Who else would appreciate a pet-friendly DVC property?

[brucec32]

Originally posted by littlestar
I would think there would be increased liability insurance for Disney (higher insurance costs) for dogs being allowed. I work for an insurance company and if you have a dog and my company knows it, you pay higher Homeowners insurance rates. You'd be surprised how many claims come through regarding dogs (who have never been aggressive before) attacking small children. I wouldn't want the increased insurance rates, nor the increased upkeep for wear and tear caused by dogs.

I'd sell my points if Disney allowed it.

Well, I was an Underwriter for a well known P&L company. So I can weigh in on this.

Do you have dogs in your neighborhood where you walk and your kids play?

Do your neighbors have dogs in their homes?

Do you realize that most public parks allow dogs on leashes? I was at our local park today and many people were out walking and jogging with their dogs. It was nice.


So tell me, how is someone leaving a small dog in a hotel room for a few hours any different in terms of danger to children? Nobody's advocating letting packs of wild pit bulls run loose in the parks. They're simply allowed on leashes to go out to a designated area to poop and excercise. I doubt people are bringing kids out to stomp around in the dog poop yard. Geez. I would suggest that it's far safer at a resort, since they will be on leashes and supervised, not running free like in many neighborhoods.

But hey, maybe my docile 18 lb geriatric Boston Terrier who pisses himself if he hears a loud noise will snap and bite someone in the knee. So we'd better not allow it.

 

[brucec32]

Originally posted by Dean
I'd love to, maybe it'll even work. I don't trivialize your health problems but the medical problems with cigarette smoke are not allergic, cig smoke is an irritant but not an allergen. It's no different than those that sneeze 20 times with perfume, cleaning agents, etc.; those are not allergens but can still cause health problems. The point was that it would be much easier to get the room back into shape after cigarette exposure than pet exposure, esp. cats. I'm a malignant non smoker and as I've stated previously, I'd rather not go to WDW than get a smoking room.

Agreed, but my suggestion was to designate a seperate building for pets, and let the guest beware if he wants to bring his pet. I would assume, if one owns a pet and wants to bring it with him on vacation, he's probably not allergic to them. Cats can be bothersome, and dogs not, and perhaps vice versa, but again, it's working all over the country already, and in much less ideal conditions than I have proposed for DVC. If one doesn't want to risk a reaction, don't stay in the "pet motel" section.

Of course it will never happen. But my point was that it could be made to work well with some imagination and problem solving skills. But Disney thinks in terms of Billions of dollars, so I doubt they'd want the hassle of managing it.

I can just speak from the point of view of someone who has made money catering to wealthy pet owners. They have big bucks and don't mind spending them for their pets. Until you've seen it you can't believe it. Doggy Daycares have sprung up where people pay more than they would for child daycare just so their pet doesn't get loney while they're at work. I can't imagine that Disney couldn't use at least one resort with that option.

DVC is probalby not the best venue for it, I must admit, since people feel they "own" it. (you don't, you're renting time at it, all paperwork to the contrary)

 

[macs4us]

We have three kitties, and we haven't been to wdw since we got them last May. They are our children!!! I have family who would watch them, but I rather go on a trip that I can take them. We take them to the Four Seasons a lot (they don't charge a deposit, either - and bring them room service), and we are staying in cabins that take pets in Yellowstone and the Tetons this summer. Kitties are pretty quiet, but I think the dog barking thing wouldn't be a problem, as all hotels will kick you out if you are noisy - people or pets. I have seen more rooms thrashed by people than pets!!!

 

[HorizonsFan]

I find this humorous.
Those of you who are adament about not staying in a pet-friendly hotel have almost certainly already stayed in at least one and never knew it.

Why bother......even if it was 99% for pets at DVC resorts......it will never happen.

That hasn't stopped you from lobbying for non-smoking resorts. I guess it's all about whose ox is being gored...

 

[Dean]

Most hotels that allow "small dogs" define that as 25# or less. Do they weigh them, I'm sure not. Marriott Vacation Club's experience is that even Service animals are a problem and increase expense significantly. As I posted here previously, many of the MVCI resorts have instituted certain rules and conditions on having service animals which include preregistration, liability insurance and a deposit. I am also aware of several resorts that we have used with our pets in the past that have now banned pets. Their explanation was that the costs were higher and they didn't want to fool with it any more.

Bruce, as I indicated, I would not be oposed to a pet section at say DVC and HH but would think a size limit would be needed. The problem would be that those units would need to be reserved specifically and there would need to be some type of extra fees. Maybe a $25 initial fee and $5 per day or something along those lines.

 

[ncligs]

Originally posted by HorizonsFan
That hasn't stopped you from lobbying for non-smoking resorts. I guess it's all about who's ox is being gored...

What do you think has a better chance of happening..........non-smoking WDW resorts

or pets being allowed at DVC

??

P.S. smoking is hazardous to everyone's health.

 

[HorizonsFan]

What do you think has a better chance of happening..........non-smoking WDW resorts or pets being allowed at DVC

I think they have an equal chance of happening. Zero.
That's my point.

 

[ncligs]

Originally posted by HorizonsFan
I think they have an equal chance of happening. Zero.
That's my point.

Thats what smokers

thought in California .......and in N.Y. restraunts and bars.

 

[Chuck S]

Actually, I think a smoking ban has a slightly better chance of becoming standard vs. allowing pets, simply because it is possible (though unlikely) that a LAW could be passed by the state or federal government making smoking in rooms illegal. And given the political climate, there is a greater possibility for a non-smoking law than a "right to travel with pets" law.

