Trial Run for Dogs in Resort Rooms

Do you think dogs should be allowed in guests' rooms?


  • Total voters
    1,260
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
How do you carry it? It looks like something you put together and place in a room, then put the dog in it. It doesn't look like a "carrier." It looks like a kennel. We had one for our lab. We didn't ever actually carry it around with the dog in it.
I have one like this & the sides all collapse & there is a handle. It becomes a large flat rectangle.
 
They do make crates that fit dogs that large. I own one. It folds down flat and even has a handle to lift it easily. I bought it at Walmart so it's not like it was hard to find.
"A handle to lift it easily". With a huge dog inside? It seems to me that a carrier is something you use to carry the dog in.
 
"A handle to lift it easily". With a huge dog inside? It seems to me that a carrier is something you use to carry the dog in.

LOL, I assume a carrier means a crate. Nobody is literally carrying a 100+lb dog in ANYTHING. They do make airline-approved carriers for giant breed dogs. But I THINK those are on casters and are pulled rather than carried. Now, how one would be able to get a giant-breed dog crate/carrier on a vehicle that was Disney's, in the event it was necessary, is beyond me. I have to imagine anyone bringing a giant breed dog is coming in their own massive vehicle rather than by plane.
 
Oh My, Folks! Relax!!!!!

Since everyone already has jumped to conclusions, pre-judged, etc.....

I CALLED the number provided in OFFICIAL announcement and a CM read the OFFICIAL transcript of the release. So easy to do.


-Designated Rooms ONLY in designated section of specific resorts ONLY
-Designated walking paths ONLY
-MUST be LEASHED at all times
-NO Public spaces
-NO roaming around resorts
-NO Restaurants
-NO Bars
-NO Pools
-Owners MUST present vaccination documentation
-Resorts were chosen based on their size and layout.

My guess, dear DISsers, is you probably could enjoy your Disney vacation within the bubble everyone has grown to love and will never see the furry creatures in their own little corner of the World.

My question, is HOW MANY people would adhere to these rules? Who is going to be the first DVC member or CM to confront the first
person to bring a dog to the pool, or restaurant, or public space? This is a CAN OF WORMS!!!
You and I both know SOMEONE would break the rules!
Terrible idea, even though it may not impact DVC resorts, it will impact me if I ever wanted to stay at one of the resorts that allow
dogs.

DeerH
 


What I'm saying is, if Disney uses the word "carrier" in this contact they are thinking of small dogs.

I don't know what they're thinking (though carrier seems to be a catch-all term for cage rather than an actual item you can carry in hand). I'm thinking they're idiots for even entertaining this policy, but if they are, they shouldn't EVER assume or trust guests will self-monitor. They should spell it out and just limit it to 25lbs or less.
 
I don't know what they're thinking (though carrier seems to be a catch-all term for cage rather than an actual item you can carry in hand). I'm thinking they're idiots for even entertaining this policy, but if they are, they shouldn't EVER assume or trust guests will self-monitor. They should spell it out and just limit it to 25lbs or less.
Agreed! Rule 7 and rule 3 seem to be Disney Management trying to say something about size restriction without coming right out and saying it.
 


Disney needs to add the waiver and terms & conditions to the online booking engine, as well as have these documents attached to confirmations for dog-inhabited rooms - whether via email or U.S.Mail. It's a matter of full disclosure.

I wonder what the CMs who take reservations on the phone mention, if anything, about the T&Cs, to those who book a room with a dog.

Of course, Disney may not want to do this, as the rules of the game seem to be changing on a regular basis, and what may be in effect at the time of booking may not be the policy at time of arrival at the resort.

What a mess!
 
Last edited:
Is Bob Iger really responding to people's emails?
Of course he isn't. Well, not exactly. Sort of yes and no. He leaves the guest emails up to BIC-1138. BIC - "Bob Iger Clone" (you didn't think Disney spent all that money on Star Wars just for the movie rights, did we?)
Someone who is paying that much for a hotel would (hopefully) not risk being kicked out to save $50 a night.
Based on past threads regarding people trying to sneak additional guests into their rooms to avoid the extra room charge, I would definitely say that people will run that risk. Most of us agree it's not a good idea, but it happens.
A copy of the waiver document which guests need to sign when they check dogs in to hotels: http://www.portorleans.org/Disney's-Port-Orleans-Resort-Riverside_Pet-Agreement_13-Oct-2017.pdf
Finally we're getting somewhere with actual written policy and documents. I stated way back towards the beginning that I'd be curious to see the form guests bringing dogs had to sign. Curiosity satisfied. And it has the bells and whistles I expected - what with all the releasing and waiving and indemnifying and holding harmless and duty of defending. I'll say this - even if I had any inclination to bring a dog, this type of agreement would make me think twice (luckily, as PPs have noted, nobody reads the fine print). There's a lot of "sole discretion" throughout - which is the discrete way of saying Disney can change the rules on you however, whenever and for whatever reasons they determine. Will they? Probably not - but they could.
Just for those who for whatever reason are unable to look at the link here are some answers to a few questions. As the previous poster mentioned the paperwork is for POR and the information can be updated.

