To the editor: I respect the elevated consciousness that Nadav Ziv brings to the issue of canine house owners going nearly in every single place with their pets in L.A.
I’ve labored in an area hospital for 20 years, and solely previously three years have I skilled folks bringing their non-service canine to clinic visits. We’re allowed to ask solely two questions: Is the canine a service animal required due to a incapacity? And what work has the canine been skilled to carry out?
It’s not laborious for house owners to get round these questions. We aren’t allowed to request documentation.
It’s fairly clear when a canine isn’t a real service animal. They wander across the clinic room, their vests typically look soiled, and their house owners don’t deal with them the way in which house owners of service animals do.
Service animals are essential to those that profit from them, and changing into one requires a rigorous coaching program. Those that wrongly name their canine service animals diminish the stature of those coaching packages.
As with so many different points, it comes all the way down to consciousness and treating others the way in which we want to be handled.
Linda Marie Randolph, Los Angeles
..
To the editor: Whereas Ziv makes some legitimate factors, the accompanying image displaying unleashed canine at Veterans Barrington Park begs for clarification.
I’m one of many early morning scofflaws (and a veteran) who congregates on what we name the “gopher subject” with our free-roaming canine. The Division of Veterans Affairs property is maintained by the L.A. Division of Recreation and Parks, and the seven-acre web site is riven with holes that makes the sector unsafe for youth sports activities. Aside from uncommon sandlot actions, the bottom lies fallow and beckoning.
There’s an adjoining “official” off-leash canine park usually utilized by canine walkers throughout noon. The group of canine folks is amiable and accountable as a result of we respect the tacit privilege we’re granted at a venue the place a canine could be a canine.
Regrettably, proudly owning a canine doesn’t robotically confer sterling character or training upon the proprietor. Consequently, there’s a minority of canine house owners with an overdeveloped sense of entitlement.
Gary W. Dolgin, Santa Monica
..
To the editor: The query is just not, “Why can’t canine house owners obey the foundations?” The query is, “Why gained’t canine house owners obey the foundations?”
People have the flexibility to (that’s, can) obey guidelines. The problem right here is that some canine house owners select to not (that’s, gained’t) obey guidelines.
I don’t have the reply to why some folks consider that they’ve a particular standing that enables them to ignore guidelines that had been established to learn everybody in our society. I do know that their egocentric sense of entitlement damages our society.
Jo-Ann Shelton, Santa Barbara
..
To the editor: A piece of the Silver Lake Reservoir rim bulges out to turn out to be what the group calls “the meadow.” For years, group teams labored with the L.A. Division of Water and Energy to finalize the continual path across the reservoir, and with deliberation, it was determined that the general public can be finest served by excluding canine from the world.
Indicators clearly state that canine are prohibited, and there occurs to be a large canine park on one other aspect of the reservoir. And but, house owners carry of their canine.
Why can’t L.A. canine house owners obey the foundations? The reply I get once I ask are, “I reside within the neighborhood,” “I hold my canine off the inexperienced and on the trail,” and “Nobody pays consideration to the indicators.”
No embarrassment, no apology — simply claims of entitlement.
Dorcas Tokes, Los Angeles
