Trial Run for Dogs in Resort Rooms

[kungaloosh22]

Arguing that simply because some will break the rules is reason enough to discard the policy isn't realistic.

In this case, I disagree.

• The consequences of people disregarding the policy can be extremely irritating. Maybe not to you, but I'm going to be very pissed if I have to hear incessant dog barking, which is something I and others have experienced. The noise is not only irritating, but it makes me feel terrible for the dog.
• The consequences can cause harm to people (allergies, dog bites). As a dog attack victim, I resent the idea that it's too bad if some people get bitten, but oh well, most people won't so it's not a big deal.
• This policy is completely unnecessary in the first place (except for service dogs or emergency situations), so the annoyances and harm should never have to happen at all.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

And isn’t true that a service dog is still expected to have a certain level of behavior (which a real service dog should), so if ppl sneak in unruly dogs, I’m sure they’ll be removed.

Yes it is true. On the removing of them TBH I'm guessing they look at it from a hassle standpoint same as other things. It would def.be more noticable if a service animal was behaving in much more of a pet manner than what you would expect from a service animal and would likely raise suspicion but ultimately it's up to Disney not me.

LOL Disney didn't even ask the lady with the monkey to leave. Remember that flack? Had the dang thing posing for pictures with the characters too. Though i DO recall an instance where someone tried to enter the park with a pet Ocelot or some other type cat and they made the Central Florida Zoo come and get it and keep it during her trip.

Correct on the monkey part which is again why I said my statement. All a guest can do is alert Disney to something but it is ultimately up to Disney. This was the case before the policy and this will be the case if the policy is removed. This doesn't change. Asking if Disney plans on adjusting their current procedure due to the new policy is a reasonable thing to ask but it won't change the fact that it's their business and their responsibility. This base point was the one I was trying to make.

 

[Ghostridethedolewhip]

Someone who is paying that much for a hotel would (hopefully) not risk being kicked out to save $50 a night.

Plus if you think about it if people wanted to do something like this they would have been able to even before the resorts became dog friendly just by lying and simply saying they have a service dog. And yet I've seen lots of people here say they haven't ever seen a service dog at their resort so clearly this hasn't been a big problem in the past.

But now you have to scale it by the
increased number of people that will bring dogs. That was a small number prior and in most cases, an anomoly. It is being opened to a wider population and when more people are involved you will possibly have more issues. I will be staying at one of the resorts next week and will be reporting any incident.

 

[hunyb207]

In this case, I disagree.

• The consequences of people disregarding the policy can be extremely irritating. Maybe not to you, but I'm going to be very pissed if I have to hear incessant dog barking, which is something I and others have experienced. The noise is not only irritating, but it makes me feel terrible for the dog.
• The consequences can cause harm to people (allergies, dog bites). As a dog attack victim, I resent the idea that it's too bad if some people get bitten, but oh well, most people won't so it's not a big deal.
• This policy is completely unnecessary in the first place (except for service dogs or emergency situations), so the annoyances and harm should never have to happen at all.

With all due respect, just because you find this policy completely unnecessary doesn't mean others don't. Lots of people don't feel comfortable leaving their dogs with strangers or don't have family to watch them. There wouldn't be over 25,000 pet friendly hotels in this country if it was "completely unnecessary".

 

[gwynne]

With all due respect, just because you find this policy completely unnecessary doesn't mean others don't. Lots of people don't feel comfortable leaving their dogs with strangers or don't have family to watch them. There wouldn't be over 25,000 pet friendly hotels in this country if it was "completely unnecessary".

Disney rolled this out without a lot of thought. If they put highly restrictive rules in place (like the Four Seasons) it would make a huge difference. If they don't want to go that route, then I am hoping they will designate a couple of buildings at one of the resorts as dedicated pet rooms. It's an opportunity for special decorating, maybe a dog friendly park and walk zones. It would serve those who want/need this service, without affecting other folks who don't wish to vacation with pets.

 

[ArwenMarie]

Humans are much more dangerous to other humans in terms of risk of infectious disease than dogs are to humans.

 

[LSUmiss]

In this case, I disagree.

