Trial Run for Dogs in Resort Rooms

[MaryLovesPoohBear]

Well, duh. Of course anyone would report a dog attack and that attack should be taken very seriously by everyone.

This is the kind of ‘unwelcome’ post I was thinking about when mexi said someone was afraid to post on this this thread. It casts aspersions on the owner to remind them that biting will not be tolerated and that she will indeed feel "mistreated" because if her dog is vicious. The reminder, while factually true, assumes that (1) the dog is vicious and (2) the owner is so dumb/self absorbed/etc that they don't know that biting is not acceptable. It assumes the absolute worst of the dog and the dog owner.

You are assuming that "attack" means "bite."

But it doesn't, it should include those dogs that just have to jump all over people. Generally with that happens, the owner makes sure to tell you just how "friendly" their dog is being. Um, jumping all over me, isn't being friendly. Just like a human shouldn't be jumping all over me, nor should a dog. And owners that believe that their dog is just being friendly is exactly the type of owner that you described in your post.

So, yes. I will be on alert for dogs at a resort. I've been bit and scratched by a dog, ending up in the ER for treatment.

And yes, I will get enough information, including pictures/video/room location, if the owner does not have the dog under control. Because I will not allow another owner to be so oblivious that they ruin my vacation or life.

 

[KrazeeK120]

Just got a second follow up call from Disney guest experiences. Chris called to tell me that the number of negative response emails coming into wdw regarding this policy change are both unexpected and overwhelming. Told me due to the admitted poor rollout, and guest feedback the policy is under microscope. He admitted to me that he knows full well CM’s are loathe to confront guests even when they see them breaking rules and acknowledges how that alone makes this change this problematic.

Said they didn’t limit size or breed because they are counting on owners to be responsible. Talked about how hotels that have allowed dogs for years have size restrictions so it is just bizarre Disney jumps in with both feet with zero restrictions including allowing dogs alone in strange hotel room all day while owners are out in parks.

Overall he did say they get it, acknowledged what an issue it is and said they will monitor carefully what happens and make changes accordingly.

It boggles my mind that they actually thought this would go over well, especially given the rather lax rules associated with the change.

Thanks for providing this info!!

 

[DisneyFive]

If this was a win-win, nobody would have issues. I wish that were the case.

However, this is a win-lose, and according to the polls on Dis at least, there are far more that consider this a loss. (or perceived loss, as I do think there is some unwarranted hysteria)

Those that want to bring their dogs to Disney win, and those that don't want dogs there for whatever reason or can't be around dogs , lose.

Dan

 

[KrazeeK120]

Edited to remove.

 

[Dis703]

I am also shocked by the number people who feel entitled to a free upgrade (and pursuing one) just because they don't want dogs in the resort. I completely sympathize with people who have medical/emotional problems with dogs and my heart is warmed by Disney's response to them. Their success seems to have morphed into a doggie upgrade gravy train for people who disagree with the current policy. I understand that they may not want to stay in a pet friendly room or section, but I believe that Disney will do its best to accommodate them in their current resort choice.

I'm not sure if people feel entitled to an upgrade so much as with the short notice, they expect at least a move to a dog free resort of equal value, which many times isn't available. Even if they just don't want dogs on their vacation, it's unfair that Disney sprung this on them after they have booked and potentially paid for their trip. While it may be hard for people to understand, there was a great post here at one point that explained the whole idea of losing oneself in the experience of your surroundings at Disney. The attention to detail that is taken at WDW to essentially bring you to another place. For some people, dogs on the property takes away from that. And they should have had an opportunity well in advance to know this change was coming and make alternative arrangements. Now that it's too close to do that, it's only appropriate that Disney does what they can to rectify it for those guests. With very little resorts of equal experience/level of the specific resorts effected already and such last minute notice, that may lead to upgrades for some.

 

[mikejs78]

Just because it's your favorite resort doesn't mean the owner doesn't have the right to change it. That seems to the be thing you're missing. Does it suck for you because your love it so much - of course it does. Are you allowed to voice your concerns over it - of course. But things change everyday. Life comes at you fast and sometimes you have to deal. And people are just going to have to deal with this at WDW now. Or not if they don't want to - that's where their choice is.

