4 Walt Disney World Resorts to accept dogs

[GoofGoof]

I think the “I’ve never traveled with my pet, but know everything about pet friendly hotels” comments from a lot of posters are amusing.. but if you read the article I posted, it pretty much meshes with what all other dog owners-who travel with their dogs people have said in this thread.

Like I said, the article was good info. I disagree with your position that only people who travel with dogs can or should have an opinion on this. We can just agree to disagree on that.

I’ll say something about Kimpton though, since you chose to focus on them and ignore the major chains. If you’ve ever stayed at one, or know someone who has, ask them if the resort was overrun with pets..and if their room smelled like one. You would have a greater chance at any of the above in a hotel with under 200 rooms where all are pet friendly. Given the popularity of their hotels, I somehow doubt that you’ll hear too many of those stories.

I commented on Kimpton since it was the example given in your article. I may not have extensive experience traveling with dogs but I know the hospitality industry pretty well and not just from casual stays. Operating a boutique hotel is very different than operating a large resort. That is a fact. I know you don’t care for the Vegas analogy but a large casino resort in Vegas has a lot more in common with a WDW resort than a boutique hotel.

A Vegas hotel stated their exact policy’s.. a few others do as well.. many don’t.

I think there is room for improvement with this policy. With Disney you need to spell everything out in black and white. We both agree about the entitled attitudes of some guests. I don’t know how every hotel handles dogs. From various posts in this thread we have a good idea how Loews at Universal handles it. Their policy seems to work pretty well. I just posted the Caesars policy as another example and more importantly of how I think they should handle reservations by making pet friendly a separate room type. I’m not saying they have to mirror those policies but if they did they could alleviate a lot of the issues people have. Would any of the changes I purposed be a big issue for dog travelers? They are still basically getting what they want with a few additional restrictions but also with little impact to everyone else. Seems like a good compromise.

 

[xdan0920]

77 if one certain member would just go away....

Wild

 

[21stamps]

Like I said, the article was good info. I disagree with your position that only people who travel with dogs can or should have an opinion on this. We can just agree to disagree on that.

I commented on Kimpton since it was the example given in your article. I may not have extensive experience traveling with dogs but I know the hospitality industry pretty well and not just from casual stays. Operating a boutique hotel is very different than operating a large resort. That is a fact. I know you don’t care for the Vegas analogy but a large casino resort in Vegas has a lot more in common with a WDW resort than a boutique hotel.

I think there is room for improvement with this policy. With Disney you need to spell everything out in black and white. We both agree about the entitled attitudes of some guests. I don’t know how every hotel handles dogs. From various posts in this thread we have a good idea how Loews at Universal handles it. Their policy seems to work pretty well. I just posted the Caesars policy as another example and more importantly of how I think they should handle reservations by making pet friendly a separate room type. I’m not saying they have to mirror those policies but if they did they could alleviate a lot of the issues people have. Would any of the changes I purposed be a big issue for dog travelers? They are still basically getting what they want with a few additional restrictions but also with little impact to everyone else. Seems like a good compromise.

I mentioned many other hotels besides Kimpton (which do have decent sized hotels, they’re not these small properties that you appear to think they are). We’ll leave them out though.. Plenty of the other brands have over 1000 room properties, which allow dogs.

I’ll wait til someone posts a dog attack or something equally horrendous. Until then I’ll go ahead and stay in reality where dog issues at hotels aren’t as common as too many here are fantasizing them to be.

Tag me when incidents start rolling in.

 

[Driver]

Yes I have seen that, however as I stated, in the UK we have a Dangerous Dogs Act which prohibits someone from owning any dogs on this list. This would therefore make it illegal for any of these dogs to be on public property within the UK. Does the US not have something similar to this?

No a restriction like that would be an impingement on your freedom. However there are restrictions to where you can bring a dog like that. Or if you live in an apartment that allows pets there can be breed limitations. But those things are mentioned in the lease so you know before you sign on the dotted line.

 

[Driver]

Omg it isn’t just one county.. it is many areas in Florida.. and even where they are allowed there are many restrictions on where they can go in public.
I know logic isn’t supposed to be used here, but they aren’t as common as people think. Even less common to be a dog seen at a hotel.

