Distracted Driving

SleepyPod's large and small crash test dogs
SleepyPod’s hard-working crash test dogs

How do you keep your dog safe in the car?

On long trips (anything involving a freeway), I use a dog seatbelt. Koala likes to ride on the floor, in the footspace behind the front passenger seat.

Since I have a run-of-the-mill dog seatbelt restraint, neither of these options is particularly good. Better than letting the dog sit in the front seat or, worse, on my lap. And way better than letting her ride, loose, in the back of a pickup — all things I see often.

The issues are both her safety and mine. A dog can be distracting; I’ve driven dogs who pace on the back seat. And if I have to stop suddenly, the dog can fly off the seat and get hurt. In an accident, the dog could fly through the windshield or crash into the driver or a passenger. Or escape and get lost or hurt.

Hence the seatbelts.

AAA recommends restraining pets inside the car, in the back seat, using either a seatbelt attachment (like mine) or a crate, which is itself strapped in. These take care of the distraction issue and would provide some protection from a hard stop or mild fender bender.

The advice to let dogs ride only in the back seat is significant. It’s not only about distraction. If you are in an accident that causes the airbags to go off, your dog is very likely to be severely injured or killed by the airbag. That is why small children cannot ride in the front.

A small dog dangles from a car seatback, held by a Rocketeer harness
Rocketeer for small dogs

There’s a more secure option, one that also dramatically improves the pet’s chances of surviving an accident safely. There’s an organization called the Center for Pet Safety that tests (among other things) pet seatbelts and rates their performance.

They paid for extensive crash testing, and came up with a (very) few certified harnesses: three. These are the SleepyPod Clickit Sport and Terrain and the ZuGoPet Rocketeer.

The Rocketeer is for dogs up to 25 pounds only and is sort of like a baby carrier that you wear on the front. Only the car seat back wears it. A little weird.

You can actually watch video of the crash tests on the CPS website.

They are pricey: The Rocketeer starts at about $100, and the SleepyPods, for dogs 18 to 90 pounds, start at $70.

Duke, the new-and-improved crash-test dog, works hard to make SleepyPods safe (if you believe the video on the company website). The video is scary. Cali might be getting a brand-new, Duke-approved harness before our next road trip. Frankly, I’d feel safer if Duke came along for the ride as well!

 

Advertisements

A Great Idea!

A screen shows the Tesla Dog MOde message, My owner will be back soon.

If only Cali could afford a Tesla …

Several weeks ago, Tesla rolled out a software update that introduces “Dog Mode.”

This is a feature that allows car-and-dog owners to set a cabin temperature for their dogs’ comfort while they go off and … do whatever it is people do while leaving their dogs in the car. The car’s heating or cooling system will maintain the appropriate temperature automatically. Here’s the cool part: The Tesla’s screen shows a message meant to reassure worried passers-by that the dogs are OK. It reads “My owner will be back soon” and displays the interior temperature in large numerals.

The main hitch I see is that the screen, which is usually used for the car to communicate with the driver, is positioned between the front seats. People passing by and noticing dogs in a closed car in extreme heat (or cold) may not peek in at the right angle to see the screen. They might still panic, break a window, call the cops, leave a nasty note for the owners, alert the security at the nearest store, etc.

However, this does raise a great possibility: An add-on product that could maintain a reasonable temperature in the car while displaying a prominent notice easily visible from the car’s driver and passenger windows. A solar-powered cooler that hangs inside the window perhaps? Any inventors out there? That’s a Kickstarter I could get on board with.

Seriously. Summer is coming. Don’t overheat your pups. Trade in for a Tesla today! (I wish …)

Time to Weigh In on Flying Dogs (Hurry!)

Koala, a black Labrador, rests. She's wearing her guide harness.
Koala is an excellent traveler.

The peacocks, the pets trying to travel as service or emotional support dogs, the misbehavior — from pooping pigs to biting dogs — and the “service dog” whelping her litter near gate F81 … it’s all too much.

Not only are airlines tightening up their rules on which of our furred, feathered, and scaled friends may board, the Department of Transportation is considering changing sections of the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA), the law governing air travel with service and emotional support animals.

