Dog experiment ending in October?

[zipuzee]

Love dogs but I’m glad this is over!!

Me too. I love my dog, but would never bring her on vacation. She'd be a neurotic mess.

 

[Shanti]

Me too. I love my dog, but would never bring her on vacation. She'd be a neurotic mess.

I'm a dog-lover, but between the nightly fireworks and having to leave the dog alone for several hours per day while touring the parks, a WDW trip seems like a mean thing to do to your dog.

 

[MomOTwins]

I suspect:

(1) They did not account for the extra cost of having to do deep cleans in rooms. When I called after the policy came out, we had booked POR and I called in advance about allergies and they said while they could not guarantee I'd be in a no-dog building, they would do a deep clean of the room before our stay. I imagine there were probably additional cleaning costs from dogs left alone too long that had accidents as well;
(2) They did not anticipate how many guests would break the rules (e.g., dogs off leash, not picking up after, sneaking non-service dogs into the parks, leaving barking dogs in rooms at night); and
(3) There were more unhappy guests complaining than there were guests actually making use of the policy.

 

[GusGusTheMouse]

Well, that is an assumption. I think people do assume that corporations think things out better in advance then they actually often do. Are you old enough to remember "New Coke"? We think, "well, they have lots of money and employees, and potential liability, so they must have very carefully considered everything..." But experience shows that's often not the case. The United puppy incident you mentioned is one example of a corporation's failure to carefully train employees to protect both human & animal safety. The Grand Floridian alligator incident is one Disney example of a failure to consider the potential safety implications of families from all of the world coexisting with native resort wildlife. Having unlimited size & breeds of pet dogs at a busy, family-oriented resort was going to eventually result in a guest getting badly bitten. Imo it wasn't a matter of if, but when.

Not an assumption as it is based off some personal knowledge, and I would be SHOCKED if Disney did not do some type of legal investigation into this dog trial before implementing it. If they had not, and an event like what you describe were to occur, then the victim would have an even bigger payday. Not everything in life can be accounted for, especially freak accidents. But as you said, even you (and I am just assuming you are not in the field of legal torts) could see the possible issues that arise from a dog resort trial. Therefore, I would have to assume Disney weighed the pros and cons of the same issues as well, and felt it was worth the legal gamble

People need to give Disney a little break here. They do not go implementing trials willy-nilly. They tried this one and it didn't work out, and my guess is it is due to financial reasons or some reason beyond any of our knowledge. But common sense shows if they cancelled due to legal reasons wouldn't it require A LOT more changes than just removing the dogs from hotels (which they still cannot entirely do anyways). It would require a complete turn around on how WDW deals with all types of dogs, particularly the dogs in the parks as well.

 

[LSUmiss]

Well, that is an assumption. I think people do assume that corporations think things out better in advance then they actually often do. Are you old enough to remember "New Coke"? We think, "well, they have lots of money and employees, and potential liability, so they must have very carefully considered everything..." But experience shows that's often not the case. The United puppy incident you mentioned is one example of a corporation's failure to carefully train employees to protect both human & animal safety. The Grand Floridian alligator incident is one Disney example of a failure to consider the potential safety implications of families from all of the world coexisting with native resort wildlife. Having unlimited size & breeds of pet dogs at a busy, family-oriented resort was going to eventually result in a guest getting badly bitten. Imo it wasn't a matter of if, but when.

I would agree if there had been a major incident like those you mentioned that made them reconsider the policy, but the fact that they ended it after the designated trial period makes me think the cost just didn’t outweigh the benefit to them.

I suspect they cancelled it for the same reason they cancelled the paid park to park transportation. Not enough ppl used it to justify the cost.

 

[Gryhndmom]

My guess would be it just wasn’t profitable. I doubt the “legal department” failed to “mull over possibilities” before it was implemented especially considering plenty of other hotel chains have had success with this. My guess is they thought they saw an opportunity b/c so many opted to bring their pets for the storm. However, that’s different from a busy vacation so I’m sure not too many ppl took advantage of the option so it just wasn’t profitable.