~Regarding liability:
18. I release Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc., Disney Destinations, LLC, Disney Vacation Development, Inc., Disney Vacation Club Management Corp., and their respective parent, subsidiary and other affiliated or related companies, and the officers, directors, employees, agents, contractors, sub-contractors, representatives, successors, assigns and volunteers of each of the foregoing entities (the "Released Parties") from any and all liability for any injury and/or damage suffered by my pet. I agree that I assume full responsibility for any injury or damage caused or alleged to be caused by my pet and incurred or alleged to be incurred by any guest, employee, contractor or invitee of the hotel. I agree to release, indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Released Parties from and against any and all alleged or actual losses, claims, damages, liabilities, costs and expenses (including attorneys' fees and court costs) suffered by the Released Parties or asserted by any other hotel guest, invitee, employee, contractor or other person arising out of or in connection with my pet's stay at the hotel, including from any alleged negligence of the Released Parties.
Unfortunately, this provision and assumption of responsibility doesn't help other guests - it's there for the release and indemnification to Disney's benefit. Other guests aren't third-party beneficiaries under this - so if there was an incident all it really does is allow Disney to get out (or shift costs). I might even say it sets up a worse situation for serious incidents by limiting Disney's ability to resolve and settle guest incidents at the risk of waiving indemnification (I think - and would hope, however, that Disney still veers toward the former).
 
I’m surprised they’re not requiring the dog flu vaccine as well, since it’s known to be in the area. Our groomer (in Orlando) required all their dogs to provide proof of vaccination the last time we brought our dog in.
 
Unfortunately, this provision and assumption of responsibility doesn't help other guests - it's there for the release and indemnification to Disney's benefit. Other guests aren't third-party beneficiaries under this - so if there was an incident all it really does is allow Disney to get out (or shift costs). I might even say it sets up a worse situation for serious incidents by limiting Disney's ability to resolve and settle guest incidents at the risk of waiving indemnification (I think - and would hope, however, that Disney still veers toward the former).

I honestly don't know if this is still the actual verbage but I did find this from google for Universal (i.e. Loews):
"Guests are responsible for all personal injuries and/or property damage related to their pet(s). Guest agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Loews Hotels, the hotel, its operators and owners and their respective affiliates from all liability and/or damage suffered as a result of their pet(s)."

If anything Disney probably has a bit more legal speak in their contract.
 
I’m surprised they’re not requiring the dog flu vaccine as well, since it’s known to be in the area. Our groomer (in Orlando) required all their dogs to provide proof of vaccination the last time we brought our dog in.
But that’s to protect other dogs. Since they’re not a facility specifically designed for pets they’re probably only concerned with those diseases that are communicable to ppl. I hope ppl pay attention to this though & get whatever vaccs are recommended by their vets.
 
I honestly don't know if this is still the actual verbage but I did find this from google for Universal (i.e. Loews):
"Guests are responsible for all personal injuries and/or property damage related to their pet(s). Guest agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Loews Hotels, the hotel, its operators and owners and their respective affiliates from all liability and/or damage suffered as a result of their pet(s)."

If anything Disney probably has a bit more legal speak in their contract.
And, to me, for all those concerned about the 7 hours etc, I think WDW didn’t explicitly spell those things out, but there is a plenty of language in this that allows them to do whatever they need to if there is an issue.
 
But that’s to protect other dogs. Since they’re not a facility specifically designed for pets they’re probably only concerned with those diseases that are communicable to ppl. I hope ppl pay attention to this though & get whatever vaccs are recommended by their vets.
Our vet recommended it too, being in the Orlando area. Now all these out of area and local dogs are coming together, same as their people...
 
Our vet recommended it too, being in the Orlando area. Now all these out of area and local dogs are coming together, same as their people...
Recommended and required are two different things. I'm guessing Disney is going for what the most common year after year after year vaccines.

Rabies is very common to be required and Bordetella is also commonly administered.

I looked up and DHPPv/DA2PPv and it includes the following:
The abbreviation for this combination vaccine is frequently written as “DHPPV,” “DHPP,” “DA2PP,” or “DA2PPV” on your pet’s health records. The letters in these abbreviations are defined as follows:

  • D = Canine distemper virus. Infection with this virus is serious, with a death rate approaching 50% in untreated dogs. The virus attacks the respiratory, digestive, and brain/nervous systems of dogs.
  • H = Hepatitis. Since this vaccine protects against canine adenovirus-2 and adenovirus-1, it is often referred to as A2. Canine adenovirus-1 causes canine infectious hepatitis, a serious disease that affects the liver.
  • Canine adenovirus-2 causes respiratory disease and is one of the infectious agents commonly associated with canine infectious tracheobronchitis, also known as kennel cough.
  • A2 = Canine adenovirus-2. This virus causes a respiratory disease in dogs (see above).
  • P = Parvovirus. Infection with this virus is highly contagious and serious, with a death rate approaching 90% in untreated dogs. The virus attacks the digestive and immune systems of unvaccinated animals, causing debilitating diarrhea and vomiting.
  • P = Parainfluenza. This is a mild respiratory viral disease in dogs. V = Virus.
Therefore, a notation of “DA2PPV,” “DA2PP,” “DHPP,” or “DHPPV” in your pet’s vaccination record generally means that your pet was vaccinated against canine distemper, hepatitis (canine adenovirus-2 and -1), parvovirus, and parainfluenza. **So those wondering about Parvo--there you go**
 
I honestly don't know if this is still the actual verbage but I did find this from google for Universal (i.e. Loews):
"Guests are responsible for all personal injuries and/or property damage related to their pet(s). Guest agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Loews Hotels, the hotel, its operators and owners and their respective affiliates from all liability and/or damage suffered as a result of their pet(s)."

If anything Disney probably has a bit more legal speak in their contract.
We're on the same page there (literally and figuratively). Just pointing out that what looks like great language in that agreement ("guest assumes responsibility") doesn't really help anybody but Disney. I'm not saying it should (Disney is protecting itself) - just that the agreement's usefulness doesn't really help other guests. It is helpful to know (especially if you're bringing a dog), however, what the risk is.

One thing that keeps occurring to me is that Disney is not being particularly helpful to guests on other side. Don't like the policy and want to know the specifics and limitations? Too bad. There are few things, if any, we can tell you. Like the policy and appreciate that we're not burdening pet owners with specifics and limitations? Terrific! Now sign this paper that says we can change that anytime we want and you're responsible when we do.
 
Our vet recommended it too, being in the Orlando area. Now all these out of area and local dogs are coming together, same as their people...
I agree. Flu is recommended here too in NOLA. I’m just saying wdw might not care b/c it doesn’t effect ppl, just dogs. So if you don’t have what’s recommended for your pet, they might not care.
 
We're on the same page there (literally and figuratively). Just pointing out that what looks like great language in that agreement ("guest assumes responsibility") doesn't really help anybody but Disney. I'm not saying it should (Disney is protecting itself) - just that the agreement's usefulness doesn't really help other guests. It is helpful to know (especially if you're bringing a dog), however, what the risk is.

One thing that keeps occurring to me is that Disney is not being particularly helpful to guests on other side. Don't like the policy and want to know the specifics and limitations? Too bad. There are few things, if any, we can tell you. Like the policy and appreciate that we're not burdening pet owners with specifics and limitations? Terrific! Now sign this paper that says we can change that anytime we want and you're responsible when we do.
I figured we were basically on the same page was just pointing out that Universal seems to have a similar-ish verbage--Loews=not responsible, Disney=not responsible. I honestly wouldn't expect anything less. Most companies will write it so they are protecting themselves.

On the second portion of your comment can you help me understand a bit more of what you are meaning? I understand a little bit of what you are meaning but want to make sure I actually am.
 
I figured we were basically on the same page was just pointing out that Universal seems to have a similar-ish verbage--Loews=not responsible, Disney=not responsible. I honestly wouldn't expect anything less. Most companies will write it so they are protecting themselves.

On the second portion of your comment can you help me understand a bit more of what you are meaning? I understand a little bit of what you are meaning but want to make sure I actually am.
Exactly - every company is going to have language like that. They should have it and I don't think anyone blames them. Some people (let's call them "Auntie Dogg"), however, could read that form and think it means that a dog owner assumes responsibility directly to Auntie Dogg if, say, she was bit. It doesn't. I guess my comment was meant generally for anyone that might read too much into that form (which only defines the relationship and responsibilities of the dog owner and Disney - no one else). You get it but others might not so clearly.

The second part of my comment was an unrelated thought - going back to the lack of information and the quick roll-out of the program. The people who don't like the new policy have been frustrated by the uncertainty and inconsistency so far (are there separate dog rooms/areas? Where are dogs allowed? Are there size and breed restrictions? What restrictions are Disney enforcing?). Looking at this form, the dog owners may find themselves in a similar boat - frustrated and uncertain about what, exactly, Disney is doing here (looking at the form, Disney can decide on its own that your dog is too big, too dangerous, too loud, left too long, too much of a nuisance, etc - and require you then to board or vacate). As the form lays out, the policy seems purposefully vague in a number of areas - all of which Disney says it can change when it wants and expense it to the dog owner. I don't think that type of "open-ended, change it as we see fit" approach is helpful to guests in general. Sure, it's a trial period and Disney wants flexibility - but a lot of that flexibility seems to be coming at the guests' expense (both those for and against this). Figuring it out as they went along might be understandable if they were pioneers here - but they're not, as other hotels have clearer policy requirements that are noticeably absent from Disney's (such as size restrictions and no leaving pets unattended).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!





Top