New Disney pet poll!

[FeralCatRogue]

I chose other I am not against pet friendly hotels, I am against them pretty much saying go leave ya animal in a place it does not know while you are in a park all day with its "up to 7 hours option" which i think is unfair to the dog. I also do not think they have thought out enough how to deal with people with allergies and phobias.

 

[TheFloatingBear]

I can def. understand that and makes sense. Do you mind sharing if you voted in the other thread?

Sure, but don't say I didn't warn you, you know I get wordy! Some of this may be repeating myself from my many posts on the subject...

Given the choices, I voted No in the other poll. If I were "forced" to vote now, lol, I'd most likely be in the no's or in the mixed ones (like the Yes but No ones, etc.). Again, don't have significant issues so can work around things better than a lot of people, but really feel for the people more significantly impacted. But for example, I love YC (more than BC), but as things are now, would not book it unless Disney gets a little more organized. It's a bummer because I love it, but I'm not in the position that I feel like I have to rule it out, which whether one wants to empathize or not, people can be really attached to resorts (me included!), and if that's the case it is a loss for them. I took a sister trip last year to YC. It was my sister's dream trip, she hadn't been in 20 years and she choose YC. She was attacked by a dog as a child and while she does not consider herself having a dog phobia, she does not like them and we absolutely would have had to change resorts. I'm glad I'm not in that position right now, and I'm only dealing with being in a trial hotel with my daughter and I, neither of whom have allergies or fears.

So my struggle with choosing one of these...at the risk of being characterized as over-thinking things, over reacting, or passionate about the dog poop issue (that a joke, given our earlier exchange), I'm at a trial resort and there are a lot of firsts and unknowns in this trip, including this new policy. I've seen a lot of thoughtful posts over the last few days (and some not so much) about people wanting to bring their pets and being a responsible pet owner. I was a responsible pet owner and my biggest pet peeve were people that weren't responsible, for so many reason some I've already mentioned in previous posts but there are others too. I see people break these "societal" rules of pet ownership every single day, as the expense of their dogs and their neighbors - and part of my frustration stems from the fact that their irresponsibility can impact the responsible owners in a variety of ways too. I'm giving generals but I can provide lots of examples, of course but I'm sparing you from a lengthy examples of dog rules at our local beaches, lol. You're welcome.

So, I feel like it's reasonable to expect that there will be some that push or break the rules. At the risk of repeating myself, I combine that with my experience of rule enforcement at Disney, the fact that they appear blindsided by the fact that that people have concerns and that perhaps they should have beefed up their policies and procedures, and - and I feel like this is an important one for me - the logistics of not following these particular rules, and I'm a bit at a loss...For example (and then I promise I'll be quiet), there's been a lot of talk about the 7 hours unattended. That is the direct opposite of Universal's stated policy of never having a dog unattended in the hotel. Regardless of if people intend to do that or if people follow the rule at Universal, that's a really wide discrepancy and it seems like if Universal is doing a good job, maybe we should look to their example. So, then at the risk of speculating (but it's my personal experience with my neighbor's dogs so I think reasonable), if a dog is crying in the room, it presents issues in a different way than some previous Disney experiences. If a baby was crying, my sister snoring, drunk people, etc, I could first address it if I choose with the people in the room. Generally I tend to give people in the room the benefit of the doubt and hope it works out, then my next recourse is the front desk (calling gets a call center). In this scenario, if I know the dog is unattended, I have to skip straight to going to the lobby, which presents logistical difficulties in my specific situation - traveling alone with a 10YO in an unfamiliar resort and distant lobby. And more importantly, if I feel like the dog is in distress or lonely (and again, drawing on personal experience in my daily life) it would really stress me out and make me sad!

So, yah, if you're still with me, I'm kind of all over the place, discouraged by a lot of the dialogue, and hoping the Disney gets it together. Can that be my vote?

 

[Nancyg56]

I suspect you are correct and that bothers me way more than dogs at WDW.

