Delta to Stop Emotional Support Animals
 

Searched, but didn't see anything from the past day or so.

https://www.ajc.com/news/business/de...s%20on%20board.

Jan 11
 

Do you think they really mean what has been posted? It says if you book before Jan 11 with the proper paperwork - there appears not to be a drop dead date for final travel. I think AA was the end of January. But Delta felt more open ended? Anyone know for sure/?

Yes, they really did mean that. DL's policy is quite clear:

Delta will honor existing bookings for Emotional Support Animals January 11, 2021 and there after provided required documentation was submitted and the reservation was confirmed prior to January 11, 2021.

None of this is a shock as DL was one of the carriers strongly urging the DOT rules change. Same discussions for the other carriers.

Good start but there are still major loopholes. All an imposter has to say is the dog has been trained to perform x task due to a disability. The business cannot ask any further questions.

Why did it take DL so long to announce the changes?

Good. Any animals should be banned as they can be carriers of COVID-19.

But what about my emotional support elephant. I can't fly without Stampy.


https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/si...20141121232428

They have all only done so within the past 7-10 days. My guess is that it takes a bit of time to implement the systems, do the training, test it and then go "live."

This is pretty good. Yes, it's possible to defraud the system, but there is just so much effort that can be put into this and the ante has just been upped because it's a DOT form and a false statement is a felony. Not that everyone with a an emotion support vole needs to go to prison, but people tend to think a bit more.

Thanks for putting it in red. What I found interesting.. As you pointed out Delta was the least pro-ESA.. yet their policy is open ended.. AA is requiring travel by X date.. Delta is simply saying purchased and confirmed by Jan 11, 2021.. How far out does Delta sell tickets? This means the trailing 'tail' could be 10 months? Or am I missing something..

Finally!

you missed part of it..

Finally it has happened to me right in front of my face
My feelings can't describe it
Finally it has happened to me right in front of my face
And I just cannot hide it

Glad to see DL prohibiting ESAs. As someone who travels with a pet-in-cabin on occasion, I think everyone should have to follow the same rules: pay the fee at check in and keep their pet in the carrier. (Obviously trained service animals excluded).

Can they really? Upon visiting the East Coast over the last 2 weeks, most are super neurotic about COVID but that doesn't seem to stop them from being around their pets (and even taking them to restaurants and bars.)

I hope DL's rules and procedures ultimately aren't perceived as any less stringent than those of competitors UA and AA. It would be frustrating if all of the ESAs and fraud-ESA owners moved their travel to DL and we ended up with more rather than fewer untrained pets in the cabin (and in SCs).

I suspect that in due course, the carriers will harmonize their policies.

The key is that the policies are enforced.

I am beyond flabbergasted.

I NEED to travel with my pangolin!!

If you get him a magic feather you should be in good shape.

That is the spirit of my question.. If people on DL could book ESA flights for any future date - thru yesterday.. I imagine you will see straggler's in the cabin for the next year.. I think it also makes it harder for the service animal excuse to stick out like a sort thumb.. DL will continue to have ESAs on flights past Jan 11 or past Jan 30 - by virtue of the policy they implemented.

I think the real misunderstanding is the motive.. It isn't about saving the $150 pet fee.. This was all about the folks who wanted to bring Rover their golden retriever on board.. It is interesting they didn't adopt an abusive fee schedule to allow them to continue.. Like must buy EXST and pay a $1000 pet travel fee.. I think the bozo willing to lie on a DofT form, would have also very willingly ponied up for an additional seat and a fee - if that was the new policy vs NO.

It is *exactly* about saving the $150 pet fee because it's also not cheap or as easy to check pets as cargo. I've seen/encountered plenty of small pets who would otherwise qualify on size to be a "pet-in-cabin" who have a "Service Animal" vest but I can't say I've come across too many Chihuahuas who fit the bill of "service animal". Keep in mind too that in-cabin pet fee is ONE-WAY too, which equates to $300 round-trip for a pet in cabin. And the reason such people don't just get a pet-sitter or board their animal while they're gone is because they don't want to pay for the sitter or boarding either, which on an extended trip, isn't cheap and which is why the number of "Emotional Support Animals" was always higher over the Christmas/New Year holiday period when folks, many of whom normally don't travel, were taking 7-14 long vacations and pet sitting/boarding fees could run $500+, often with holiday rates (as my wife and I have paid for pet-sitting over various holidays periods). But the ones who don't want to pay $300 for pet fees or pay for checking their pet as cargo or pay for pet-sitting exploited a loop-hole and conjured up that they needed Rover or Fluffy as their "emotional support animal" to get through the stress and hassles of flying simply so they wouldn't have to pay. It is most definitely about money.

Back in 2014, the New Yorker published an article about absurd ESAs and to make the point, the author took these animals around to different places, including bringing an emotional support pig on a flight and an alpaca to a drugstore. It was a really good read. You can find the article here, or for the tl;dr crowd, there are pictures here.

Completely agree. It most definitely is about money. I have never understood why someone would go through all the hassle to falsify that their pet is an ESA, just to save $125 each way (on DL). I usually take my small dog on one trip a year around the holidays. So that's $250 roundtrip. If I was to board her it would easily be twice that much.

In short, if you can afford to fly, you can afford to take your pet if you truly desire to. Same with bag fees in my opinion.