Totally agree with you! Since we have three fur children and live in Texas, it was not feasible to fly with all of them and one doesn’t like loud noises so they just get to stay home with their pet sitter roaming on their 1.3 acres. I am speculating we will hear much “chest pounding” from those that will take credit for letting Disney know they hated the policy and that was the sole reason the policy/trial period was ending. Would be nice , if the rumor is true, that Disney puts out a press release on why the policy won’t be implemented permanently after the trial period.

 

[LSUmiss]

Totally agree with you! Since we have three fur children and live in Texas, it was not feasible to fly with all of them and one doesn’t like loud noises so they just get to stay home with their pet sitter roaming on their 1.3 acres. I am speculating we will hear much “chest pounding” from those that will take credit for letting Disney know they hated the policy and that was the sole reason the policy/trial period was ending. Would be nice , if the rumor is true, that Disney puts out a press release on why the policy won’t be implemented permanently after the trial period.

Same here. I had an elderly dog that I would have wanted/needed to take before he died. But my 2 young dogs do fine boarding. Also, we like to fly vs drive & one is too big to fly in the cabin & I would never fly him in cargo unless I had some sort of unforeseen emergency situation.

 

[Best_Vacation_EVER!]

For people with allergies this was a real issue. Before this policy the number of service dogs was likely a fairly low ratio of total guests -- so managing the deep cleans required was manageable. Service dogs are also highly trained (noise/soiling/reactions to strange things/people aren't as much of a concern due to the extensive training they receive) so if I saw a real service dog at a resort/park/bus (anywhere really) I wouldn't think twice. With emotional support dogs, there is a big variation of training --- from zero training to significant training and no way for the average person to know which type of dog they were dealing with. The dogs reaction to things other than their owner is less predictable. We've seen this in airport/planes/tourist spots in our travels this week (some instances were just annoying while another instance was downright dangerous.)

While we own 2 of the most amazing Australian Shepherd dogs in the world (and have always had at least 2 dogs --- Shibas, Mutts, and a Poodle --- all of whom did obedience training.) None of our dogs would have been happy being shut in a room for long periods every day, where they could hear tons of people/activity/noise that they can't join into, stuck in an unfamiliar place for hours on end, limited walks, etc... .

I was never one of the "no dogs ever" crowd but I thought that the implementation was not great. If they do bring it back I hope they will better balance the the interests of guests who want to bring dogs with those that don't want to be around them.

 

[Jadyreen1282]

Y'all know what this means...there is absolutely no hope for peacocks, hamsters or the awesome companions that are ferrets.

 

[tnolan]

I also think the shutdown of the dog program is really in the best interest of the dogs. If I owned one I would not have brought it to DW. As mentioned, the noises, being cooped up for hours at a time, etc, are not fair to the pet.

 

[Jen1995]

I suspect:

(1) They did not account for the extra cost of having to do deep cleans in rooms. When I called after the policy came out, we had booked POR and I called in advance about allergies and they said while they could not guarantee I'd be in a no-dog building, they would do a deep clean of the room before our stay. I imagine there were probably additional cleaning costs from dogs left alone too long that had accidents as well;
(2) They did not anticipate how many guests would break the rules (e.g., dogs off leash, not picking up after, sneaking non-service dogs into the parks, leaving barking dogs in rooms at night); and
(3) There were more unhappy guests complaining than there were guests actually making use of the policy.

I've had a flea infestation before and it was a NIGHTMARE to eliminate, even with toxic chemicals, etc. Granted, my house is much larger than one room, but still. It just amazes me that Disney would want to voluntarily increase the numbers of deep cleanings they have to do. To be honest, I am amazed that any hotel is dog friendly. And I have a lot of pets. Or maybe it's because I have a lot of pets that I feel that way.

 

[Jen1995]

I also think the shutdown of the dog program is really in the best interest of the dogs. If I owned one I would not have brought it to DW. As mentioned, the noises, being cooped up for hours at a time, etc, are not fair to the pet.