I think that this is an overreaction. For instance, my daughter hates dogs. Absolutely cannot stand them, so she tolerates them when necessary, but refuses to touch one, will cross the street to avoid one, and gags at the thought of one in her home. However if you ever visited that menagerie she calls home you would reverse your statement about hating animals. She has three rescue cats, and a hedgehog, and has a hard time not taking in more. Dogs? Not one.

It's troublesome for sure. I would not personally own a dog, but I worry about people who hate them this much. I am suspicious of people who hate animals.

Not liking a specific kind of animal is different than hating animals.

I like dogs, love kittles, and think critters are cute. I do not want to stay I a room that someone else's dog was lounging. Some kinds of dogs dander makes my face look like I was beat up. I also do not like the "wet dog" smell, any more than I like cigarette smoke that can be left behind after a heavy smoker sits on a couch.

If dogs were kept to specific resorts I would be fine. I would not choose those resorts, ever. But I would not begrudge pet owners to stay there with their dogs. I feel the same way about this as I would if Disney chose to have an adults only resort. I think that that would be fine, and it would meets a need that some people have. I would not choose to stay there, but I have never felt that my preferences are the only considerations that should be allowed. Just as I do not feel that each and every resort and restaurant within WDW must accommodate children, I feel that there can be specific resorts that agree to accommodate dogs. Guests can then choose where they want to spend their money.

I do feel that there should be zero tolerance for owners who do not respect the rules in place though, and I bet that is where some folks are concerned. Disney is not known for holding guests to the standard they set. I would not book one of the pet resorts because I know for sure that the first time I landed in pet "residue" I would furious, and I do choose to avoid any circumstances that would upset me on vacation. My sister would book one of those resorts in a heartbeat. Her AussiPoo goes wherever they can bring her safely.

 

[jrmasm]

I think that this is an overreaction. For instance, my daughter hates dogs. Absolutely cannot stand them, so she tolerates them when necessary, but refuses to touch one, will cross the street to avoid one, and gags at the thought of one in her home. However if you ever visited that menagerie she calls home you would reverse your statement about hating animals. She has three rescue cats, and a hedgehog, and has a hard time not taking in more. Dogs? Not one.



Not liking a specific kind of animal is different than hating animals.

I like dogs, love kittles, and think critters are cute. I do not want to stay I a room that someone else's dog was lounging. Some kinds of dogs dander makes my face look like I was beat up. I also do not like the "wet dog" smell, any more than I like cigarette smoke that can be left behind after a heavy smoker sits on a couch.

If dogs were kept to specific resorts I would be fine. I would not choose those resorts, ever. But I would not begrudge pet owners to stay there with their dogs. I feel the same way about this as I would if Disney chose to have an adults only resort. I think that that would be fine, and it would meets a need that some people have. I would not choose to stay there, but I have never felt that my preferences are the only considerations that should be allowed. Just as I do not feel that each and every resort and restaurant within WDW must accommodate children, I feel that there can be specific resorts that agree to accommodate dogs. Guests can then choose where they want to spend their money.

I do feel that there should be zero tolerance for owners who do not respect the rules in place though, and I bet that is where some folks are concerned. Disney is not known for holding guests to the standard they set. I would not book one of the pet resorts because I know for sure that the first time I landed in pet "residue" I would furious, and I do choose to avoid any circumstances that would upset me on vacation. My sister would book one of those resorts in a heartbeat. Her AussiPoo goes wherever they can bring her safely.

I didn't make a statement about anyone hating animals.

 

[AngiTN]

So, yah, if you're still with me, I'm kind of all over the place, discouraged by a lot of the dialogue, and hoping the Disney gets it together. Can that be my vote?

Sure, that's what Other is for

 

[Nancyg56]

In this scenario, if I know the dog is unattended, I have to skip straight to going to the lobby, which presents logistical difficulties in my specific situation - traveling alone with a 10YO in an unfamiliar resort and distant lobby. And more importantly, if I feel like the dog is in distress or lonely (and again, drawing on personal experience in my daily life) it would really stress me out and make me sad!

So, yah, if you're still with me, I'm kind of all over the place, discouraged by a lot of the dialogue, and hoping the Disney gets it together. Can that be my vote?

