Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Alaska Airlines | Mileage Plan
Reload this Page >

Dog in aisle, walked onboard, no carrier, poop & urine galore

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Dog in aisle, walked onboard, no carrier, poop & urine galore

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 11, 2015, 6:50 am
  #46  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: DTW - Rochester Hills, MI
Programs: Cathay MPC, IHG Diamond Ambassador, Domestic Airline Nobody
Posts: 715
Originally Posted by jaimelobo
The other issue is allergies.

My wife is pretty reactive to dogs, granted if she was a few rows back, it might not be more than a little sniffle. However, if she ended up sitting in an adjacent seat, she would definitely have a very uncomfortable flight.

Some years back, it seemed alike all the airlines stopped serving peanuts on the off chance one person, somewhere on the plane, might be allergic.
Originally Posted by iwatawood
I am always baffled by why they've banned all sorts of food items (ie peanuts) because people are deathly allergic to them but I am deathly allergic to dogs and cats and I'm constantly surrounded by them on the plane. (Yes, I know I can be moved, or they can be moved, not always a possibility on the stuffed flights) At a minimum, they should stay in their carrier, emotional support or not. In some cases, I've given my rescue inhaler to the FA and said, "since you aren't going to do anything about the dogs/cats in my vicinity, here is my medication for when I stop breathing." because I don't get sneezing/wheezing first, I just stop breathing.
Negative physical reactions are not the only problem.

I am sympathetic to the various disorders people may have that indicate the need for an animal companion. However, what about when those needs come in conflict with someone else's disorder that makes them petrified of dogs? Cynophobia.

Dogs, monkeys, cats... do not belong in the passenger compartment of a plane.
Gongzuokuang is offline  
Old Feb 11, 2015, 7:38 am
  #47  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: MIA
Programs: AA EXP (AC), DL G (SC), Bonvoy LTP, & IHG AMB
Posts: 1,798
Originally Posted by Gongzuokuang
Negative physical reactions are not the only problem.

I am sympathetic to the various disorders people may have that indicate the need for an animal companion. However, what about when those needs come in conflict with someone else's disorder that makes them petrified of dogs? Cynophobia.

Dogs, monkeys, cats... do not belong in the passenger compartment of a plane.
That's why airlines limit pets in the cabin. In First, it's generally one pet in that cabin and economy, I've seen the limit set at three to four pets in that cabin. That way, if someone does have an allergy or a phobia, the airline has some flexibility to move seats. Now, those numbers are exclusively for the people who pay the fee. We travel frequently with our Cavalier King Charles Spaniel and we pay the fee at time of booking to make certain that there is adequate 'pet space'. Moreover, he knows the drill and he sleeps the entire flight in his bag. The ADA was meant to protect people from discrimination. Sadly, it's been abused.
CHOPCHOP767 is offline  
Old Feb 11, 2015, 8:00 am
  #48  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: south of WAS DC
Posts: 10,131
Originally Posted by mapu
I would report these highly unsanitary conditions to the department of health and demand a full refund from the airline for transporting me in the same conditions.
i have been on a couple flights where there are a large number of children in diapers. they seem to have a poop contest. the stench is horrendous, and the leftovers are much more dangerous than dog poop. the diapers get stored in a leaky bag, or just dumped in the bathroom.

i usually fly tatl, so have only had a dog on one flight out of hundreds. most of these posts indicate dogs on most every flight. i have had chickens on more flights than dogs(fly to central america for chickens on board).
slawecki is offline  
Old Feb 11, 2015, 8:18 am
  #49  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 704
Originally Posted by seekinghelp
I disagree with the fee, but also the ability to take dog out of carrier. If you can't survive in this world without having your dog on your lap, you should drive.
I would say,rather not,but I live in a country where driving a car is not considered a human right

I would actually go so far as to say that I would wastly prefeer to be on an airplane with somebody having a dog on their lap than somebody coming at me,full speed,in the oposing lane, having the same animal on their lap,but maybe its just me being a bit anxious,might actually go to a shrink for this anxiety to get a couple of certificats for my dogs
geirfugl is offline  
Old Feb 11, 2015, 8:33 am
  #50  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Leavenworth WA
Programs: MVPG
Posts: 78
Originally Posted by slawecki
i have been on a couple flights where there are a large number of children in diapers. they seem to have a poop contest. the stench is horrendous, and the leftovers are much more dangerous than dog poop. the diapers get stored in a leaky bag, or just dumped in the bathroom.
True, however you're much less likely to be bitten.