The root of the problem is that federal laws governing access for assistance animals are vague, different laws allow for different things in different spaces (public businesses, housing, and air travel), and it’s easy to exploit loopholes or deliberate omissions in these laws. The result, as far as air travel is concerned, is a mess.

In a nutshell, the ACAA allows people to travel with service animals or with emotional support animals (ESAs). The ACAA definition of a service animal is different from the more familiar ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) definition; the ACAA definition of ESA is loose indeed. For one thing, no training is required; for another, passengers are not required to crate or otherwise contain the animals during the flight.

Problems include threats to (and harm to) the safety of other passengers, interference with legitimate service animals working with their partners, and undue stress on the animals themselves, who generally have had no public access training and should not have to endure a strange, noisy, smelly, stressful, cramped, terrifying experience (air travel is all of that and more for me, and I am used to it!).

The DOT is soliciting comments by July 9, 2018 specifically in these areas:

  1. Psychiatric service animals; ADA treats (some) PSAs as any other service animal, while the current ACAA groups them together with ESAs
  2. Whether to maintain the distinction between ESAs and service animals
  3. Whether ESAs should be crated or otherwise confined / restrained throughout the flight; similarly, they are soliciting comments on whether service / ESAs should be required to be leashed or tethered
  4. Whether to limit what species of animals would be permitted to fly as service and/or ESAs; ADA allows only service dogs and a limited number of miniature horses
  5. Whether and how to limit the number of service / ESAs a passenger may travel with; currently neither the ACAA nor the ADA limits the number of animals
  6. Whether to require that passengers with a service or ESA should be required to attest (sign a statement declaring) that the animal has been trained  for public access
  7. Safety concerns regarding travel with “large” (undefined) service animals and suggestions for addressing those concerns
  8. Whether airlines should be allowed to require a veterinary health form or immunization record from any or all service animal users
  9. Issues with airlines denying / allowing passengers to board with ESAs / service animals on foreign airlines’ code-share flights

For more details, read the full notice. Post a comment here. Read others’ comments here.

Post your comment by July 9!

Wrong on So Many Levels …

a poster announces that service dogs are welcomeI was in St. Petersburg when the Tampa Bay Times ran this story about a “service dog” whelping a litter of puppies at the Tampa airport. Columnist Daniel Ruth’s response is spot-on. This is so, so wrong.

The initial article said that the dogs’ owner claimed both dogs (the puppies’ dad was present for the whelping) were service dogs; it also said the puppy-mom was a service dog in training. The initial article says that the owner has mobility issues; Ruth’s column mentions blood pressure. It’s impossible to know which is accurate or whether the owner meets the ADA definition of a person with a disability. It’s also impossible to tell whether either or both dogs do anything to mitigate the disability. While the reporting could be more clear, part of the problem is that the various laws covering public access and air travel with service dogs are so vague and poorly written that they are a nightmare for gatekeepers — and an engraved invitation to fakers. (I’m not saying this person was faking; I am saying it is nearly impossible to know.)

The second problem is that it’s legal in some cases for people to use two service dogs and request public access with both simultaneously. I know that people might have multiple disabilities that a dog or dogs can help with. And if you’re an owner-trainer and want to train a dozen service dogs for yourself, I don’t think any law should stop you. But I also advocate for some common sense in access laws.

I’ve worked with dozens and dozens of service dogs. Even the best dogs get spooked in airports or on planes, and I know that it’s hard enough to find and train one dog for the really difficult, demanding job of working while traveling, through an airport, and on an airplane. Expecting someone to be able to safely handle more than one dog in these circumstances, while dealing with the many hassles of travel — that’s just not reasonable. It’s not fair to other travelers or to airline staff. No one can predict what will happen. I’ve seen “service” dogs react aggressively to working dogs, kids come out of nowhere to grab the dogs in a hug, people interfering with dogs by doing everything from reaching to pet to trying with gestures and noises to distract the dog to actually enticing working dogs with food.

Add to that the exploding number of emotional support animals traveling these days — a concept that many people, including Ruth, in his column, have trouble separating from service dogs — and I’m surprised that any dog can navigate air travel without losing her cool. Expecting a person, any person, to keep tabs on multiple service dogs with all of that going on, and keep everything under control so that the traveler, dogs, and everyone else is safe? Not realistic.

