37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1524660 |
Time | |
Date | 201803 |
Local Time Of Day | 0601-1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
State Reference | US |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Commercial Fixed Wing |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Parked |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Captain |
Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Events | |
Anomaly | Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown |
Narrative:
This situation should not have happened and my crew was placed in an unnecessary situation which could have escalated into a worse situation if not for the professionalism demonstrated by my flight attendants.we had a passenger bring 2 emotional support dogs onboard: a great dane and a ban doggee (in the bulldog/mastiff family) in which she later brought a vet statement stating that the dog was a lab mix so that she could have the dog in the cabin.my crew was never warned of the situation of 2 dogs coming onto the plane. We found this out ourselves when we arrived for the flight seeing the 2 dogs. I advised the customer service agents (csa) to research into the situation and see what restrictions if at all would effect the carriage of 2 emotional support dogs in the cabin.what really frustrates me is that these dogs had been originally denied boarding. So; this situation was known. My crew was blindsided by this whole situation. The worst of it all is that we finally got all of the information at our destination instead of our departure [airport]. What I find completely unacceptable and truly amazing is how someone can take their dogs in the cabin after having problems with them in the cargo hold. The great dane was too big for the dog carrier to be able to fit in the cargo hold. The other dog apparently chewed through 2 kennels; thus injuring itself.as I mentioned; we found out all of the particulars at the end of the flight instead of at the beginning. The station management as well as a senior supervisor did show up to help assess the situation and to obtain information from the passenger. They were very helpful in giving some of the information. We were advised: 'this situation has run all the way up to corporate.'I called the [operations] to discuss the situation and to have him in the loop. I and my crew were then given the ultimatum that it was all okay as long as we were okay with it and that corporate was okay with it. The amazing aspect of the situation is we have absolutely no guidance in our fom for emotional support animals. I discussed it with my crew with the information discussing such issues as the presence of children and passengers with dog allergies and agreed to proceed under the assumption that the dogs would be separated in their own open rows clear of other passengers. Thankfully; the cabin had plenty of seats open. Another amazing piece of the puzzle was that a traveling nonrev flight attendant traveling with her mother was asked to be the handler for the pit bull/lab mix. The pit bull/lab mix practically dragged the nonrev into the cabin down the isle. Once the dogs were onboard; the situation seemed okay for awhile until mid flight in which the pit bull/lab mix dragged the nonrev to the back of the plane and then eventually ended up in the same row as the owner. And; apparently it had growled at the nonrev a few times; but was fine once around the other dog and the owner. For safety of flight issue; the dogs remained in the same row with the great dane on a seat and the other on the floor during the flight.my flight attendants were exceptional in trying to keep me advised of the situation that they were trying to deal with in the back with the dogs. We had agreed as a crew from the beginning that we would turn back/divert if need be if the dogs were ever uncontrollable. The thing that I have to ask to whoever came up with the idea to solicit a nonrev to care for one of the dogs...who is liable for the dog once in the care of a nonrev employee?this whole situation is mind boggling as to how passengers can have pets in the cabin that are too big for carriers in the cargo hold and especially how another can be in the cabin after chewing through 2 dog carriers.the encore of the whole event was when one of the dogs defecated in the airplane isle as it exited with the owner never apologizing or even thanking a soul for her being able to carry her 2 dogs onboard as emotionalsupport animals. We rewarded the passengers bad behavior with discounted coupons and discounted airfare. At some point; airlines have to take a positive stand to address this industry wide abuse of emotional support animals.and; I and my crew should never have had to feel pressured into accepting such an unnecessary situation.there needs to be guidance in our flight operation manual on any restrictions pertaining to the carriage of emotional support animals. There needs to be a size limit to an emotional support animals vs. Sending them on a cargo flights. There needs to be equipment on the aircraft to deal with a possible hostile emotional support animal...i.e.; muzzles and/or restraints. The use of the status emotional support animals has become an uncontrollable problem for airlines. Several airlines have applied defined guidelines and restrictions. Placing the burden on aircrew is unacceptable.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Air carrier Captain reported disruption caused by placing large emotional support dogs in the cabin and having no governing company policy.