But seriously, how can the presence of an uncrated animal be safe? On my last trip the FA was all over us about the phone cables being in the way, preventing safe egress in an emergency -- but the dog on the floor is okay?!
gahyland is offline  
Old Feb 11, 2015, 8:35 am
  #51  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 704
Originally Posted by ANC
Tough thing for airlines to police. Theyre darned if they do darned if they dont. They dont want to get in trouble for denying a legitimate person from bringing on a service dog or being scrutinized as a handicapped person hater but on the other hand dont want to make everybody else mad either. Its not just airlines, its now happening everywhere. Whats out of control is the term "emotional support" animals. But if you want an emotional support animal on the plane you should still pay a fee. The reason being is whats next? An emotional support person? They get to fly for free with the so called distressed person because they are there for moral support? But the main moral of the OPs topic proves that I couldnt probably last very long as an FA. I wouldnt be cleaning up anything from this dog. Id hand the passenger some towels and a bottle of cleaner and tell them to ring the call button after they have it cleaned up so I can bring a trash bag
This is a realy good argument,but surely the main problem must be the profesional ethics of the practitioners who produce theese certificates for what seems to be very litle money,please do not give them any ideas about the "suport person" concept,although I rather likes the obvious free opgrades I would be entitled to with a lifetime certificate claiming severe claustrophobia,
geirfugl is offline  
Old Feb 11, 2015, 10:28 am
  #52  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NY, AA Plt 2 MM, HH Gold
Posts: 3
Angry Emotional Support animal abuse

There is a racket going on with the emotional support trick that people use to bring their dogs on-board without paying. A close family member is now one of the people abusing this category!. It is time for airlines to start charging a higher fee if they want their dogs in the cabin and under no circumstances is the dog to be let out of a mandatory carrier. I understand that to get the certificate only requires you know someone that can sign one!!
newaamil is offline  
Old Feb 11, 2015, 10:29 am
  #53  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,042
Does anyone have any information about when and where airlines are checking for the letters of certification? At the departures counter? At the gate?

I got interested in this so I looked up some of the airlines policies. United has a tough policy (at least on paper) whereby this letter is to be submitted for review and possibly verification by email or fax a couple days before the flight. The others I looked at were vague: the letter is to be shown to a Customer Service agent, doesn't say when or where.
Tizzette is offline  
Old Feb 11, 2015, 10:29 am
  #54  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kan@da
Programs: Anything with sweet spots
Posts: 1,790
Pets should be outlawed on cabin period. They are a luxury. Nobody needs them (except law enforcement and blind people)
MasterGeek is offline  
Old Feb 11, 2015, 11:41 am
  #55  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Programs: DL DM
Posts: 239
I somehow remembered, at least in Washington State, it is required to have documentations for your "service dog" But it is illegal to ASK for paper, which means you can totally refuse to show any certificates, the laws worded it in a very confusing way I think. In the case of bringing dogs to national parks (most of national parks in any States do not allow dogs) in WA, the rangers are not allowed to ask for proper paper for service dogs. I might be wrong but that's what I recall.
WinSea is offline  
Old Feb 11, 2015, 11:57 am
  #56  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Hyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: QLA
Programs: SBUX Gold
Posts: 14,507
Originally Posted by WinSea
I somehow remembered, at least in Washington State, it is required to have documentations for your "service dog" But it is illegal to ASK for paper, which means you can totally refuse to show any certificates, the laws worded it in a very confusing way I think. In the case of bringing dogs to national parks (most of national parks in any States do not allow dogs) in WA, the rangers are not allowed to ask for proper paper for service dogs. I might be wrong but that's what I recall.
I've noticed that owners walk their dogs into stores in WA MUCH more often than in California. Even into Starbucks, supermarkets, and other food service type places... and no challenge from the staff. I personally love dogs, but agree that they should stay outside.
IceTrojan is offline  
Old Feb 11, 2015, 12:05 pm
  #57  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Programs: DL DM
Posts: 239
Originally Posted by VNAFlyer
I've noticed that owners walk their dogs into stores in WA MUCH more often than in California. Even into Starbucks, supermarkets, and other food service type places... and no challenge from the staff. I personally love dogs, but agree that they should stay outside.
yeah that is a common thing in Seattle, the thing is we have SOOOO many coffee shops and most people are pretty chill about it. It is not allowed as long as the shop serves food, but not many shops are enforcing it, I personally don't have a problem with it, as long as the dog is well trained and behave well.
WinSea is offline  
Old Feb 11, 2015, 12:44 pm
  #58  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Southwest
Programs: HAL Platinum, JetBlue, KrisFlyer, NWA, USAirways, Alaska Air
Posts: 105
Originally Posted by mikexner
I'm so glad someone else started this as I've been massively annoyed by similar things lately. I just wrote customer care, but they haven't responded to my last two notes which is disappointing.

