Service Dogs For Veterans Outreach Event At Arlington National Cemetery

Service Dogs For Veterans Outreach Event At Arlington National Cemetery

Video from yesterday’s Canine Companions for Independence Salutes Independence veterans outreach event at the Women In Military Service for America Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery is now up at The Pentagon Channel. My friends Sam Cila, Buddy Hayes, and Corey Hudson, CCI CEO, are all interviewed.

I tried to embed it with the start time set (something you can easily do with any YouTube video and you’re supposed to be able to do with these, too), but it didn’t work for me, so you’ll need to let it load and then drag the bar to the 18-minute point where the CCI segment starts:

Companion article (pun intended) with more detail has now been posted at Defense.gov as well:

“Defense Leaders Promote Benefits of Assistance Dogs for Veterans”

On top of everything else, I want to point out something Buddy addresses that most of us who’ve been involved with service dogs for any length of time have heard hundreds if not thousands of times from virtually everyone who has a service dog.  Namely, how people would completely ignore them before they got the dog, but once they had the dog, that all went away – people stop, talk, actually go out of their way to meet them.

As Buddy says, “Oh, yeah, they ignore you – just flat out…they walk right by you like you’re invisible.  And now they come up and, you know, wanna pet the dog…” (Trust me, I know all the etiquette rules very well, and I also know that many with the dogs allow it, too – it’s up to them, and that’s not the point here.)  A complete, 180 degree change from how life was before.

That’s one of the biggest reasons I have problems with the whole concept of what service dogs for those whose primary or only issue is post-traumatic stress are being trained to do – actually keeping people away from their human partners. That runs directly counter to the role service dogs have appropriately played for as long as they’ve been around (with the exception of one group of dogs whose proponents have been pushing this idea for years and are now doing it with veterans) and is something I plan to address at length in another post.

Haven’t had a chance to talk to anybody who was at yesterday’s event yet, but I’ll be very interested to see what they say.

Wait – You Mean Those Two Dogs Didn’t Really Belong To A Deployed Soldier?

Wait – You Mean Those Two Dogs Didn’t Really Belong To A Deployed Soldier?

See this all the time, and not just with dog stories, and it makes me nuts:  “Follow-up visit: Dogs’ owner not soldier in Iraq”

Classic example of why you have to check things out BEFORE you post them.  Although this one’s pretty tame in comparison to many I’ve seen, and there were questions raised about it by some milbloggers when it was first publicized.

I’ve even had friends post things that I’ve told them privately weren’t real, they’ve acknowledged that, but then have made no public correction or comment.  And in the case of one hoax where I did publicly comment on it and say it was a hoax, follow-on commenters continued to thank the person who posted it for doing so!

Look, there’s already enough real nonsense floating around out there, not to mention all the made-up stuff from people who don’t check before they post it – why add to it?

AMVETS Addresses Two Tough Issues Concerning Service Dogs For Veterans

Big points to Christina Roof and AMVETS for issuing this press release yesterday (“AMVETS Clarifies Stance On Veterans’ Service Dogs”) and taking on some unpopular issues nobody seems to want to deal with, particularly the second one.

Definitely worth reading the whole thing because there are a lot of good background details you want to be aware of in it (and, for the record, I had nothing to do with it at all – we just agree about a lot of  things), but here are the two main issues.  The first one everybody will get behind, the second I have no doubt AMVETS will take heat for, but that doesn’t change the fact that they’re correct and the issue needs to be addressed:

“…access for service dogs other than guide dogs to VA facilities remains at the discretion of each individual medical center director.”

I’ve discussed this before, but the ADA doesn’t cover public access for anyone at VA facilities other than employees.  The result (and there are documented cases of this happening right now) is the classic Catch-22 where a veteran has a legitimate service dog under the ADA, that dog has been approved for benefits by the VA, but the veteran can’t take the dog into VA facilities, in many cases the very ones where he’s receiving treatment for the same physical issues for which he has the dog.

“There are no current ADI standards for psychiatric service dogs and minimal scientific data to support assertions on their overall effectiveness… Given the current situation, AMVETS warns that accepting assertions about psychiatric service dogs at face value could prove to be a disservice to affected veterans, only creating more hurdles to earned care and benefits.”

If you went by the majority of what you see online, on TV, and in print, you’d never realize this was the case – you’d think this was a done deal.  Well, it’s not, and as I’ve said many times, I have big qualms about this whole area, particularly since so many have “declared victory and gone home” on this subject, as if the mere fact that a veteran suffering with post-traumatic stress is out in public with a dog proves that the dog is working and that it is an effective solution.