The only other consideration I can think of that people are (or I guess I should say "were") getting ESA certs was in order to avoid finding a compliant carrier. My experience is that DL does not make it easy to find under seat dimensions unlike other carriers who has that info on their website. With DL you have to call and it is 50/50 if the agent can tell you. Even then I have found the underseat dimensions to be even further restricted with the Entertainment Equipment Boxes. We have a 13x8x8 carrier and our 10 lb dog is fairly cramped. I can't imagine attempting to fly with a bigger dog/carrier.

and of course the classic “Bloom County” comic from 2015
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...77432bd9e.jpeg
https://www.gocomics.com/bloom-county/2015/08/25

I agree that it's largely about the fee, which over the years rose to indefensible levels. I think it is also partly about not wanting to keep the dog confined to the carrier bag under the seat the entire flight, either for behavior reasons or because the dog is somewhat oversized (no, I'm not talking about Goldens). Frankly, I'd probably rather have a small dog sitting quietly on the passenger's lap instead of barking or crying the entire flight in the bag.

Gosh - I guess if it was all about the fees - instead of banning them - they could have monetized it at an even greater rate than the existing policy. $125 for Rover in the bag, additional seat purchase and $500 fee to allow Rover to sleep and fart at your feet. Because they didn't continue to allow a like offering - it seems not revenue based for the airline.

Delta isn't banning pets in cabin. Delta is banning "ESA's". DL will still be monetizing a pet-in-cabin fee, though part of the reason the price is so steep is to overall discourage it in the first place, for many reasons, but monetize off of those who are still willing to pay it.

The issue with ESA's is the airline couldn't monetize it because it was treated similarly to a service animal, thus DL couldn't "charge", which is why people who wanted to bring Rover and Fluffy along but wanted to skirt the fees labeled Rover and Fluffy as "ESA's".

We take our dog on at least 4-5 trips annually. I will have to say I've never had a problem in coach getting our carrier to fit, but first class seats are all over the board. I have not been able to get our carrier to fit on the A220 for instance. There is maybe only 6-7" of clearance under the seats and last flight I just pushed the carrier as closely as I could to the seat and wore a blanket over my legs to hide the dog. We also have a soft sided carrier and only leave our dog under the seat until 10,000 ft then put him between us in his carrier on the floor.

:confused: :confused:
They're closing the loophole that allowed passengers to specifically avoid paying the fee. So yes, it's about the fees. Sure, it's about snakes and pigs and peacocks too, but those were likely a VERY small percentage of the ESAs.

This is all being incorrectly reported in the media as a ban on ESA's. It isn't. It's simply that your ESA travels just like any other dog and you (or perhaps the dog if it's got the cash) pays the tab.

This is part of it, but let's not forget that if ESAs (and fraudulent ESAs) must now travel as pets, it means that very different rules apply, regardless of the fee. Pets are required to remain inside their carriers on flights and in SCs. It also means that the size of such dogs in the cabin is restricted, although their owners are welcome to pay to have the animal fly in the cargo hold, subject to some route and seasonal restrictions (i.e., for breeds who tend to experience breathing problems in hot weather).

These changes should prevent dogs from roaming around freely in SCs (no leash and no carrier, obviously not trained as a service dog) and dogs from running up the aisle during flights and sniffing/licking other passengers (both of which I've experienced when traveling DL). It should also avoid the problem of animals that are too large (or too untrained) to be capable of fitting in the owner's seating area during flights so that they take space belonging to another customer.

Last month I flew on a DL red eye flight from LAX to ATL on a 764. I was upgraded to C+ in the middle seats and the guy to my right at the window seat at the bulkhead had an empty next to him with a HUGE dog on the floor. Dog was good and slept on the floor the entire flight, perhaps turning around a couple times. Thing is, this emotional support dog belonged to a passenger traveling up in D1 where there was no room so he flew with the friend who had the bulkhead space. That's great emotional support, isn't it. And some airports even have relief areas to curb your dog!
So glad the airlines are finally ending this scam. It has gotten completely out of hand.

Since the dog behaved well, it might have been a genuine trained service dog (unless it was wearing a stupid ESA vest). OTOH, the guy apparently valued his D1 seat more than having the dog and somehow the friend agreed to the plan.

Now the airlines just need to square up a plan to require the 400LB+ genpop pax to buy an additional seat or fly cargo. Pretty sure that abuse of space is far more often, and undesirable.

Well yes, all of that happens, but again, I maintain it's only a small part of the motivation. DL doesn't really care if you get licked by FuFu. I think they do care if you get attacked by FuFu, so requiring the dog stays in the carrier will help. They probably marginally care about FuFu doing her business in the aisle, and this should help also. But the vast majority of ESAs, IME, are small animals that can fit in a carrier. Most of them traveled uneventfully as well. For free.

The real scam is the $300 r/t to carry your own dog and put the bag in your own legroom. :shrug:

I thought this was behind us
 

DL2603 DTW-BWI, Mon 26 Jul — GA had just called pre-boards when a woman with a medium-sized French bulldog on a leash sauntered up to the podium … I was probably in the first 25% of the F/DM group, and as I was about to scan my BP the other podium agent called out “Ohhhh, your puppy is sooooo cute! If you want to go down now to get settled, just go ahead!”
:rolleyes:

There was a dog in the bulkhead row on my flight last week (Thanksgiving). Upon boarding, one flight attendant questioned the passenger about it. The passenger confirmed the dog was an ESA and claimed not to be aware of specific rules on ESAs because "every airline has a different policy."

The FA lightly chided the passenger, saying "it could make other passengers uncomfortable."

The FA walked away. The passenger told seatmates "I will do whatever they tell me."

No further exchanges occurred. Mid flight, the dog wandered into the first class cabin, but otherwise had no presence onboard.

I was on a multi-segment itinerary and forgot exactly which segment this occurred on but it was a mainline DL flight on a B737.