I looked into training service dogs at one point. For them to graduate training, they can't bark, cry, whine (over generalizing).

I can't believe "comfort" animals are protected on a plane. Am I wrong?

I thought Alaska's policy was that on board pets MUST remain in carriers the entire flight. Yep. Just looked at policies on website.

On my flight yesterday the second we took off, the lady across the aisle in First put her dog ON THE MEAL TRAY! Where the dog ate food, right off the tray with his or her tongue. He or she sat on it with its behind that it poops from.

When done, tray just put away.

Should I start traveling with wipees? I've never seen those sanitized and I'm a bit grossed out.

Don't get me wrong. I have a dog and I love her. But I don't let her lick food off of or sit on my dining room table.
And that is why I ALWAYS travel with wipes. The best ones are those "wet ones" in travel packs of 20 that you can find at Target or Wally world. Another option I've been carrying is from a new startup called Briotech Labs They have a spray that kills nasty stuff on contact. Lots of info on their site.

When I traveled in the past with my little ankle biters, I had to keep them In their carrier the whole trip. That was a long flight from Hawaii to California at the time. I did bring the carrier onto my lap from under the seat after takeoff. But I just opened it enough so I could reach in and keep them calm and pet them. Before I did that, though, I checked with both the FA's and my fellow pax to make sure they weren't allergic and it wouldn't be an inconvenience. Fortunately, people around me were dog lovers and my little guys were very sweet and didn't fuss the whole time.

Hard to believe someone would let a dog roam around or sit on a tray. Ewwwwwe! So much of this is just being conscious and considerate! If you believe everyone on a plane should be OK with whatever you want to do, then perhaps a private charter is a better way for you to travel! Just sayin'
BSpeaker is offline  
Old Feb 11, 2015, 1:55 pm
  #59  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: SFO
Programs: Paid F
Posts: 238
I had no idea animals other than seeing eye dogs were even allowed in the cabin! That is just stunning that they would let an animal roam freely and defecate on the floor!
JW76 is offline  
Old Feb 11, 2015, 2:21 pm
  #60  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: ANC
Programs: AS; Hyatt; Bonvoy
Posts: 1,718
When commenting on this particular air atrocity, please keep in mind there's a big difference between a bonafide - and well-trained - service animal and an "emotional support" or "companion" animal.

I concur that there seem to be a lot of people circumventing the rules by claiming their pet is a "support" animal.

If you follow the articles, you can find numerous examples of "emotional support pigs" on flights - or getting kicked off of flights. There's an "emotional support rooster" that travels in a pink tutu. And the list goes on ...
AKCuisine is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.