Finally, the most egregious part of this story: Who boards a plane with a dog who’s that pregnant? It’s not that hard to know when a dog is due to whelp. Gestation is about 60 days. If your dog has been bred, don’t travel after about 6-7 weeks. And that doesn’t even address the bigger issue: Any professional service or guide dog trainer will tell you that a working service dog should be spayed or neutered. Regardless, a pregnant female shouldn’t be working that close to her due date. And if she is a service dog in training, as some accounts said, she shouldn’t have been allowed to fly anyhow; no law gives access to service dogs in training. (In a probably vain attempt to forestall criticism, I will state that I think that trainers should be able to fly with dogs-in-training, but that is a whole separate issue.)

A service dog partnership is not a one-way street. The dog helps the person in a way that only a dog can. The dog also provides companionship and love. In return, the person owes the dog care and respect. I don’t doubt that the owner of these dogs loves them and appreciates their service. But she did not fill her obligations as their guardian and steward and advocate, nor did she show respect for the dog when she let a working dog become pregnant and then attempted to fly with that dog so close to her due date. The person’s needs do not always come first, and in this case, the owner was selfish and irresponsible.

As a person who cares deeply about the human-canine connection while also deeply respecting the work dogs do for us, I become angry when I see or hear about any dog owner who treats her dogs that badly, whether they are service dogs or pets. (I’m not alone; the Times apparently heard from lots of others who were outraged.) While travelers who saw the puppy birth might have thought it wonderful, miraculous, cute (or gross), that this poor dog had to whelp her puppies in such awful, public conditions is outrageous.

Travel Pods for Pets?

Seasoned car travelers

I have quite a bit of travel coming up, and the plane trips require leaving Cali behind. So when I saw this article on Wired.com about a new travel idea, my mind went right to dog travel. Safe dog travel, not the current nightmare scenario.

The article is about an aerospace designer, working with Airbus, to create custom cargo pods with bunk beds. The airlines be shaped to put the special cargo pods aboard or not, depending on the needs for a particular flight. When used, they’ll be accessible to economy passengers who wish to rent a bed for the duration of a long flight. That means that there will be a way for passengers to move between the main cabin and the pod.

So … why not design a similar pod for dog kennels?

The article states that the pods are being designed for economy passengers, since business or first class fliers already get beds on long flights. The cost will have to be less than the cost of a first class ticket, or why bother, right? The article describes on other uses for these designable, modular pods: lounges, kids’ play areas, conference rooms.

So, seriously, why not kennel space? They’d need a way to secure the dog crates — not a problem since airlines that transport pets already do that. For any of the uses described, the pods would need to be climate controlled, have decent airflow, and be accessible from inside the plane. I personally would be much more comfortable flying my pet if I could spend the entire flight (other than takeoff and landing) with her, even if she had to stay in a crate. As for cost, well, a two-week vacation can already run about $500 (or more!) for dog-sitting; wouldn’t you rather spend that money to take your pet along? I would. And I’d certainly see value in flying Cali cross-country rather than subjecting her and myself to a weeklong car trip, should the need arise. (We’ve driven cross-country several times; Jana experienced about a dozen cross-country drives in her lifetime.)

I wonder why flying pets wasn’t one of the uses Airbus mentioned. Maybe I should suggest it!

 

 

Travel Nightmares

United Airlines is, once again, drowning in terrible publicity. This time, it’s about major screw-ups with canine passengers. I’ll put the news-averse among you out of your misery: In two of the three incidents, the dogs survived.

I’ll start with those. One dog, who was supposed to go to Akron, wound up on a flight to St. Louis; earlier in the week, a German en route to Kansas traded places with a Great Dane bound for Japan. Traveling with a dog checked in as cargo is nerve-racking enough without having to worry about whether the dog is headed to the same destination you are. But there really has to be a better way to arrange pet travel.

Which forces the conversation to the third incident on United: The puppy who suffocated. I don’t know who to be more angry with: The flight attendant who ordered a frazzled mom to put her puppy into the overhead bin — which is against policy, not to mention common sense; the mom who did it; or the other passengers who watched, heard the puppy crying … and did nothing.