 

[HorizonsFan]

Neither would bother me nor does the smoking ban in Dallas bother me. I don't smoke indoors. Period.
My point was, why should one tell someone that posting a poll or proposing an idea is "pointless" when one has advocated a proposal that has only a marginally better chance of success?

 

[TWEEDLEDEE2]

i think having a pet friendly hotel or wing of a hotel would be awesome. i do not like smoking rooms but, if that is all they have i will accept (no complaints). i know first hand that smoking rooms affect people with allergies. but, you also must remember it isn't the smoking, it is the second hand smoke that is bad for you. one other thing is my animals are my children. i don't like to be around other peoples screaming kids, just like they don't like being around someones barking dog. it is not a win win situation, it is give and take. you accept me and i will accept you.

 

[mikesmom]

So tell me, how is someone leaving a small dog in a hotel room for a few hours any different in terms of danger to children? Nobody's advocating letting packs of wild pit bulls run loose in the parks. They're simply allowed on leashes to go out to a designated area to poop and excercise

Because it won't stop at that. I'd love to have more "trust", but we already have people smoking in non-smoking rooms, leaving garbage in hallways, trying to wedge 10 people in an 2 bedroom or even smuggle in small animals (there was a thread about this a few months back).

There's always someone who thinks the rules don't apply to them, or "this one time" they aren't stretching the rules "much". ("We don't have 10 people, we have 3 couples, a teenager, a child, and 2 children under 3")

There's plenty of folks that either don't have any common sense or just don't care about rules or other people when it comes to their own personal wants and desires.

 

[JimC]

Dean's comment regarding MVC's experience with service animals surprises me. Service animals are carefully bred. Both animal and their owner must pass extensive screening and training. It is a very thorough, but I admit probably not perfect, process.

I wonder how Marriott determined that service animals are a problem and significantly increase expense. I would like to see their data and methodology before commenting further.

Interesting restrictions that they have instituted regarding preregistration, liability insurance and deposit. I need to do some research to see what the law is on such restrictions at a vacation club.

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by JimC
Dean's comment regarding MVC's experience with service animals surprises me. Service animals are carefully bred. Both animal and their owner must pass extensive screening and training. It is a very thorough, but I admit probably not perfect, process.

I wonder how Marriott determined that service animals are a problem and significantly increase expense. I would like to see their data and methodology before commenting further.

Interesting restrictions that they have instituted regarding preregistration, liability insurance and deposit. I need to do some research to see what the law is on such restrictions at a vacation club.

I know this somewhat because I own at Marriott's Grande Ocean resort and they just instituted this policy. I know the manager both through the resort but also have other friends in town that are best friends with him. I emailed him and he responded saying that most of the new MVCI resorts had this rule. My take away message was that it had been a real problem and they felt they had to institute this. Apparently since it's a private resort, they can do this even if a hotel couldn't under the current ADA. I can pull out the newletter if needed.

 

[vernon]

I can see an argument for having hotel rooms on Disney that take pets, the "allowance" for extra damage can be put into room charges. IMHO this wouldn't work with a "timeshare" system as there would be no way to differentiate between the dues for those owners with pets and those without.

With a points based system it would be hard to allow sufficient rooms for "pet owners" to be able to bring their animals, while being able to accomodate "regular" members who do not want to stay in a room that may smell of dogs, cats or whatever animal comes. Similar to smoking, one guest in 20 smokes in a room, it is possible to get the smell out of the room, if you have rooms designated smoking ( or pets) that smell is going to become ingrained into the furniature, curtains EVERYTHING. IMHO it would be an unpleasant room to take and I don't see Disney giving themselves more potential problems than they need to.

I think someone has already touched on this point, what would you do with your pets while you are in the parks,at the pool etc? Being locked up in a strange room ( if you're lucky you get the fun of a maid doing a T+T to terrorise) all day long. There are places that are wonderful to take your pets I'm sure, but I don't think Disney is one of them. I would be very opposed to bringing this type of policy in , unless it was in a specified (unsold as yet) resort and people knew this was the policy before they bought. I do think it would slow the "take up rate" and therefore think it unlikely to come about.

 

[jana]

I would think that would be a cruel thing to do to your pet.
New places are always tramatic for animals. Unless your going to spend the day in the room I don't think it's fair to the animal to take them. They have no idea where they are and then you just leave them alone for the day. They have to listen to strange noises all day. They don't know if your coming back or not. You have taken their security away from them. I think it is an added stress that an animal shouldn't have especially an ill one.

 

[chrissyk]

Originally posted by jana
I would think that would be a cruel thing to do to your pet.
New places are always tramatic for animals. Unless your going to spend the day in the room I don't think it's fair to the animal to take them. They have no idea where they are and then you just leave them alone for the day. They have to listen to strange noises all day. They don't know if your coming back or not. You have taken their security away from them. I think it is an added stress that an animal shouldn't have especially an ill one.

My pet either goes to my pet sitter's house (my sister's house), or he comes with us. Either way, he's not at home. I think he'd rather be with us. He's never been traumatized by travelling with us before. We've had him since he was 8 weeks old, and he was travelling with us shortly thereafter When we were having work done on our house, he stayed at the Residence Inn all day long w/o us while DH and I were at work, and again, he wasn't traumatized. While some pets might be traumatized, I know my pet well enough to know that he wouldn't be

 

[mitros]

We have a cat. But as far as pets at the DVC, no thanks. That is what the kennels are for .

 

[Gigashadow]

Mabye I could bring my adult female Columbian Boa (7+ ft.). She is very quiet and only messes in the cage. "Are you sure thats your cat in her belly??"


- Satire

 

[Richyams]

"no"