I read your entire post and I do understand. With issues that concern humans you have a way of addressing them directly, if you choose. With unattended pets? No. I know many dogs are left at home for the day and are perfectly fine. In a hotel room? I think it can be stressful on them, and in turn on those who would hear them. I also with go directly to the front desk. As I stated earlier, I am not going to put myself in any position that involves me staying in a pet friendly resort in WDW, and while that may not solve every issue, it will solve most of my concerns. Frankly, I liked seeing the puppy parades, etc during Irma, and I did wonder if Disney was going to open their policy to pets. Time will tell whether this will be a viable option for WDW to continue.

 

[HappyMomma]

It's funny how pet owners are the biggest ones against it! LOL. I love my dog, but don't want to deal with him, or others on my vacation. Unless it's a service dog, of course.

 

[Dis703]

I'm a definite no and went with Worst Idea Ever although I do love animals in general but dogs trigger my anxiety and kids have allergies and behavioral/sensory issues to worry about.

 

[MaryLovesPoohBear]

It's funny how pet owners are the biggest ones against it! LOL. I love my dog, but don't want to deal with him, or others on my vacation. Unless it's a service dog, of course.

The biggest difference for me? I don't have to deal with service dogs. Service dogs are with their owner. They are there to help their owner. They aren't left alone and they are fully trained.

Pets? Not so much.

 

[TheFloatingBear]

Sure, that's what Other is for

I didn't want to choose "other" since I felt like I fell into multiple categories, so instead I decided to wait until my trip in one if the trial resorts before I answered, since my feelings may change or become more clear - but thanks.

 

[trvlgirlmq]

I'm going with yes as long as it stays at a Handful of resorts. This to me will satisfy everyone. Seems like most people don't want it at all, but there obviously is some do. So make it available to people that have the need/want, but give the rest of us our dog free resorts. Everyone is happy.

I do think that much of the unhappiness comes from the resorts chosen. Three of them are part of a handful of properties for families of 5 that are moderately priced (by Disney standards). The only option for those that don't want to be near any dogs now are ASM suites or very expensive deluxe resorts. I know as a family that requires 3 sleeping surfaces that we just can't afford deluxe prices. I've priced out DVC rentals and although better cost-wise I don't really want to sleep on a sofa bed for a week. Also, how many people are actually giving up their points making this a very risque way to go.

 

[HappyMomma]

The biggest difference for me? I don't have to deal with service dogs. Service dogs are with their owner. They are there to help their owner. They aren't left alone and they are fully trained.

Pets? Not so much.

Exactly! I didn't want to say anything. But few ppl truly have control of their dogs. Just look at them being walked around your neighborhood. The dog should never lead the human. But I digress because someone, I'm sure, will take umbrage.

 

[BigAlsGal]

I can't seem to pick one, strangely enough. My concerns stem a lot from both Disney's inability to develop clear policy/plans here, and my personal experience with their lack of enforcement of even clear and basic rules, so I'll probably wait until my trial period trip to vote...

I think that a lot of strong feelings stem from a belief that Disney won't do this right...they won't clean the rooms properly, they won't tell guests where they can and can't be with their dog, they won't crack down on barking, no weight restrictions. For a resort that is so beloved, some folks don't seem to have a lot of confidence in it if that makes sense

Agree! I feel like I fall into that category so I'll weigh in...I feel like my dissatisfaction with Disney is slowly accumulating over time, like the bloom is falling off of the rose, so to speak. However, the counterbalance is how much my kids love it and what a blast we have overall when we go. So my approach has been to try to troubleshoot before when Disney throws me a curveball, then make the best of things in the moment when stuff happens on my vacation. Like when someone breaks a rule that directly impacts me (fill in the blank, we all have experiences!), I've posted before that it's a cost/benefit ratio for me in the moment. Address it with a CM and grin and bear it or whatever if it's not resolved so it doesn't take away from my fun with my family. But I will say my confidence has been eroding over time, and this situation doesn't help. I've been reading posts about how surprised management is about concerns - and not even speaking to the perceived validity of the concerns - it really stuns me that they didn't think through all the different issues that might impact guests in a more thorough and thoughtful manner. Sorry, I tend to go on...