As I’ve said, I want to write shorter posts more often rather than longer ones, so I will continue to address why I feel that way in other posts.  There are a number of solid reasons, and I will, as always, do my best to give you the information and tools you need to make your own decisions.

Warrior Games Coming Back To Colorado Springs In 2011

Warrior Games Coming Back To Colorado Springs In 2011

I’ve gushed over the inaugural Warrior Games held here at the Olympic Training Center and Air Force Academy back in May enough you already know how much I thought of them. (If you don’t, check here.)

So, I was more than a little pleased to see the official announcement yesterday that they are coming back again next May: “Officials Announce Warrior Games 2011“.  I’d definitely suggest watching the video – it’s 30 minutes, but gives you a really good feel for how things were this year plus the plan for next year.

BTW, Stacy Pearsall, who is in both the article and video, took the great picture of Jason Morgan and Napal in this post.

I’ve seen a lotta people who weren’t here for this year’s Games already talking about coming to them next year – all I can say is, if you’re even thinking about it, do it.  Granted, there’s only ever one “first”, but if it’s anything like that (and based on that video, no reason it shouldn’t be – could very well be even better), you definitely wanna be here.

“I’m So Proud Of That American Flag… That’s Why I Was Serving My Country.”

“I’m So Proud Of That American Flag… That’s Why I Was Serving My Country.”

CBS broadcast a PGA special called “Playing With A Purpose” last month about the charity efforts some of the top professional golfers are involved in.

The first segment featured Phil Mickelson and his involvement with Homes For Our Troops and was all about my friends Matt and Tracy Keil who live out here in Parker, Colorado. I’ve written about Matt before – he was shot in the neck by a sniper in Ramadi in 2007, is paralyzed from the chest down other than a little movement in his left arm, and has a Canine Companions for Independence service dog, Gus (who, coincidentally, was raised in the Kit Carson Correctional Facility in Burlington, Colorado).

Video of that segment is now on YouTube.  CCI isn’t mentioned in it, but Gus is very visible. Pretty emotional, too – Matt and Tracy have done a lot of very public things like this, but this is the best one I’ve seen. Just tremendous.

What Do You Do When It’s Time For Your Service Dog To Retire?

What Do You Do When It’s Time For Your Service Dog To Retire?

Canine Companions for Independence graduate Buddy Hayes has just written a great post on her site about planning for her service dog Ellie’s retirement.  A must-read, especially if you’re even remotely considering getting an assistance dog or know anyone who is: “The big “R” word…


Probably the most overlooked subject I see with people looking for a service dog, and one of the major advantages a first-class service dog organization offers, is support – it’s just not something most people normally think about in the overall scheme of getting a service dog.  And yet it’s one of the most important things to consider, and one of the biggest reasons I always recommend going to a top organization that will offer lifetime support – for both you and the dog.

That’s clearly not something you get if you train a dog yourself – you’re completely on your own.  A trainer, even a great one, may or may not be there when the time comes for another dog, and doesn’t likely have anything close to the resources a good organization has for both placing your dog with someone else or providing you a successor dog.  Even among organizations, you need to take a close look, because that varies widely, too.

What you’re looking for is exactly what Buddy talks about.  An organization that has a built-in, long-standing process for something no one really wants to think about, but yet knows is gonna happen someday.  It’s tough enough to begin with, and you sure don’t wanna be fooling around with what happens to a dog you love more than anything and has been so faithful to you for many years, or worrying about where your next dog to meet the needs you still have (and which may over time have become even more serious) is gonna come from.

Kudos to Buddy for tackling a very important subject I know she doesn’t really wanna talk about and doing such a great job.

Canine Companions for Independence Veteran Graduate In Airman Magazine

Canine Companions for Independence Veteran Graduate In Airman Magazine

How about something great and a lot more fun after all that stuff I’ve been writing about lately? (Still haven’t seen any word on Cesar Millan’s disability, BTW.)

The new September/October Airman Magazine, the official magazine of the US Air Force, went online a couple days ago, and Canine Companions for Independence graduate (and my friend) Jason Morgan is on the cover.


The Airman article was put together when Jason and his service dog Napal were here in Colorado Springs competing at the first-ever Warrior Games in May.

Some of the usual fantastic Airman pictures, and talks about how Jason was injured when he was an Air Force combat weatherman on a Spec Ops mission in South America, something I’ve mentioned here before as well.

