I’m going with “obscure wrinkle that exists only in the US for system-gaming”.
I have never seen an animal in the cabin of any plane in Australia or Asia. No doubt there are some rough and ready flights that might allow chickens or the like on small planes in third world countries, but I have not seen that in big jets. Even blind people put their dog in the hold and are assisted in-flight and on the ground by airline attendants. I was stunned in the US seeing people walking around airports with dogs in the obvious expectation that they would travel in-cabin.
Based on my non-scientific analysis of flying a few times a year, it seems to be something that has changed very recently in the US. The last couple of times I’ve flown (in the past six months) I’ve seen an order of magnitide more dogs travelling with their owners (in the terminal and on the plane) than in all the times before than
Has something changed in airline policies in the 2018 that made this possible?
I heard on the radio the other day - Popeye’s in airports is apparently offering an “Emotional Support Chicken” for people who need one, in a box, breaded and deep-fried, to take on the plane.
The Are humans animals? thread may be relevant. I just glanced at a couple of airline policies, not all explicitly state that an Emotional Support Animal must be a non-human animal. And not all state that the animal must fit under your seat. I wonder if I turned up with my grandma, and a letter from my psychiatrist that I need my grandma with me for emotional support, would she qualify?
I also noticed the following odd stipulation on the Jet Blue site:
Clearly they are taking no chances that I might have a mid-flight emotional crisis that my grandma couldn’t handle. I wonder if she could bring her gun?
What I find odd is that JetBlue feels the need to have a policy for people flying armed who have service animals, considering that the only people permitted to fly armed are law enforcement officers on certain assignments with a operational need to have the weapon accessible*. I wouldn’t want to be the officer sent to escort a prisoner whose agency found out I needed an ESA.
in other words, they can’t fly armed on personal travel or to attend training, memorials or conferences but can if they are part of a protective detail or on a trip to escort a prisoner.
When we landed in PNG in 1969, there were pigs in the back of the mixed passenger / freight space. You didn’t need a special “support animal” classification to allow support animals in that service.
The whole idea of absolute separation between people and other animals is comparatively recent: consequently, so are exceptions to that rule.
That’s not a complete understanding, since there are classes of federal employees that are considered operational at all times, and are required to carry their accessible weapon whenever they are in an aircraft, even if on personal travel.
I didn’t look up and quote the TSA rules in their entirety because it didn’t really matter to my point - which was that the people permitted to fly armed are going to have issues with their employment if they claim to need an ESA to fly.
Many airlines allow pets in the cabin with certain restrictions (usually size restrictions so your Mastiff probably is not welcome in the cabin…your Chihuahua is…which is a shame because the Mastiff will probably be more mellow and chill about the whole thing but he cannot fit under the seat so not allowed) . No need to claim them to be “emotional support” or “service” animals. Same with hotels. Some allow pets, some don’t. Interestingly it is often the really nice hotels that allow them (rich people want what they want which often includes a pet).
If it is an issue for you, one way or another, it is worth checking ahead of time.
As to the OP pets are, generally, a “first world” (read wealthy) phenomenon. Pets are expensive. A luxury. If you do not have the means you probably do not have a pet. That said many poor keep animals around to do work and the animals are valuable to them but they are kind of distinct from “pets”. They earn their keep.
I really wish I could remember where I read a story along these lines (National Geographic maybe?..dunno). Some American traveled to Africa to study some indigenous tribal folk. She related that they had dogs in the village and she started playing with the dogs. The villagers found this weird. I remember she said it would be akin to you running into a field and playing with some farmer’s cows. The farmer would think you were a bit strange. Certainly they are part of life there and there may even be some affection for them but playing with them was just viewed as weird.
IIRC in Muslim society dogs are considered “unclean” and the society discourages keeping dogs as pets (they can be kept for work though…seeing-eye-dog, protecting flocks, etc.). Dunno how they feel about cats.
Legally, the only two questions that may be asked under ADA:
Redirecting…
Then again, an astute person can often spot a fake service animal by observing the behavior and demeanor of the service animal and/or it handler.
Within the disabled community is the phrase, “Four on the floor.” This means a true service animal is always using its four feet on the floor. It is never carried (an arm, purse, in a shopping cart, etc), except for two circumstances: (1) the handler is a diabetic and the dog is carried close to the face to detect breath smell changes that might indicate an oncoming diabetic seizure; or, (2) the dog is a psychiatric service animal and remains close to the handler’s face to detect a potential anxiety attack.
Service animals are attentive to its handler and no one else. A real service animal does not seek attention from others, doesn’t sniff crotches, doesn’t pull on its leash or harness not intended by the handler. The handler doesn’t treat the service animal “as a pet,” meaning regularly petting it, holding its attention, etc.
You are correct. The best way to address fake service animals is to license them via the state’s existing licensing process.
That’s not true at all I think. Pets (as in animals kept for companionship not work) are pretty common in many cultures and time periods. Unless you are living a completely subsistence life they aren’t that expensive.
What is recent “first world” phenomenon is the idea of “fur babies”. The idea pets should be treated (in terms of food, medical care, etc) like human children.