• The consequences of people disregarding the policy can be extremely irritating. Maybe not to you, but I'm going to be very pissed if I have to hear incessant dog barking, which is something I and others have experienced. The noise is not only irritating, but it makes me feel terrible for the dog.
• The consequences can cause harm to people (allergies, dog bites). As a dog attack victim, I resent the idea that it's too bad if some people get bitten, but oh well, most people won't so it's not a big deal.
• This policy is completely unnecessary in the first place (except for service dogs or emergency situations), so the annoyances and harm should never have to happen at all.

I think this could be argued about most things that ppl choose to break the rules at WDW or anywhere else for. This policy could cause annoyance to you vs something else someone does that breaks a rule might cause me more annoyance. As far as it being unnecessary, it’s vacation, there are many things that are “unnecessary” that are allowed that become annoying to other guests when ppl abuse/ignore the rules.

 

[LSUmiss]

But now you have to scale it by the
increased number of people that will bring dogs. That was a small number prior and in most cases, an anomoly. It is being opened to a wider population and when more people are involved you will possibly have more issues. I will be staying at one of the resorts next week and will be reporting any incident.

But there is no evidence that suggests that there will then be more ppl who break the rules.

 

[nicko]

But there is no evidence that suggests that there will then be more ppl who break the rules.

A certain percentage of the population of dog owners in this country are bad owners (i.e. they let their dogs bark incessantly and/or allow them to take a dump anywhere they like without cleaning up.) As the population of dogs go up at the resorts, the number of bad dog owners at Disney goes up as well. It's simple math.

 

[LSUmiss]

A certain percentage of the population of dog owners in this country are bad owners (i.e. they let their dogs bark incessantly and/or allow them to take a dump anywhere they like without cleaning up.) As the population of dogs go up at the resorts, the number of bad dog owners at Disney goes up as well. It's simple math.

I disagree. There is nothing to suggest that those bad owners will show up at WDW. We’ll just have to see how it ends up playing out.

 

[jarestel]

In this case, I disagree.

• The consequences of people disregarding the policy can be extremely irritating.

I have no position on this policy as I would prefer to base any judgement on actual experiences rather than a series of "what ifs". I may join you in your dislike of the dog policy if my experiences with dogs at resorts turn out to be negative, but for the time being I'm officially neutral.

If you can cite any rule, policy, or law that exhibits 100% compliance, you might persuade me of my error in judgement. Otherwise, my opinion remains the same: opposing any policy simply because some may choose to violate the rules is unrealistic.

 

[P'colaBeachBum]

But there is no evidence that suggests that there will then be more ppl who break the rules.

Got some alerts and saw this post. *sigh*. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence showing that over the years people do break rules at WDW. Long before pets were allowed. You all keep saying that there will not be a problem. You don’t know that anymore than people that say there will be. What did people do before pet dogs were allowed? They left them at home, boarded them, or broke the rules and sneaked them into the resorts and parks. The ones that left them at home or boarded went to WDW anyway and had a great time....for years. I’m thinking that all the other roll outs that didn’t last long ,that this roll out will also fail.. due to rule breakers, not the compliant ones.

 

[LSUmiss]

Got some alerts and saw this post. *sigh*. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence showing that over the years people do break rules at WDW. Long before pets were allowed. You all keep saying that there will not be a problem. You don’t know that anymore than people that say there will be. What did people do before pet dogs were allowed? They left them at home, boarded them, or broke the rules and sneaked them into the resorts and parks. The ones that left them at home or boarded went to WDW anyway and had a great time....for years. I’m thinking that all the other roll outs that didn’t last long ,that this roll out will also fail.. due to rule breakers, not the compliant ones.

As posted for other things, ppl break rules for all kinda things. There is no evidence that dog owners will be any worse or more frequent than other rule breakers. I agree no one knows. But ppl are saying let’s wait & see b/c we don’t know. It’s the “anti” group that seems to be implying that they do know that all of these terrible things WILL happen & then freaking out about it. You are assuming that many ppl went without their pets & still enjoyed themselves. Many ppl have posted how they either didn’t go or were worried the whole time & didn’t enjoy themselves as much as they could have. It’s dimssive to assume b/c it doesn’t apply to you that there would be no reason that a person would feel they needed to bring their pet. My biggest argument that I stick by is that, excluding ppl who were already booked, (which sucks I ageee) a person has a choice (even if limited) to avoid these resorts if they don’t like the policy. To me, it is not a valid argument to say it was your favorite resort. Choices for pet owners are also limited so if they feel they need to bring their pet they also may have to make a choice to stay in a resort that is not their favorite.