Definitely worth downloading the magazine and reading the article: 

http://www.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-100908-051.pdf

Outstanding to see this not only because Jason’s a friend, I know his story, and I witnessed most of this in person at the Warrior Games, but because of the increased exposure top-notch service dogs for seriously injured veterans will receive.  That’s really a carryover from the Games – Napal is a wonderful dog and classic example of a CCI graduate dog who was very, very visible here in front of hundreds of wounded veterans, senior military staff, those veterans’ families and friends, and the general public.

More on Jason and Napal here:

“Out Of Everything I’ve Done To Try And Improve My Life, Nothing’s Even Come Close To Getting My Service Dog Napal”

Warrior Games – More Thoughts

Warrior Games Opening Ceremonies

Air Superiority At The Warrior Games – Air Force’s Jason Morgan And Napal

Cesar’s Way Wrong About Service Dogs: Part 4 – Registries

I’ve been writing about Cesar Millan’s recent “Junior gets his Service Dog certification!” post the last few days, including how it was so wrong,  a classic example of misplaced priorities, and didn’t address the law.  The page that started this has been taken down, but there’s a cached version here, and you can also click on the photo for a larger screen capture image of the article.

Next up, service dog registries, but first, here’s a very pertinent late breaking update. Yesterday I found this response from United States Service Dog Registry, whose “documentation package”  is in that picture, to a comment on their Facebook page – pretty obscure place for a pretty significant announcement, honestly (my italics below):

Friends of the United States Service Dog Registry: Hi Emily, thanks for you question. We’ve been in touch with Cesar’s assistant and the writer of this story. The writer of this story is not knowledgeable about Service Dogs and made several errors and omissions in her post. This blog also went live before Cesar could review it. The writer was also reticent to mention Cesar’s disability out of concern for his privacy. She has taken the blog down due to the holiday weekend and until she can meet with Cesar. We will post more information as soon as we have it.”

That’s huge news if Cesar has a disability (and I also have to say it seems USSDR doesn’t share the same concern about Cesar’s privacy if they would post that), since, as I said in my last post, I’ve never seen that mentioned before. No question I’m very much awaiting official clarification, but let’s be very clear – even if that’s accurate, it doesn’t change the fact there are still big problems here, one of which is using a service dog registry.

I’ve been following this subject for several years and have just ducked talking about it here because, frankly, I see so much bad stuff daily where service dogs are concerned I get tired of talking about it all. So I’m very familiar with USSDR, even though I’ve intentionally never mentioned them here.  They are certainly not the worst of the bunch, and if you didn’t know better about the whole registry concept and just went by their posts about service dog access issues everywhere, you’d think they were great.

Here’s what you need to know, and let’s just say this right up front:

Service dog registries’ documentation, IDs, tags, patches, and so on are basically worthless. They have no legal standing and are completely meaningless when it comes to determining if a dog is really a service dog.

Hey, USSDR even tells you that, although not in those words, of course. You can wade through all the legalese on their site (and, trust me, there’s plenty – just click on that Terms and Conditions link), but these two excerpts from their About Us page are what count:

Registrant data is based on assertions by the dog owners. The USSDR can not confirm or certify information provided by the registrants. Service Dog certification is not required by the ADA law. Use of this website, your 10 Digit ID Code, any items from our Archival Documentation Package, cards you make up for yourself are subject to our full Terms and Conditions. Please note that misrepresenting any animal as a Service or Assistance Animal (in any way, either by simply verbally claiming an animal is a service animal, wearing a Service Animal vest or cape, using a special harness, leash, tags or by any other means—including using this Registry) is a crime and may be punishable by law. See our Terms and Conditions for details.

The United States Service Dog Registry is not a certification process and Registrant data is based solely on the assertions of the dog owner. Registrants accept full responsibility for the accuracy of their information, their own conduct and the conduct of their animals. Please read our Terms and Conditions. We provide no benefits or protection for our Registrants, legal or otherwise. Protection and benefits are granted by the ADA and local governments.

See what I mean?

The problem is there’s a fundamental disconnect here. I don’t see how you can say you support the ADA and sell these materials – it’s that simple. You can be well-meaning, cover yourself legally every way from Sunday, dance things around any way you want, but it still comes up the same way.