Let the hysteria continue though.
Mean dogs.
Owners who haven’t trained their dogs.
Dogs on furniture everywhere.
Dogs peeing and pooping on furniture.
Dogs peeing and pooping all over the resort grounds.
Dogs attacking people.
Everyone bent over in allergy fits.
Lawsuits against people and Disney over dogs.
I may have missed one or two..
All of it ignoring that a ton of hotels have been doing this for years already, quite successfully.

Let's not forget dogs on busses, ( none service dogs) they must be in a pet carrier, the carrier can be on your lap but cannot be on the seat. Must be on the floor and/or under your seat if it fits.

 

[Chernaboggles]

Apologies, I often forget rules are different in the UK as they are in America. In the UK I believe all service dogs have to undergo specific training, for which they are awarded documentation. Here they also wear a different coloured vest depending on their persons needs, i.e. burgandy for deaf, florescent for guide dogs etc. So I just presumed regulations in the US are similar.

No need to apologize, I didn't know the UK system at all! In the US, the specific type of disability is generally considered private medical information, so color-coding like that would come up against privacy laws. It's meant to protect against discrimination, which is good, but a little more oversight or at least a standardized training course (for both owners and dogs) would go a long way toward fixing the problems.

 

[Hayley In Wonderland]

If dogs weren't allowed - as it used to be, it wouldn't happen.

But dogs surely must have always been allowed due to service dogs... Either way, a theme park is going to end up with something on the ground, be it dog poo or dirty nappies. Maybe dog bins will be installed with a rule for guests to pick up after their dogs, with dog friendly areas and restrictions such as child-friendly areas, swimming pools & food courts etc. This will stop the whole "oh but what if a dog poop's somewhere!". It's the law over here to pick up after your dog, and very rarely do you get someone leave poo about the place. Same as smoking in ride queues.

 

[Incomudro]

But dogs surely must have always been allowed due to service dogs... Either way, a theme park is going to end up with something on the ground, be it dog poo or dirty nappies. Maybe dog bins will be installed with a rule for guests to pick up after their dogs, with dog friendly areas and restrictions such as child-friendly areas, swimming pools & food courts etc. This will stop the whole "oh but what if a dog poop's somewhere!". It's the law over here to pick up after your dog, and very rarely do you get someone leave poo about the place. Same as smoking in ride queues.

Years ago, service dogs were few.
There wasn't a service dog available for such a wide array of ailments.
Add to that, the plethora of people with phony service dogs.
And again, the parks were designed for people - not dogs.

 

[Hayley In Wonderland]

No need to apologize, I didn't know the UK system at all! In the US, the specific type of disability is generally considered private medical information, so color-coding like that would come up against privacy laws. It's meant to protect against discrimination, which is good, but a little more oversight or at least a standardized training course (for both owners and dogs) would go a long way toward fixing the problems.

I don't think it's common knowledge as to what colours mean what, as there are several different. I think the only painfully obvious one is guide dogs. It just makes it easier when service dogs are taken into public places where dogs are not usually allowed, and if someone is crossing the street or walking down the road, then we can move out the way or allow them space to get past. I understand the whole "data protection thing", but again, it's bad that there isn't even a certain document just to state the dogs name, age and that they have undegone some kind of qualifying course, or are registered to an organisation as proof, without giving any personal information away. *EDIT* As I have just mentioned, it also stops people from approaching the dog to say hello, as they are working and it's kind of a common rule (not a law as far as I know) that you shouldn't ever approach a service dog if they are working as not to distract them

 

[Hayley In Wonderland]

Years ago, service dogs were few.
There wasn't a service dog available for such a wide array of ailments.
Add to that, the plethora of people with phony service dogs.
And again, the parks were designed for people - not dogs.

Of course the parks are designed for people, I never once said they were not. However, upon building they would have to take into consideration people with service dogs, the same way they would have to consider people in wheelchairs or crutches. Even if not when first built, when service dogs started to become a more common thing, they would have to update certain facilities to allow people with service dogs to use/gain access to them.

Again, I am not sure what service dogs are like in the US, but in the UK they undergo rigorous training in all aspects including behaviour, and we are not allowed to approach a working service dog, due to distracting them from their job.

At the end of the day, the parks have had dogs in them before, for a while.

 

[Hayley In Wonderland]

No a restriction like that would be an impingement on your freedom. However there are restrictions to where you can bring a dog like that. Or if you live in an apartment that allows pets there can be breed limitations. But those things are mentioned in the lease so you know before you sign on the dotted line.