 

[hunyb207]

A certain percentage of the population of dog owners in this country are bad owners (i.e. they let their dogs bark incessantly and/or allow them to take a dump anywhere they like without cleaning up.) As the population of dogs go up at the resorts, the number of bad dog owners at Disney goes up as well. It's simple math.

My God, you would think that with the way people are talking here that the majority of pet owners are irresponsible, disrespectful, entitled people. I see quite a few "bad" parents at Disney. It would be easy for me to assume that most parents are irresponsible, disrespectful, entitled people. But the "good" ones don't stand out. You see the kid throwing a tantrum and the parents ignoring them...not the 20 other parents who told their children to stop. If you see a single pile of poop that should have been picked up you can choose to assume that dog owners are irresponsible or you could realize that 20 other piles of poop were picked up right before it. It's all in how you see it. I choose to assume that the vast majority are good, respectful people otherwise I would drive myself crazy.

I seriously can't wait to fast forward a few months from now when people see that this isn't the issue they are making it out to be. Hardly anybody wants to go to Disney with their dogs.

Also, what are you people feeding your dogs that they poop so much??

 

[Gryhndmom]

My God, you would think that with the way people are talking here that the majority of pet owners are irresponsible, disrespectful, entitled people. I see quite a few "bad" parents at Disney. It would be easy for me to assume that most parents are irresponsible, disrespectful, entitled people. But the "good" ones don't stand out. You see the kid throwing a tantrum and the parents ignoring them...not the 20 other parents who told their children to stop. If you see a single pile of poop that should have been picked up you can choose to assume that dog owners are irresponsible or you could realize that 20 other piles of poop were picked up right before it. It's all in how you see it. I choose to assume that the vast majority are good, respectful people otherwise I would drive myself crazy.

I seriously can't wait to fast forward a few months from now when people see that this isn't the issue they are making it out to be. Hardly anybody wants to go to Disney with their dogs.

Also, what are you people feeding your dogs that they poop so much??

TOTALLY agree!!

 

[wdwlver]

On one of the other threads on here there was someone who said they saw dog on boardwalk. Said it didn’t walk/act like a service dog. That’s one rule right there already broken.

 

[Ghostridethedolewhip]

A certain percentage of the population of dog owners in this country are bad owners (i.e. they let their dogs bark incessantly and/or allow them to take a dump anywhere they like without cleaning up.) As the population of dogs go up at the resorts, the number of bad dog owners at Disney goes up as well. It's simple math.

Don't forget certain breeds. I've seen a pit bull jump a fence and kill a small dog that was being walked in my suburban neighborhood. Seeing little kids playing in the street terrified at that site still is hard to forget. I have friend that was attacked by a rotweiler unprovoked. Now with no restrictions, will some be forced to pack a .45 on their trip to sadly protect themselves when walking around the resort.

And none of this "it's about how it is raised." Although that is a factor you can't stop instinct. I can punt a
chihuahua across ol' man island but you need more to stop a large aggressive dog.

 

[WDW1979]

I will be staying at one of the resorts next week and will be reporting any incident.

I think you should be okay next week (I hope), as the policy is so new that most people who may want to brings dogs have not had time to plan a new Disney trip with their dog, plus of course the time between booking and the actual trip (there may be a few locals who bring their dog for a night because they are already in the area). As a result, it may take a couple of months at least, maybe 3-4 months, before the level of dogs at the resorts reaches what will be a "normal" level under the new policy. Note that I strongly disagree with the new policy and I hope it is rescinded because I do not want to spend thousands of dollars to vacation with other people's dogs, but I think for your trip you might be okay and will see very few dogs. Those who travel much later will likely encounter more dogs.

 

[CampbellzSoup]

How you don’t have to have your service dog documented and registered and how it’s pretty much illegal to ask for proof blows my mind...

Put me on the no list. Keep your dog home where it belongs. I love my dog so much too, but the parks/resorts is not an appropriate place for him.

 

[Gryhndmom]

On one of the other threads on here there was someone who said they saw dog on boardwalk. Said it didn’t walk/act like a service dog. That’s one rule right there already broken.

Did they stop and ask the dogs owner? A service dog may not have a vest, they can simply have a tag. Did they contact a CM to ask about the dog on the boardwalk?