No one is saying Disney doesn't have the right. Of course they do. They're a private company with a private resort, etc. But that doesn't mean that they should. It also doesn't mean that what they did was fair. In regards to how they rolled it out, it certainly wasn't fair as people have made plans, already spent money that can't be recovered, etc... And it doesn't mean that those of us that don't like the policy, as frequent customers, we don't have the right to voice our opposition to this new policy, either verbally, in writing, or with our wallets, in the hope that enough loud voices effect change.

 

[Darbie]

Also dvc member and stockholder here......and one of those that hopes policy fails. Adore my two Pembroke welsh corgis but trust me between the barking if anyone walks past our house, and insane amount of shedding, no one wants any part of them on vacation.

Thank you for being self aware enough to realize not everyone loves your pets like you do.

 

[PrncessA]

Like the majority here I am not a fan of this idea, and I love dogs. I love my dog. But I also have horrendous allergies, including to dogs. (Yes I know I have a dog.) I take allergy medicine every day and my dog is restricted to the 1st and 2nd floor of our townhouse and not our sleeping area and we have air purifiers. When we got her, she slept next to us and my allergies just couldn't take it. Even with the medicine. The possibility of staying in a room that had a dog who was possibly on the bed and pillows... not an option for me.

We are booked at POR in February so I have been watching the reports and it does seem like although in the Mansion section they are trying to contain it to two buildings, it isn't guaranteed, the AB section is a free for all from what I can tell. I just don't think I want to risk it, and I was afraid if I waited too long then other resorts might fill up. So I made the decision today to switch our stay to POFQ, which is new to us, so that is a bonus. I hope that Disney works the kinks out and this either is very contained or doesn't continue, because YC and POR are our favorite resorts.

 

[croach]

No one is saying Disney doesn't have the right. Of course they do. They're a private company with a private resort, etc. But that doesn't mean that they should. It also doesn't mean that what they did was fair. In regards to how they rolled it out, it certainly wasn't fair as people have made plans, already spent money that can't be recovered, etc... And it doesn't mean that those of us that don't like the policy, as frequent customers, we don't have the right to voice our opposition to this new policy, either verbally, in writing, or with our wallets, in the hope that enough loud voices effect change.

I 100% agree with you about the short notice on the roll out of the program. Wasn't a smart move. And if you will read my post I said you have the right to voice your concerns. Why wouldn't you? If you do maybe you'll get the results you want.

 

[Dis703]

Just got a second follow up call from Disney guest experiences. Chris called to tell me that the number of negative response emails coming into wdw regarding this policy change are both unexpected and overwhelming. Told me due to the admitted poor rollout, and guest feedback the policy is under microscope. He admitted to me that he knows full well CM’s are loathe to confront guests even when they see them breaking rules and acknowledges how that alone makes this change this problematic.

Said they didn’t limit size or breed because they are counting on owners to be responsible. Talked about how hotels that have allowed dogs for years have size restrictions so it is just bizarre Disney jumps in with both feet with zero restrictions including allowing dogs alone in strange hotel room all day while owners are out in parks.

Overall he did say they get it, acknowledged what an issue it is and said they will monitor carefully what happens and make changes accordingly.

Thanks for sharing! I've had a couple followup calls as well. I do think they are definitely looking at this closely and hope at the very least it makes for some swift rule changes.

 

[robinb]

You are assuming that "attack" means "bite."

But it doesn't, it should include those dogs that just have to jump all over people. Generally with that happens, the owner makes sure to tell you just how "friendly" their dog is being. Um, jumping all over me, isn't being friendly. Just like a human shouldn't be jumping all over me, nor should a dog. And owners that believe that their dog is just being friendly is exactly the type of owner that you described in your post.

So, yes. I will be on alert for dogs at a resort. I've been bit and scratched by a dog, ending up in the ER for treatment.

And yes, I will get enough information, including pictures/video/room location, if the owner does not have the dog under control. Because I will not allow another owner to be so oblivious that they ruin my vacation or life.

You're right, I didn't consider jumping on people in my comment because it is not an "attack". It is actually NORMAL canine behaviour, albeit bad manners. And yes, I understand that a dog can possibly injure someone if they jump on them, but it is still NOT an attack. In any case, my original comment still rings true even if you substitute the word "attack" with "jumping on people".

You go right ahead and arm yourself with your phone if it makes you feel better but I think it will wear on you to be so hypervigilant.