And the bottom line is still this – if you got fifty bucks and fill out their application, you can have the same stuff you see with Cesar and Junior:

http://www.usservicedogregistry.org/shop.php

Let’s be serious – if  someone who doesn’t know better (which is pretty much everybody) sees a dog with that stuff, do you have any doubt that they think it’s something official that says the dog is a service dog? And they aren’t gonna be looking for all that legalese and disclaimers on a web page – all they know is what they see.

Happens all the time.  I can’t tell you how many news stories or blog posts I see that go something like this: “Even though Lassie had on her vest and service dog ID, she and Billy weren’t allowed in the store.” as if that had any legal standing and then go on to rant about how that’s a violation of the ADA.

This video from last year is a classic example. The veteran in it may very well have a perfectly legitimate beef with the bus line, but, unfortunately, both he and the reporter have shown they aren’t clear on the law when they talk about how the dog “even has identification” and show a closeup of her ID card:

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/us/2009/10/21/fl.service.dog.trouble.wsvn.html

(Note that particular ID is from registeredservicedogs.com which may have gone out of business since their page comes up as a suspended account, but you can see what it used to look like here.)

That’s the fundamental problem with these registries – they skirt the line and effectively say “We’ll sell you all this great official-looking stuff that allows you to ID your dog as a service dog, but it isn’t official and we take no responsibility if you use it that way.” I guess the concept is you can’t fake something that doesn’t actually exist in the first place, I don’t know.

The larger subject, and one for another time since this is way too long already, is that this is all an outgrowth of the DOJ decision to not only not require any identification for service animals, but not even create one in the first place. One of the end results is that even people with legitimate service dogs buy this stuff because they’re desperate for anything that might keep them from getting hassled.

So what do I wanna see happen and what can we do here?

Well, I’d just as soon see all these registry places go away. I don’t know that it’s appropriate to outlaw them, I’m not a fan of doing business like that, and don’t know that you could, anyway. And even if you did, it would still take time and effort.

But what you CAN do and right now is this: don’t buy anything from these places, don’t promote them, don’t retweet their tweets, don’t share their posted links on Facebook, don’t give their products any recognized status when you see them on a dog – nothing. It’s like so many other things – you might not be able to put an end to them or may not even want to, but you don’t have to support them, either.

Beyond that, I think it’s long past time to resurface the idea of a standardized national ID.

Next: I plan to wait for some kind of official statement from Cesar or his staff before writing any more in this series.

Cesar’s Way Wrong About Service Dogs: Part 3 – The Law

So far in my series about Cesar Millan’s recent “Junior gets his Service Dog certification!” post, I’ve talked about how it was so wrong and how it’s a classic example of misplaced priorities.  Please review those if you haven’t read them already.  And, again, the page that started this controversy has been taken down, but you can read a cached version here, and you can click on the photo for a larger screen capture image of the article as well.

Next let’s talk about the law, or, more appropriately, Cesar’s apparent ignorance of it.

Now, if you’ve been here more than once, you know it’s no secret I’m not a big fan of the law or looking for legislative solutions to problems in general, and more specifically where service dogs are concerned.  It’s also way too easy to get into a complex and arcane legal discussion, courts have gone both ways in their rulings, I’m not an attorney, and chances are neither are you. So I like to keep things as simple as possible in this area, and that’s easy to do in this case.

For all the legal complexities, there are only a couple things you need to know here.  First, as I said in “When You Hear ‘Service Dog’, Think “Public Access’“:

When somebody says their dog is a service dog, public access is really what we’re talking about. If I describe my dog that way, the clear implication is that the dog does stuff for me and I can take it with me wherever I want. And, when it comes down to it, that’s the primary, if not only, reason to differentiate your dog in that way. (Note I didn’t say that that’s what defines a service dog – that’s another post.)

Keep in mind that, unless I state otherwise, my goal here is to give you brief, real world, practical, useful definitions and explanations that you can operate from daily, and not textbook, dictionary, or legal ones – you can go look those up for yourself, anyway.  In that vein, think of public access as “having your dog somewhere dogs normally aren’t allowed.”

So, if Cesar says Junior is a service dog, the clear implication is that he intends to take Junior into public access areas. Because otherwise there’s no need to say that.

It follows then that, second, Cesar and Junior need to meet the public access requirements, and, in that regard, what I said in “Bet You Have No Idea Just How Low The Bar Is To Say Your Dog Is A Service Dog” applies.  You can read that post for more details, including the pertinent section of the newly revised ADA, but here’s the key point:

All you have to do is be able to answer these two questions the right way:

* Is your dog required because of a disability?
* What does your dog do for you?