Oh no I agree, I personally think any dog can be dangerous if given the ability to do so, i.e a shoddy owner who raises them to be vicious and territorial. I just was not sure if there was anything similar in place

 

[John park hopper]

Like anyting in society today people abuse the intended pupose of a law or regulation. I have no problem with valid service dogs, however there should be some form of documentation for the need of a service dog. Heck, we are asked to provide all sorts of personal information in our daily lives. picture ID, proof of insurance, SS# on and on. My dog has a rabies vaccine tag on her collar issued by the county I live in. County or State of residence could issue a service dog tag without violating any HIPPA requirement.

 

[GoofGoof]

Like anyting in society today people abuse the intended pupose of a law or regulation. I have no problem with valid service dogs, however there should be some form of documentation for the need of a service dog. Heck, we are asked to provide all sorts of personal information in our daily lives. picture ID, proof of insurance, SS# on and on. My dog has a rabies vaccine tag on her collar issued by the county I live in. County or State of residence could issue a service dog tag without violating any HIPPA requirement.

The ADA was passed in the early 90s back before social media or really even the internet as we know it today. I don’t think they conceived of the kinds of abuse that exist today. A service animal was basically a seeing eye dog. They did not require proof of the service animal because in most cases it was obvious and they didn’t want blind people harassed and forced to continually show proof. Times have changed. I do think it’s time they reconsider the law and maybe amend that aspect. There was an amendment already to the employment section.

 

[GoofGoof]

I mentioned many other hotels besides Kimpton (which do have decent sized hotels, they’re not these small properties that you appear to think they are). We’ll leave them out though.. Plenty of the other brands have over 1000 room properties, which allow dogs.

I’ll wait til someone posts a dog attack or something equally horrendous. Until then I’ll go ahead and stay in reality where dog issues at hotels aren’t as common as too many here are fantasizing them to be.

Tag me when incidents start rolling in.

Now who is over-exaggerating

Do you think that a dog attack is the only issue? That’s an extreme example which I hope would be very rare or non-existent.

There are many more subtle issues that may seem petty or insignificant to you but obviously not to others.

 

[Minnesota disney fan]

If you think about all the things that might go wrong on any vacation, you'll never take one. It's always a gamble. Bad weather, bedbugs, someone gets sick, wild loud neighbors, line-jumping tour groups...with so many people at WDW there's always going to be some risk that your vacation will be negatively impacted. Having dog-friendly rooms at POR might raise the odds of an issue a little, but if you've gone enough to have years of POR memories, you've probably weathered minor (or major!) inconveniences in the past. If Disney has earned any credit with you over all those great vacations, give them a shot and hope for the best. Just be ready to insist that they make good if something actually does go wrong. I think CMs on site faced with a specific issue are generaly much more responsive than CMs on the phone talking about possible ones.

you are right, just walking out of the house is a "gamble". But a vacation to WDW should not be. We all know things can and do happen while on vacation. That's not the point. The points have been brought up repeatedly as to why most who have responded are against this new trial policy.
We have not decided yet whether we will keep our reservation at POR or try another resort. We have tried many, but POR was the one that is perfect for us. We have stayed at Universal RPR and knew there were dogs housed in some rooms on the first floor. They apparently had their own dog area away from all other areas. Never saw a dog in the lobby or anywhere on RPR's grounds. That was great. Universal obviously knows how to handle dogs on vacation. Not so much Disney with their very lax policy. I hope that they do more like Universal in the future. I don't want to walk in poo or messes that someone neglected to pick up.
I think the answer would be for WDW Co. to build a trial dog friendly hotel on property, then there would be absolutely no complaints.
Anyway, still not sure what we will do. I'm leaning towards giving it a try to see what happens, and also to keep a watch on these boards as to the real experiences others have while at POR.
I would love to give Disney some credit for doing it right, but have seen how lax they are on enforcing the rules that are in place. Right now it is truly a "gamble".

