The bottom line is that all passengers know that masks are mandatory when entering an airport or aircraft. She knew what she was doing. She needs to pay for the consequences of her actions. This may be airline policy to return. So did she enter the airport and the aircraft with a mask and then removed it? Or did she walk through security without one? I'm betting on the former. No excuses. Choices have consequences which should include the cost of fuel and time lost, not to mention the inconvenience to over one hundred other passengers who follow the reasonable guidelines.

(Written on 2022/01/21)(Permalink)

Aren't you supposed to check all systems, pull all the handles?

(Written on 2021/05/19)(Permalink)

Should have clarified my comment to say that Service Dogs are a specialized sub-category rather than emotional support. No one EVER contests a legitimate Service Dog. The problem is those who game the system by taking advantage of the fact that there is no way anyone can challenge the claim for a legitimate Service Dog from an ordinary emotional support dog. THAT is the issue, never a legitimate Service Dog. The dog's behavior is obvious and gives total attention to the handler. My aggravation comes from those who present their emotional support dogs as Service Dogs. They are usually easy to spot, poorly trained, overly friendly. If they claim a Service Dog, then I have no recourse but to let them go. I know, and they know, but I can't stop them if they lie. I know trained dogs. I worked for 20 years as a sheriff deputy with highly trained dogs. They were totally under control by the handler, sitting when told and working when needed. A squirrel could fly out of a tree a

(Written on 2021/01/15)(Permalink)

The problem is that there is NO certification for "Service" dogs by the ADA. Anyone can go online and buy a fake certificate (that the ADA does not recognize) and a cute little vest with "Service Dog" on it. Means nothing except that they are cheaters. And authorities have no way of verifying legitimate service dogs because we can only ask if the dog is a service animal and is it trained for a specific purpose. If the answer is "yes" to both, we can only take their word for it and we cannot challenge them in any way. Huge loophole that the ADA must close.

(Written on 2021/01/15)(Permalink)

Yes, as I've said before, all dogs are "emotional support" animals. Why else would anyone spend the money and hassle of caring for one unless it filled some emotional need? Perhaps for a few, rare breeds are a status symbol of sorts. Like children, people love their own, but not other people's dogs/kids. If you must own a dog, keep it in a kennel or drive.

(Written on 2021/01/15)(Permalink)

This is what happens when people abuse a privilege. With today's "dog craze" every pet is an "emotional support" animal.

(Written on 2021/01/11)(Permalink)

The ONLY way this could work is to require a certification from a dis-interested third party. I work at a national park where dogs are not allowed on hiking trails. The NPS allows "service" dogs as defined by the ADA, but not "emotional support" dogs. So park rangers are always encountering people with dogs who want to take them on the trails. According to the ADA, we can only ask the owner if the animal is a "service" animal and if it is "trained to perform a service due to disability." We cannot ask what the disability is, nor can we ask for the owner to demonstrate the skill. Lies to both of those questions, gets a dog onto the trails and we get complaints from others who were honest and denied. The ADA also allows owners to train their own dogs. That's not a loophole, it's an open door. Depending on how you define "emotional support" ALL dogs are emotional support animals. This rule is used and abused. We've seen dogs stampede elk herds endangering bystanders. And all

(Written on 2020/12/30)(Permalink)

My point was that because there are NO established certification regulations to identify "Service" animals (now limited entirely to dogs and miniature horses by ADA definition) from "emotional support" animals, those of us who are tasked with screening abusers have no support or backup. We must take the word of the owner. While airlines apparently have their own set of standards, government agencies use ADA guidelines. We are seeing countless abuses of this lack of certification with "emotional support" animals being presented as "service" animals which is frustrating for us and angers those who respect and follow the rules.

(Written on 2020/12/04)(Permalink)

Airlines must have a different set of rules. The ADA regs say exactly what the National Park service must go by as outlined in my original post. Those regs are online at the ADA web site. Private carriers apparently are able to ignore the ADA regs and substitute their own.

(Written on 2020/12/03)(Permalink)

These restrictions and regulations have been in effect already for U.S. National Parks. The problem is one of definition. Park Rangers, for example, are restricted to asking only two questions -- "Is it a Service Animal?" and "has it been trained to perform a specific duty or function related to a disability?" They cannot ask what the disability is. They cannot ask for the owner to demonstrate the animal's alleged function. The system is easily "gamed" by people wanting to take their pets with them. Screeners cannot ask for proof or certification because there is none recognized by the ADA. Online outlets sell dog vests with "Service Animal" on them, but it's a commercial scam and means nothing. Owners of service animals are even allowed to train their own animals. Since there is no legitimate certification of any kind for defining a "service animal" a simple lie will get any dog past a checkpoint.

(Written on 2020/12/03)(Permalink)