Narrative: This situation should not have happened and my crew was placed in an unnecessary situation which could have escalated into a worse situation if not for the professionalism demonstrated by my Flight Attendants.We had a passenger bring 2 Emotional Support dogs onboard: A Great Dane and a Ban Doggee (in the Bulldog/Mastiff Family) in which she later brought a Vet statement stating that the dog was a Lab mix so that she could have the dog in the cabin.My crew was never warned of the situation of 2 dogs coming onto the plane. We found this out ourselves when we arrived for the flight seeing the 2 dogs. I advised the Customer Service Agents (CSA) to research into the situation and see what restrictions if at all would effect the carriage of 2 Emotional support dogs in the cabin.What really frustrates me is that these dogs had been originally denied boarding. So; this situation was known. My Crew was Blindsided by this whole situation. The worst of it all is that we finally got all of the information at our destination instead of our departure [airport]. What I find completely unacceptable and truly amazing is how someone can take their dogs in the cabin after having problems with them in the cargo hold. The Great Dane was too big for the dog carrier to be able to fit in the cargo hold. The other dog apparently chewed through 2 kennels; thus injuring itself.As I mentioned; we found out all of the particulars at the end of the flight instead of at the beginning. The Station Management as well as a senior Supervisor did show up to help assess the situation and to obtain information from the passenger. They were very helpful in giving some of the information. We were advised: 'This situation has run all the way up to Corporate.'I called the [Operations] to discuss the situation and to have him in the loop. I and my crew were then given the ultimatum that it was all okay as long as we were okay with it and that Corporate was okay with it. The amazing aspect of the situation is we have absolutely NO GUIDANCE IN OUR FOM FOR EMOTIONAL SUPPORT ANIMALS. I discussed it with my crew with the information discussing such issues as the presence of children and passengers with dog allergies and agreed to proceed under the assumption that the dogs would be separated in their own open rows clear of other passengers. Thankfully; the cabin had plenty of seats open. Another amazing piece of the puzzle was that a traveling nonrev Flight Attendant traveling with her mother was asked to be the handler for the pit bull/lab mix. The pit bull/lab mix practically dragged the nonrev into the cabin down the isle. Once the dogs were onboard; the situation seemed okay for awhile until Mid Flight in which the pit bull/lab mix dragged the nonrev to the back of the plane and then eventually ended up in the same row as the owner. And; apparently it had growled at the nonrev a few times; but was fine once around the other dog and the owner. For safety of flight issue; the dogs remained in the same row with the Great Dane on a seat and the other on the floor during the flight.My Flight Attendants were exceptional in trying to keep me advised of the situation that they were trying to deal with in the back with the dogs. We had agreed as a crew from the beginning that we would turn back/divert if need be if the dogs were ever uncontrollable. The thing that I have to ask to whoever came up with the idea to solicit a nonrev to care for one of the dogs...who is liable for the dog once in the care of a nonrev Employee?This whole situation is mind boggling as to how passengers can have pets in the cabin that are too big for carriers in the cargo hold and especially how another can be in the cabin after chewing through 2 dog carriers.The encore of the whole event was when one of the dogs defecated in the airplane isle as it exited with the owner never apologizing or even thanking a soul for her being able to carry her 2 dogs onboard as EmotionalSupport Animals. We rewarded the passengers bad behavior with discounted coupons and discounted airfare. At some point; Airlines have to take a positive stand to address this industry wide abuse of Emotional Support Animals.And; I and my Crew should never have had to feel pressured into accepting such an unnecessary situation.There needs to be guidance in our Flight Operation Manual on any restrictions pertaining to the carriage of Emotional Support Animals. There needs to be a size limit to an Emotional Support Animals vs. sending them on a cargo flights. There needs to be equipment on the aircraft to deal with a possible hostile Emotional Support Animal...i.e.; Muzzles and/or restraints. The use of the status Emotional Support Animals has become an uncontrollable problem for Airlines. Several Airlines have applied Defined Guidelines and Restrictions. Placing the burden on Aircrew is unacceptable.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.