Did you see that addressed anywhere in Cesar’s post? In fact, I’ll even give him the benefit of the doubt since that post has been pulled, apparently because of the way it was written – have you EVER seen any indication ANYWHERE that he understands this concept? I didn’t, and I never have.

Nothing there about what Junior does for him, or even for other people with disabilities, either. For example, medical professionals with service dogs that were not trained for them, but for use with their patients with disabilities (e.g., Canine Companions for Independence Facility Dogs), have public access when they take the dog and those patients out into public access areas, the concept being the dog is required because of the patients’ disabilities and performs functions for them.

Nope, none of that.  Just a “hey, look at me and my great service dog Junior and how cool is that” picture with a really flaky explanation lacking any real substance.

On top of that, the real proof for me that Cesar doesn’t get it here is what got this controversy started in the first place – his use of a service dog registry.  Remember, as I said at the outset, this is not about Cesar, the issues go way beyond him, and service dog registries are a prime example.  And let’s be very clear here – even if  someone has a disability and a legitimate service dog, service dog registries and their meaningless documentation, patches, tags,  ID cards, and so on are still a bad thing.

More on that subject in my next post – it’s one I’ve let go for far too long.  We’re long past the point where the lid needs to be blown off those places, and this may be the incident that finally does that.

Next: Part 4 – Registries

Cesar’s Way Wrong About Service Dogs: Part 2 – Priorities

Last time I talked about Cesar Millan’s recent “Junior gets his Service Dog certification!” post, how it was so wrong, and said I’d point out specifically what the major problems were in my next few posts. As mentioned, the page has been taken down, but you can read a cached version here, and you can click on the photo for a larger screen capture image of the article as well.

Let’s start with what’s probably the biggest one because it drives so many things in the service dog world – priorities.  I’m constantly reminding people that, if you’re gonna be involved with service dogs, you absolutely have to be clear on the priorities. Because it’s very easy to get caught up in the feelgood factors, especially when you add veterans to the mix, and lose sight of what you are trying to accomplish.

As I said, when possible, I’m going to reference things I’ve already written since most, if not all, still apply and this situation presents a great opportunity to bring those up again and reinforce them.

I’ve talked about this as recently as six weeks ago in “Pit Bulls As Service Dogs? Why?“:

Again, there’s nothing that says you can’t do that, BUT it’s like everything else with a service dog, and that’s really the point I want to make here.  The focus has to be on making a life-changing, lifelong improvement for the person receiving the dog, and everything – EVERYTHING – has to be evaluated in that light. And the question you have to ask yourself or an organization is “What’s the priority here?”  Is it rescuing pit bulls, or a crusade to prove they aren’t bad dogs, or (fill in the blank), OR making that truly life-changing improvement in someone’s life?

And the answer is not “both”.  It’s like that old thing about how “you only get one thing in the box – what’s it gonna be?”

I also addressed it as part of a larger discussion (“Tough Questions You Need To Ask About Every Service Dog for Veterans Organization“) back in April 2009:

●  What is the real focus of the organization? Are they truly focused on “the human end of the leash”?

Service dog programs now often have a number of individual elements they promote, sometimes all combined into one program – for example, prisoners raising dogs (one element) rescued from shelters (another element) that will become service dogs (another element) for wounded veterans (another element).  On the upside, each one of those is a great thing by itself, and, naturally, in combination, it comes across as even that much better.  On the downside, though, those things can easily be competing priorities, and the organization – and you – have to figure out what’s the primary focus.

Are they more interested in rescuing dogs from shelters?  Or is the real priority helping prisoners?  Or is their true passion helping wounded veterans? Harsh as this may sound, the bottom line is the focus has to be on making a life-changing, lifelong improvement for the person receiving the dog, and those other interests are side benefits that are important only to the degree that they help make that happen.  Again, look closely, but sometimes I think this one jumps out at you.

Take a look at that picture of Cesar and Junior, read the accompanying article, and you tell me – what’s the priority here?  I don’t think it’s too tough to figure that out, especially if you know anything about Cesar’s history, but you can go read the Millan Foundation mission statement just to confirm it:

“To create and deliver community humane education programs and promote animal welfare by supporting the rescue, rehabilitation, and rehoming of abused and abandoned dogs.”

Nothing wrong with that at all and a great goal in an of itself, but doesn’t play (or is, at best, secondary) when you’re talking about service dogs.

Next: Part 3 – The Law