 

[robinb]

I'm not sure if people feel entitled to an upgrade so much as with the short notice, they expect at least a move to a dog free resort of equal value, which many times isn't available. Even if they just don't want dogs on their vacation, it's unfair that Disney sprung this on them after they have booked and potentially paid for their trip. While it may be hard for people to understand, there was a great post here at one point that explained the whole idea of losing oneself in the experience of your surroundings at Disney. The attention to detail that is taken at WDW to essentially bring you to another place. For some people, dogs on the property takes away from that. And they should have had an opportunity well in advance to know this change was coming and make alternative arrangements. Now that it's too close to do that, it's only appropriate that Disney does what they can to rectify it for those guests. With very little resorts of equal experience/level of the specific resorts effected already and such last minute notice, that may lead to upgrades for some.

I meant to add that to my post, thanks for pointing it out! Yes, a lateral move is perfectly OK. Just like when they started tearing up CBR with no notice and they moved people laterally.

 

[alicecooper]

So if you complain enough. You will get a phone call trying to pacify and reassure just the usual PR rubbish. BUT nothing is going to change. They will not email a response as this will leave a paper trail as a previous poster on this thread explained.

 

[LSUmiss]

Would it not also be entitled for people who want to bring their dogs and think it's fine to subject others to their barking, smell, urine and feces tainting the beautiful grounds of the resort, allergic and asthmatic reactions for those who can't be around them, scaring little kids or even adults who are afraid of them, etc.? If you consider one entitled (which wasn't my word I'm just responding to it's use) both sides would be guilty of this.

Of course! But that’s been mentioned ad nausea. My point was that it appears that there are just as many on the other side acting entitled...excluding those who were already booked...I get that.

 

[mikethedigiartist]

I love (most) dogs. I would have a dog myself if they weren't so much work.

I just don't really understand why people who have non-service animals want to bring their dog to a WDW resort. Do people really spend much that much time in their hotel room when they are not sleeping? Just the logistics of having to come back to your room to walk a dog sounds terrible. Board your dog, please.

Not to mention how many irresponsible pet owners there are.

 

[Darbie]

We shouldn’t be attacking and blaming each other. We should be holding Disney accountable and making sure their policies are fair to both sides and fully enforced. If Disney does what they should (and what most pet friendly hotels do) then those who want to be separate from dogs will be, and those who want their pets along can do so. The onus is on Disney to get it right.

My personal negativity comes from doubting Disney can do this, based on prior history and experience. They are going to have to earn my trust. I am looking forward to hearing how the next few months go and really hoping Disney grows up and learns to confront people who are violating policy (pet, smoking, or otherwise).

Exactly. Long time visitors fully understand Disney's lack of policy enforcement. This situation will be no different.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Based on recent reports on adjustments being made by Disney management to their ridiculously wrong-headed dog policy, it is good to see that at least some sanity is beginning to return to their minds with what appears to be new adjustments and restrictions to the policy. In addition to these new adjustments and restrictions, hopefully the new dog policy will be completely terminated by the end of the trial period, or before. Even if my favourite Disney resort hotel is now a Dog Resort, at least the outrage about what has happened to the new Disney Dog Resorts (formerly known as Riverside, Yacht Club, AoA, Cabins) may have saved other Disney resorts from becoming Dog Resorts in the future. I do not want to spend thousands of dollars to have a vacation with other people's dogs.

I always find it's interesting when people bring up how much money they spent on the vacation. If we want to go that route it's equally possible that the person who is bringing their dog has spent several thousands of dollars on the vacation too. It's also entirely possible they actually spent more than you.

I can see not wanting to post here but to think she will be mistreated by guests seems a bit dramatic. What does she possibly think they will do to her? The only thing she has to worry about is if her dogs barks, her dog goes to the bathroom anywhere but the relief stations, if Disney puts allergic guests in rooms by her ......... and all of that will be reported to the front desk. If it's her problem aka dogs behavior she will be contacted and if it's Disney's problem aka putting non-dog guests next to her, Disney must fix it.

What is dramatic as well however is some posts on their thread. I really just want people to be able to say on both sides there's been dramatic responses because that's the truth.

So then your saying that the people on this thread are just saying those things to be dramatic? I hope your right. Wouldn't want to see someone trying to follow me around or have a dog taken away because they know there's a dog in a specific room.