For these feeling that's why I put the "Yes. Until I step in dog crap" option. Basically yes until I see it's a problem then I'll change my mind.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Sure, but don't say I didn't warn you, you know I get wordy! Some of this may be repeating myself from my many posts on the subject...

Given the choices, I voted No in the other poll. If I were "forced" to vote now, lol, I'd most likely be in the no's or in the mixed ones (like the Yes but No ones, etc.). Again, don't have significant issues so can work around things better than a lot of people, but really feel for the people more significantly impacted. But for example, I love YC (more than BC), but as things are now, would not book it unless Disney gets a little more organized. It's a bummer because I love it, but I'm not in the position that I feel like I have to rule it out, which whether one wants to empathize or not, people can be really attached to resorts (me included!), and if that's the case it is a loss for them. I took a sister trip last year to YC. It was my sister's dream trip, she hadn't been in 20 years and she choose YC. She was attacked by a dog as a child and while she does not consider herself having a dog phobia, she does not like them and we absolutely would have had to change resorts. I'm glad I'm not in that position right now, and I'm only dealing with being in a trial hotel with my daughter and I, neither of whom have allergies or fears.

So my struggle with choosing one of these...at the risk of being characterized as over-thinking things, over reacting, or passionate about the dog poop issue (that a joke, given our earlier exchange), I'm at a trial resort and there are a lot of firsts and unknowns in this trip, including this new policy. I've seen a lot of thoughtful posts over the last few days (and some not so much) about people wanting to bring their pets and being a responsible pet owner. I was a responsible pet owner and my biggest pet peeve were people that weren't responsible, for so many reason some I've already mentioned in previous posts but there are others too. I see people break these "societal" rules of pet ownership every single day, as the expense of their dogs and their neighbors - and part of my frustration stems from the fact that their irresponsibility can impact the responsible owners in a variety of ways too. I'm giving generals but I can provide lots of examples, of course but I'm sparing you from a lengthy examples of dog rules at our local beaches, lol. You're welcome.

So, I feel like it's reasonable to expect that there will be some that push or break the rules. At the risk of repeating myself, I combine that with my experience of rule enforcement at Disney, the fact that they appear blindsided by the fact that that people have concerns and that perhaps they should have beefed up their policies and procedures, and - and I feel like this is an important one for me - the logistics of not following these particular rules, and I'm a bit at a loss...For example (and then I promise I'll be quiet), there's been a lot of talk about the 7 hours unattended. That is the direct opposite of Universal's stated policy of never having a dog unattended in the hotel. Regardless of if people intend to do that or if people follow the rule at Universal, that's a really wide discrepancy and it seems like if Universal is doing a good job, maybe we should look to their example. So, then at the risk of speculating (but it's my personal experience with my neighbor's dogs so I think reasonable), if a dog is crying in the room, it presents issues in a different way than some previous Disney experiences. If a baby was crying, my sister snoring, drunk people, etc, I could first address it if I choose with the people in the room. Generally I tend to give people in the room the benefit of the doubt and hope it works out, then my next recourse is the front desk (calling gets a call center). In this scenario, if I know the dog is unattended, I have to skip straight to going to the lobby, which presents logistical difficulties in my specific situation - traveling alone with a 10YO in an unfamiliar resort and distant lobby. And more importantly, if I feel like the dog is in distress or lonely (and again, drawing on personal experience in my daily life) it would really stress me out and make me sad!

So, yah, if you're still with me, I'm kind of all over the place, discouraged by a lot of the dialogue, and hoping the Disney gets it together. Can that be my vote?

And there is nothing wrong with being all over the place. I think there would be stress on either side to be honest.

Either way both sides wants clear expectations and follow through. I'm by nature a general rule follower. But if the rules are inconsistent or unknown it causes me stress in my everyday life. I get why people are concerned with Disney as well on this aspect.

