dog, not a pet. But I think any sort of testing should be turned over to national organizations already in place, rather than government ones. Seriously, who wants a DMV type organization running that sort of a program

 

When I first started training for SAR, I was amazed at a few of the people who loved the idea of having a search dog and wanted to be part of the team, but then would complain at meetings that the rules or certification process was too hard. Umm, it's slightly challanging for a reason, and if your dog is not progressing, either you're not cut out for this or your dog isn't. Many people like the idea of having their beloved pet be their working compaion and having freedom to take the dog everywhere and show it off. But once you decide you want to train a dog that will be working in a public arena a person has to realize that there are major responsibilities that go with it.

 

To date I have been banned from Indian parklands where I used to work because they are closed to dogs. I'm going to change that starting with Jin.

 

If it's a private area, not open to the public, you and your dog can be banned, SD or not. Private individuals do not need to allow service dogs on their land.

 

Besides SDiTs work while in training. It would be the same as me training a person to a level of certification and giving them their piece of paper with no On-the-Job training or experience then turning them loose without supervision. An SDiT needs OJT therefore should be allowed the same privileges once a certain level of training has been reached.

 

They are learning to work while they are in training - that's the whole point of training What type of on the job training do you feel an in training dog needs that can't be met by current conditions? I know for myself I have found there are numerous places I can take my dog just by explaining what I'm training for and having a well-behaved dog. Hardware/home improvement stores, feed stores, pet stores (talk about distractions!) the library, nursing home/rehab center, out door farmers markets, schools, outdoor festivals - these are all places I've been able to take my dogs just by asking permission first. I would think that that sort of array would provide just about training senario that a person would need.

 

 

currently in those places where certification is required it takes 100hrs of training to get a piece of paper. The cost to the owner can be horrendous especially if they live on disability. BTW If you don't know disability payments are less than Social Security and are taxed. I don't know anyone who can afford to pay for SD training when making much less than $1500 a month.

 

One hundred hours of training is not that much for a working dog. I've put waaay more than that into training Kipp for SAR. All an individual has to do is train and keep records and they'd be surprised how fast the training added up. There are alot of training classes a person can attend for a reasonable cost and many book/video resources that are available as well. That seems like a very doable requirment for a person who is serious about training their dog. And there are also several organizations out there who provide well trained service dogs at little or no cost to a disabled person provided they are suited to working with one and can afford basic care for a dog.

[desertranger]

The interesting thing is there are people posting who've I've never seen post before. Thanks.

 

The SD registration is for Calif and maybe some other states I don't know. A national SD registry only exists in the minds of those charging you $250 and above for an ID card and number in a database that doesn't mean bupkis.

 

We all know how long it takes to train any kind of working dog including SDs. Some of them especially SAR, medical, trail, any dog that works with other people or is in the public eye take hundreds of hours to train and a lifetime of re-enforcement. You're right people think it's cool to have a working dog or one that does tricks. They have no idea that while simple things like sit stay and shake are fairly easy it take a long time to teach a dog to go look for something be it a ball, beer or body. When we're out with Jin there is always a group of people saying the same thing. I want my dog to do that but as you well know they are not willing to make the commitment. If Jin were a student I would say he gets the equivalent of 20 hrs of formal training a week plus whatever he gets for reenforcement when we are just out together. When I explain what it takes for people to just have a basic ob trained dog they balk. They may want a sharp clever well trained dog but like we have both sad they are not willing to put the time into it.

 

 

Post interrupted to take the dogs for a walk. 6:30

Returned, now for a second cup of coffee and a home made pastry. 7:50

 

Regarding the Indian parklands. Native Americans tribes are sovereign nations bound by federal law and the constitution. For the most part they have their own laws, government and individuals do not pay taxes to the US Govt. On the other hand corporate tribal entities, law enforcement, public safety, and a lot more fall under federal law. Police and rangers are certified DOJ, and supported by the FBI and US Marshalls. Local tribes also fall under local and state law in many instances especially here where there is so much interaction and co-mingling between the tribe and the local cities. I have friends that live in Indian land who are not Indians. The local tribes are are also the largest employers in the area. If you work for the Indians you are covered by workmans comp and have health insurance as required by state law.

 

As for OJT, there are rare instances or perhaps I should say exceptions where you might want to go. A doctors office for instance or supermarket. Remember while Americans love their dogs they are filthy beasts in most peoples mind and they don't want them in places where they might transfer a nasty disease to the human population. Europe and the UK have a different view on that subject. More to the point how about air travel? While the list is not a long one it is there.

 

You're right a couple of hundred hours is not a lot. I've already got 25 hrs in the classroom and Ihave no idea of how much other time I spend with him. Yet the answer is not how many hours of training alone but what kind of training. How much can you teach a dog in 100 hours of the suggested training? What do you teach a dog?

 

If we don't do it ourselves what will happen is some govt feeb will get it into his head to make it a do something. Then we're screwed because standards will be made up by a committee of people who have no idea of what an SD is or can do.

 

Amateur (HAM) radio mandated by congress as a Strategic National Resource and is licensed by the FCC to operate. No state or local govt can deny or restrict the use of HAM radio and it's attendant towers, avg 40ft tall. Even HOAs have problems trying to enforce their no antenna laws which is a violation of fed law. Because there is so much potential for abuse like illegal operators, crime, how it effects homeland security, emergencies and such we police ourselves and we do it very effectively. An illegal station can be located in minutes and if it's moving it can be tracked.

 

I think SDs need to be setup in the same way. We should write the standards not someone else. Input should come from everyone, SAR to the wheelchair bound, from medical alert to psychiatric. Space should even be made for therapy dogs.

 

This is a huge can of worms and dimes to dollars someone is sure to get his hands on it for political profit and that can only result in disaster for the SDs and their owners.