Unfortunately passions run high and we do have the opportunity to say things when we may not actually mean them (giving people the benefit of the doubt). But written word accounts for something and it's all the person has to go off of if they are hesitant to mention they are bringing their dog.

I have read through practically all this thread, I haven't seen those posts you speak of so it doesn't seem to be rampant. I would imagine someone was just venting .... and maybe overstating. Maybe .... they see a dog that poops and pees by their room, they might take a picture to show the front desk, they may watch what room they go back into so they can report an accurate room number. Do I think people will waste their own vacation following others around the resort ........ no. But when you call the front desk to say "Fido keeps pooping in front of my room" the first thing the desk will say is "What kind of dog is it and do you know which room they are staying in?" Otherwise it's all pointless.



Well, yes that is a given ........... but I think I'm thinking more in terms of what is most likely to be the ongoing every day issues with this.

Respectfully though you don't have to effectively spy on your fellow guests. If you happen to see someone not picking up their dog's mess or happen to know that the dog barking is in the room next to you by all means let the front desk know. You don't need to follow them around with your phone or go out actively looking for trouble around the resort property.

If I told you I was going to follow my neighbor around our neighborhood to see if I could catch him violating the dog waste ordinance (which states you must clean up after your dog or face a fine) you might think something of me. If I called the policy and said "I followed my neighbor with my phone so I could get you the proof" they may actually fine me (I really don't know on that but I'm just saying it's in the realm of possibility).

I agree, and I can assure concerned dog owners that I will not follow them around the resort. If I happen to notice a violation of Disney's dog policy I'll report it, and as I have written before I would think it prudent for anyone bringing a dog to have contingency plans in case they are required by Disney to immediately leave the resort due to any violations

I respect that and appreciate your response.

This. If a dog and its owner are following the rules, it merits nothing more than an eye roll, if that. But violation of rules (allowing the dog to bark for minutes on end, not cleaning up feces because "that's someone else's job," or letting the dog run wild and jump on people because "Fluffy is just so friendly!") should be reported ASAP and documented as best possible (location, date, photo of dog, etc.).

I'm not getting the eye roll part to be honest. Is the eye roll because the person has a dog there which is allowed now? That's a strange reaction no offense. I guess I could eye roll anyone who does something I don't agree with (and I probably have lol).

Would it not also be entitled for people who want to bring their dogs and think it's fine to subject others to their barking, smell, urine and feces tainting the beautiful grounds of the resort, allergic and asthmatic reactions for those who can't be around them, scaring little kids or even adults who are afraid of them, etc.? If you consider one entitled (which wasn't my word I'm just responding to it's use) both sides would be guilty of this.

Playing neutral you could say it's entitled for both sides (though I don't really want to go into the entitled aspect). (ETA: sorry you did mention both sides would be guilty of this so yes I do agree with you )

It wouldn't be fair to call a guest with a dog on property entitled without also calling the guest who doesn't have a dog entitled. Both have an equal right to their vacation. But as of now it's been mostly "this is my vacation..." without any concern to the other person. And to me that's interesting considering the person saying "this is my vacation" wants themselves to be considered but won't consider another person.

 

[FiggyFan]

I would love to hear from someone staying at PO-R right now - have you seen many ( if any) dogs and what bldgs do they seem to be in ?

 

[MaryLovesPoohBear]

You're right, I didn't consider jumping on people in my comment because it is not an "attack". It is actually NORMAL canine behaviour, albeit bad manners. And yes, I understand that a dog can possibly injure someone if they jump on them, but it is still NOT an attack. In any case, my original comment still rings true even if you substitute the word "attack" with "jumping on people".

You go right ahead and arm yourself with your phone if it makes you feel better but I think it will wear on you to be so hypervigilant.

Yes, it does.

But as a dog attack victim, it is a way of life.

See, not all dog owners are responsible. And those that aren't, are just as likely to pack up their dogs and travel to Disney.

 

[ironz]

Actually Universal spells out their rules/policies/consequences much better, and they are far more stringent than those currently in place at WDW.

True-- and from my conversation with Guest Services yesterday, one might expect that some of the rules are going to be clarified. My impression was that they didn't think of all of the implications with this rapid rollout.
Though, I was assured that pet owners who bring their dog will be signing something at checkin about abiding by the pet policies, much like we all sign the non-smoking clause at checkin.