The "yes, but.." allows for someone who may be ok with the new policy (even if only minutely ok with the new policy) but only if there are stipulations in place. And then the specific stipulation (I'm sure as best that the OP of the poll could concisely see from the other thread) of a choice given.

And yes as several of us have mentioned an "Other" choice on the other thread and on this thread allows a person to just be like "these choices don't just fit". But I do understand why you don't feel like "other" fits right now. Wait and see isn't a bad position at all.

When you take other polls for example they may have "on a scale from 1 to 10" with '5' being the understood neutral position but also allows you to provide the strength of your opinion or worded like "what do you feel most fits with how you feel" and then they give a range of answers including 'strongly agree and strongly disagree to also somewhat agree to somewhat disagree and even a neither option'

It wouldn't do too much good if all you were ever given was a 1 or a 10 or a strongly agrees or a strongly disagrees if that didn't match what you actually felt.

 

[DisneyFive]

I'm going with yes as long as it stays at a Handful of resorts. This to me will satisfy everyone. Seems like most people don't want it at all, but there obviously is some do. So make it available to people that have the need/want, but give the rest of us our dog free resorts. Everyone is happy.

The problem I see with this option, which is how things are currently, is that it limits the resorts for people that don't want to be around other peoples dogs at "name your favorite resort".(BTW, I'm not arguing with you, but with this option)

POR is our favorite resort. Our last four trips in a row have been there. Special place for us. We are a family of 5 and are limited in economical options already. We've visited the other moderate resorts that hold a family of five and IMO, they pale in comparison to POR. We would probably stay offsite before staying at a different mod, which is saying a lot for us. To step down to a value resort is more expensive than POR for a family of five.

Even if we weren't a family of five, we've visited every resort on property (Except Wildnerness lodge) and POR is the best for us. There are a couple of the deluxes that I would choose over POR, but the cost premium just isn't worth it.

In my opinion, if Disney modifies the policy so that dedicated buildings, or wings of buildings, are the only rooms for housing dogs at that resort, and the dogs aren't allowed in the general resort walkways, then I don't care which resort they are at because it wouldn't negatively impact me and I don't think they would negatively impact others. This is a win, with no loss, at that point.

Dan

 

[china mom]

I live with two dogs and three cats so I am probably not what one would consider and animal hater but I voted No! Absolutely not. Worst idea ever!

I have multiple reasons from worrying about dogs yapping or barking while left alone during my nap time to not wanting to wonder if a dog has peed on the carpet prior to my check in to the dog slobber issues and so on.

My SIL is extremely upset because they have a trip booked in the AoA suites and her 5 year old daughter is deathly afraid of dogs. She is not happy about the thought of staying at ASMu and can't afford anywhere else.

I think this is a really bad idea.

 

[MaryLovesPoohBear]

In my opinion, if Disney modifies the policy so that dedicated buildings, or wings of buildings, are the only rooms for housing dogs at that resort, and the dogs aren't allowed in the general resort walkways, then I don't care which resort they are at because it wouldn't negatively impact me and I don't think they would negatively impact others. This is a win, with no loss, at that point.

Dan

For me they would also have to limit the amount of time a pet could be left alone in a room. I can't imagine that leaving a pet for 7 hours alone, in a strange hotel room, is a good idea. And it would bother me knowing that dogs are being treated that way.

But my main problem is, I don't want to suddenly come across a dog or two running around.

If they are truly kept to the far reaches of certain resorts, and only families that include pets are placed in those buildings, then that wouldn't bother me.

 

[DisneyFive]

Yes, the "7 hour left alone" thing, and the "No restrictions on size or breed" thing is really puzzling.

Dan

 

[LSUmiss]

It's troublesome for sure. I would not personally own a dog, but I worry about people who hate them this much. I am suspicious of people who hate animals.

OMG! I wanted to say that on the other thread, but didn't feel like dealing with the drama of it! I get ppl who have been attacked, but otherwise...

 

[DisneyFive]

Has someone said that they hate dogs or animals, in either thread? Honest question.

Dan