Here’s my rant: You are your dog’s only advocate and voice. If someone tells you to do something that would harm your dog, there’s a simple response: Refuse. Don’t do it. I wasn’t there, and it sounds like the mom had more than she could handle. But that doesn’t let her off the hook. I’m sure that being a flight attendant is extremely stressful. That doesn’t let the flight attendant off the hook. And the other passengers? I don’t even know what to say.

Everyone let that puppy down, but the primary responsibility is with the owner. If you have a dog, you have accepted the enormous responsibility of being that dog’s advocate and protector.

United has the most incidents resulting in pet loss, injury, and, especially death. The airline has a terrible record. But the numbers (which anyone can look up here, on the FAA’s consumer complaints site) don’t tell the whole story. Why not? Because some airlines won’t accept pets as cargo. Others won’t accept pets on board. Some won’t accept pets at all. Many pet-owners have bypassed the system by pretending that their pets are emotional support animals, though airlines are beginning to close that loophole.

People who need to get pets from one place to another have few options. No trains or buses. Driving isn’t always feasible. I heard recently that Pet Airways, which closed down a few years ago, is coming back to life. I don’t know what their plan is or whether that will become a solution, but … Maybe we should all just stay home!

 

Better and Better

Montana just gets better and better.

Cali and Jana’s cousins came to visit recently. Ziggy and Hannah live in Kansas, where summer is full of scary thunderstorms and terrifying lawnmowers. Up here on the hilltop in Montana, there are no lawnmowers at all. Thunderstorms are rare. There’s a huge play yard and lot of places to go hiking. Ziggy was excited.

Cali, Jana, and their cousins went to Missoula to visit Scarlett and her sister, Gracie. Then they went for a walk by the river, saw a huge carousel, met some really friendly Montana kids, and then, best of all, they got to go out for ice cream. The nice lady at the Big Dipper gave each dog her own cone! Ziggy and Jana and Cali ate theirs really fast, but Hannah showed her good breeding and manners, licking her cone delicately and not dripping it anywhere.

Hannah and Ziggy quickly learned to use the automatic dog door, and they each got their own key. Hannah thinks that it opens when she barks at it. She likes to bark, so that suits her just fine. Jana’s friend Molly came for a visit, and she remembered how to use the dog door right away, even though she hadn’t been over to visit in a really long time! She’s super-smart because she’s a poodle. She knows that barking is not what makes the door open.

Molly likes to bark too, but with all the girls barking, Jana and Cali’s mom couldn’t get any work done, so she told everyone to be quiet. Meanie!

The cousins and Molly loved playing out in Cali’s big play yard. They chased the ball, chased Cali or Alberta chasing the ball, ate grass, barked at deer, chased each other some more … when they got tired, they went back inside and piled onto the dog beds or stretched out on a rug. Hannah and Ziggy thought that Montana was pretty awesome. Molly, a native Montanan, couldn’t agree more.

After Hannah and Ziggy and Molly went home, Cali, Alberta, and Jana finally made plans to go to Packer Meadow. Jana loves this place and told Cali and Alberta all about it, but Cali and Alberta had never been there. It’s huge and very green. Jana remembers being there when it was so full of purple flowers that it looked like water. Speaking of water, there’s this really great stream that runs through the meadow. Brrrr. The water is very cold. But a dog can jump in and climb out and jump in and climb out and jump in and … all day (or until her mom makes her leave. Meanie.).

Unfortunately, the day they went, Packer Meadow was closed because it was too close to some huge forest fires. Good thing that Mom always has a backup plan; the girls had a great afternoon at Jana’s second-favorite place, Fort Fizzle. Jana found the first of her heart-shaped rocks there. She loves splashing in the river, finding rocks, rolling on the bank, and chasing sticks. Cali chased tennis balls; one almost got lost way out on the rocks, and Alberta wouldn’t bring it back, but Cali finally agreed to go and get it. She got a bunch of cookies for that. Maybe Mom is not such a meanie after all.

And guess what! They still get to go to Packer Meadow in a couple of weeks. Montana sure is a great place to be a dog.