Quantcast
Home / Home news / Under this bill, it’s illegal to pretend your pet is a ‘service animal’

Under this bill, it’s illegal to pretend your pet is a ‘service animal’

pets-animals-620State lawmakers are hoping to keep Fido and FiFi out of grocery stores, restaurants and airports if they have no legal right to be there.

On a party-line vote Thursday, the Senate approved HB2588. It would make it illegal for someone to “fraudulently misrepresent” a pet as a legitimate “service animal.” The House still needs to give the bill a final approval.

Violators would be subject to fines of up to $250.

Sen. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, said the problem has gotten out of control.

“Right now, it is perfectly legal to buy a $20 vest on Amazon.com, put it on your pet and take it into a store,” he told colleagues.

Sen. Steve Farley, D-Tucson, acknowledged that both state and federal law preclude business owners from demanding that those who claim their dogs are service animals detail their disabilities. But, he said, that does not leave them without remedies when there are problems.

He said store owners can ask an owner to remove an animal – even a service dog – if the animal poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others. The same is true if the animal is out of control, not housebroken or the animal “fundamentally alters the nature of the public place or the goods, services or activities provided.”

“So, basically, if you’ve got a poorly behaved animal, a service animal or somebody claiming for it to be a service animal, the owner has the full authority to kick that animal out of the premises,” Farley said. “There is no need to involve law enforcement.”

In fact, Farley noted, even if a business owner called the police, they can’t do anything to remove the animal. Instead, it would simply require the owner to appear in court.

Kavanagh, however, said focusing on whether an animal is well behaved – or even housebroken – misses the point.

“I don’t want some dog being wheeled around a supermarket in the same cart I’ll put my food in later to be able to stay just because he’s not misbehaving,” he said.

Sen. Katie Hobbs, D-Phoenix, countered that there already are ways for business owners to approach those with animals and separate out the legitimate service dogs from the household pets – all without violating federal and state laws about asking people about their disabilities.

She said store owners are allowed to ask if the animal really is a service animal. And they also can question a handler about exactly what task the animal is trained to perform.

“And if it is not a legitimate service animal, the people bringing the animal in are not going to be able to answer the questions accurately and appropriately,” Hobbs said. “And the proprietor can ask them to leave at that point.”

Kavanagh, however, said it shouldn’t get that far.

“I’m trying to prevent the situation where store owners have to begin interrogating people with service animals, especially people with legitimate service animals,” he said. “The way to stop this is to deter the phony people from coming in in the first place.”

3 comments

  1. bradley taylor hudson

    John Kavanagh thinks this issue is important? I guess I can see why. After all, teachers’ pay, infrastructure, opiod deaths, jobs, and pollution will probably just take care of themselves or just go away, but those evil pet-owners have got to be stopped! In his own words, this has gotten “out of control”! What if they became a caravan, tromping through stores like a bunch of hungry illegal aliens! Maybe we could use National Guard troops to enforce the “fake” service animal threat. Repeatedly, Kavanagh takes extreme, weird positions on issues. How is it that he stays in office?

  2. What has gotten out of control is the number of venues that arbitrarily deny access to pets. We camp in Flagstaff and have found Northern Arizona to be the most pet-unfriendly place we’ve visited. Grand Canyon, Meteor Crater, Bearizona, Lowell Observatory and many museums are some of the places that won’t even allow us in with a pet carrying bag, or holding our small dog. Blame these arbitrary policies for pushing pet owners to become liars.

  3. as a user of service dog [proper term is handler] i do highly object to the misrepresentation of pets
    there are misstatements in this article, the store owner may NOT ask specific questions of the handler
    the only two authorized are ‘is this a service dog?’ and ‘what does it do?’ and the second only has to be answered in general terms in my case the answer is medical alert i am not required to explain that the dog can detect bad sugar levels and alert me to get insulin or sugar as needed before i may notice the symptoms, if not in a hurry and depending on attitude of questioner i usually do explain this as my tiny contribution to the fund of general knowledge, but this is not required

    i do feel that the law, at present, is biased too far to the handler [the dog has no rights, these are derived from the owner] i feel that something along the lines of handicap parking would be appropriate, still subject to abuse, but what isn’t and would cut down the incidents get statement form doctor see county clerk and get tag/wallet card recognized in all 50

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

 

x

Check Also

vote-1-web

Prop 306 foe warns of ‘Trojan horse’ to undermine Clean Elections

A measure Republican lawmakers put on the November ballot could determine how much Arizonans actually know about who is trying to influence political campaigns.