Agree and I think a Disney vacation is unique in that most people spend all day in a park that doesn't allow pets for days and days at a time, so it's not like you are going to some cabin in the woods to hike with your dog.

 

[Sydney2977]

Agree and I think a Disney vacation is unique in that most people spend all day in a park that doesn't allow pets for days and days at a time, so it's not like you are going to some cabin in the woods to hike with your dog.

Exactly! We took our dog last summer to visit older DS at his base and we stayed in a pet friendly military room, which was basically a big one bedroom apartment and they were one story and attached in groups of four. We took her to the beach, dog park, walking trails, etc. with us and really just left her when we went out to eat. They provided a large crate and we left her in there with her blanket when we left the room. She was fine and DS was happy he got to see her too. WDW is a whole different story. She'd be alone longer than she is when she's home and we go to work and/or school, plus it's a less home like environment. The cabins at FW are about the only place I think I'd consider bringing her to stay, but again, that would be a strain on us having to go check on her and stuff.

 

[TheSouthernBelle]

I agree with a lot of other posters on here, taking your dog to WDW is cruel, we are at the parks and out of our room the majority of our day, I would never want to leave my dog in a strange place for extended periods of time. I have heard wonderful things about the Best Friends doggy daycare/kennel on property and would do that if my pet needed to come on vacation with me. We're lucky that our dog gets his time with grandma when we travel and he has a blast with her. My in-laws love having a pet for a brief bit of time and then they give him back to us, much like our kids

 

[HopperFan]

Y'all know what this means...there is absolutely no hope for peacocks, hamsters or the awesome companions that are ferrets.

Never any love for the ferrets ...

I think it's MANY of the above thoughts ...

First and foremost Disney is about money ~ it is going away because it didn't pay off they way they hoped.

WHY?

Due to guests major focus being long hours doing parks etc, most guests who LOVE their dogs would never bring them there.

Due to above ^ money coming in was not enough.

Due to Disney's POOR execution and lack of using industry standard rules, other guests were avoiding those hotels.

Due to higher cost of deep cleanings, necessary cleanings and damages to rooms.

Due to the reports of CM complaints and who knows if some have asked for transfers.

Due to the housekeeping shortage at Disney getting MUCH worse since Dogs & Security Checks have been added.

And VERY possibly there may have been some legal issues brought forward we would never know about by guests with negative experiences.



Good move For us I would absolutely consider going back to those hotels now that policy will be changing. Not that I don't like dogs, I have two very spoiled furbabys - that I would never take to Disney for their happiness. And my next trip is actually booked at Home2Suites which is a VERY VERY dog friendly hotel but, as many dog friendly hotels do, has RULES that Disney doesn't have. They could have done it right, but they didn't.

 

[disneyseniors]

Very well said, Hopper Fan!

 

[cwis]

I don't know if this can give a hint, but FYI Disneyland Paris has just started allowed dogs on select resorts (well, only in the Davy Crockett Ranch at the moment, which is kind of like the Cabins at Fort Wilderness).

Given this is some fresh news (it was announced just a few days earlier), I wouldn't have expected Disney to stop the experiment at WDW.

 

[Mom loves Disney]

I don't know if this can give a hint, but FYI Disneyland Paris has just started allowed dogs on select resorts (well, only in the Davy Crockett Ranch at the moment, which is kind of like the Cabins at Fort Wilderness).

Given this is some fresh news (it was announced just a few days earlier), I wouldn't have expected Disney to stop the experiment at WDW.

I've called and so far guest services has said that they have no official word that the trial is ending. I have a reservation with a dog in a cabin for December. I wish they would actually release their statement if it is ending in October.

 

[cwis]

I've called and so far guest services has said that they have no official word that the trial is ending. I have a reservation with a dog in a cabin for December. I wish they would actually release their statement if it is ending in October.

If they decide to end it, I would expect them to stop accepting new reservations at some date, and maybe still honour reservations with dogs before that.

 

[dansdad]

If they decide to end it, I would expect them to stop accepting new reservations at some date, and maybe still honour reservations with dogs before that.

This.