 

[Raineman]

you are right, just walking out of the house is a "gamble". But a vacation to WDW should not be. We all know things can and do happen while on vacation. That's not the point. The points have been brought up repeatedly as to why most who have responded are against this new trial policy.
We have not decided yet whether we will keep our reservation at POR or try another resort. We have tried many, but POR was the one that is perfect for us. We have stayed at Universal RPR and knew there were dogs housed in some rooms on the first floor. They apparently had their own dog area away from all other areas. Never saw a dog in the lobby or anywhere on RPR's grounds. That was great. Universal obviously knows how to handle dogs on vacation. Not so much Disney with their very lax policy. I hope that they do more like Universal in the future. I don't want to walk in poo or messes that someone neglected to pick up.
I think the answer would be for WDW Co. to build a trial dog friendly hotel on property, then there would be absolutely no complaints.
Anyway, still not sure what we will do. I'm leaning towards giving it a try to see what happens, and also to keep a watch on these boards as to the real experiences others have while at POR.
I would love to give Disney some credit for doing it right, but have seen how lax they are on enforcing the rules that are in place. Right now it is truly a "gamble".

I will be checking in to POR on Sunday, and I am going to make sure to give a complete report of what I see in regards to the dog issue. We won't be spending a ton of time at the resort, but hopefully enough to get a decent picture of what is going on.

 

[Minnesota disney fan]

I will be checking in to POR on Sunday, and I am going to make sure to give a complete report of what I see in regards to the dog issue. We won't be spending a ton of time at the resort, but hopefully enough to get a decent picture of what is going on.

That's great! Are you in the AB section? That's where we always stay, in a garden room, no less.
I honestly feel that this close to the roll out that there will not be many dogs yet. Most people book months out, so I think those reservations have to run out for the test to be valid. I have friends arriving on 11/3 to POR, and they are completely against this policy too. I think they are not going to see many dogs either.
Hope you have a great time, and looking forward to your report. Thanks!

 

[Incomudro]

I was thinking about this...
Do people bring their dogs over other people's houses?
With extremely few exceptions, the answer is "no."
Why not?
Well, we know why not.
Hair, smells, possible behavior problems, the possibility of it relieving itself in or around the hosts home, and so on.
For those very reasons hotels used to not allow dogs.

 

[Incomudro]

That's great! Are you in the AB section? That's where we always stay, in a garden room, no less.
I honestly feel that this close to the roll out that there will not be many dogs yet. Most people book months out, so I think those reservations have to run out for the test to be valid. I have friends arriving on 11/3 to POR, and they are completely against this policy too. I think they are not going to see many dogs either.
Hope you have a great time, and looking forward to your report. Thanks!

Yes, I believe that it is very early in the process to get an idea of how it may be in the future.
It'll take some time before the word gets out.

 

[GoofGoof]

you are right, just walking out of the house is a "gamble". But a vacation to WDW should not be. We all know things can and do happen while on vacation. That's not the point. The points have been brought up repeatedly as to why most who have responded are against this new trial policy.
We have not decided yet whether we will keep our reservation at POR or try another resort. We have tried many, but POR was the one that is perfect for us. We have stayed at Universal RPR and knew there were dogs housed in some rooms on the first floor. They apparently had their own dog area away from all other areas. Never saw a dog in the lobby or anywhere on RPR's grounds. That was great. Universal obviously knows how to handle dogs on vacation. Not so much Disney with their very lax policy. I hope that they do more like Universal in the future. I don't want to walk in poo or messes that someone neglected to pick up.
I think the answer would be for WDW Co. to build a trial dog friendly hotel on property, then there would be absolutely no complaints.
Anyway, still not sure what we will do. I'm leaning towards giving it a try to see what happens, and also to keep a watch on these boards as to the real experiences others have while at POR.
I would love to give Disney some credit for doing it right, but have seen how lax they are on enforcing the rules that are in place. Right now it is truly a "gamble".

Good post. I do think Disney could (and likely will) easily resolve a lot of the issues by having a dedicated section of the hotel pet friendly and make that a category when you book the room. At POR they currently have regular rooms with these views:

1. Standard view
2. Garden view
3. Pool view
4. River view

Then they repeat those view types for Royal Rooms. Just add another section with Pet Friendly and the various view types. This way when you book you know if you don’t book in the pet friendly category you won’t get a dog room. They can also make sure anyone who specified a dog allergy is far from that section.

They could also restrict dogs from any indoor public space. They would need to figure out what to do with check-in but other than that the average guest wouldn’t even see a dog except maybe walking a path which really shouldn’t be too big a deal.

I think those 2 subtle changes could make almost everyone happy. As it is there are too many open questions for people with existing reservations to feel good about this.