# faking service dogs, and home training service dogs

Category: Let's talk

## Post 1 by Liquid tension experiment (move over school!) on Friday, 03-Feb-2017 15:24:48

Hey everyone. I had an interesting incounter with someone on the street this morning while I was waiting on the bus. Someone walked up to me and inquired about getting her dog registered as a service animal. She informed me that she was moving, and that she wanted to take her dog with her, but the place she was moving to charged pet rent and she didn't want to pay it. That is just one of many examples I have seen in person and read online about people being able to go inline and buy papers for a pet from a doctor. I may step on some toes here, but what is the deal with home trained guide dogs? I am not downing people who decide to do that, but I have incountered so many misbehaved home trains, and it is kind of damaging to the handlers community as a hole, of witch we have been working hard for equality anyway. I personally don't think that a home trained guide dog has the amount of training that a well funded and well staffed school can provide. Plus, you all who do this need to realize, years and years of breeding and genetic research and testing has gawn into preeding quiet, well tempered dogs that perform well under stress and generally get along with other animals. They are raised from a puppy to do this. I want to know what you all think about what I have said. so lets talk.

## Post 2 by SilverLightning (I've now got the silver prolific poster award! wahoo!) on Friday, 03-Feb-2017 21:10:38

I completely agree. I don't think home trained guide dogs should be allowed.

## Post 3 by Shepherdwolf (I've now got the bronze prolific poster award! now going for the silver award!) on Friday, 03-Feb-2017 21:31:07

Practically, I agree. I don't think it should be permitted.
That said, it's a little bit of a shame, because there are doubtless people out there who would raise a really excellent guide dog from home, people who know the dog very well and the psychology and training methods and all that.
The problem is that those people, the ones who'd do a really good job of it, are so rare that we can't just allow them the chance, because there are so many who wouldn't do an adequate job.
Now, with all that having been said, all this selective breeding and specialized training doesn't seem to be able to stop some guide dogs from scrounging or exhibiting other not-so-great behaviour all the time. Scrounging is an issue I hear a lot about, actually, which is why I bring it up. So sometimes I think the divide between the training a school might give, vs. the training that a really well set-up home environment might give, is perhaps not quite as enormous a gulf as we're made to believe.
It's still too large to just allow anyone to raise their own guide dog willy-nilly, but this is food for thought anyway.

## Post 4 by SilverLightning (I've now got the silver prolific poster award! wahoo!) on Saturday, 04-Feb-2017 16:26:21

IN my experience Gregg, though this is certainly not a universal truth, most
of those negative behaviors start after they leave the school. Its usually the
fault of the handler who doesn't keep up with obedience training and that sort of
thing, rather than the fault of the school. Though, one could argue that its
because the school doesn't choose handlers more wisely. However you want to
look at it.

## Post 5 by Liquid tension experiment (move over school!) on Monday, 06-Feb-2017 9:02:37

Some very good answers here. glad this post didn't turn into a bitching slandering fest like some others. But I would like to say that, silver lightning you are correct. once Krieger and I left guiding eyes, he started testing me. sniffing while guiding, trying to grab things off of the ground, every dog, or almost every dog is going to test you. its the people who crack down and put a stop to it that continue the amazing performance that the school worked for in that dog. sadly some schools need to be a bit mor strict on who they give dogs to, pilot, leader, I'm looking at you. now I am not saying they are bad schools, they just let anyone who can pick up a cane and say I am blind in there.

## Post 6 by SilverLightning (I've now got the silver prolific poster award! wahoo!) on Monday, 06-Feb-2017 18:27:56

I think all schools are guilty of that. I had people who couldn't find their ass
with a map in both my classes at two different schools. One guy at my first
school actually pulled the fire alarm, thinking that it was a doorknob.

## Post 7 by forereel (Just posting.) on Tuesday, 07-Feb-2017 19:59:18

I'd say if a dog can pass testing, then it is a well trained dog.
I don't know if you all know this, but your dogs get lots of home training.
When they are puppies, they are given to people for the basic home living and what I've been told is people skills.
The final leading training doesn't happen until later.
Sure, the homes are guided, but they are mainly just regular families, or people.
So, if we had a testing board, or classification system, I don't see were one will be better then the other.

## Post 8 by SilverLightning (I've now got the silver prolific poster award! wahoo!) on Tuesday, 07-Feb-2017 21:12:45

If we were talking about obedience training I'd agree with you wayne, but
we're not. The dogs don't learn guiding in a home. They do that with
professionals at the schools. They learn basic obedience like sit and stay with
their raisers.

## Post 9 by ADVOCATOR! (Finally getting on board!) on Wednesday, 08-Feb-2017 0:03:17

Well, I think all guide dogs should be tested by a "Good" school, that knows what a guide is supposed to do. I've seen anxiety dogs home-trained, and some people let their dogs do anything. Then, we who really need a service animal, get hit hard. I've seen handlers get a lot of crap, from owners of establishments. Or Wal-Mart letting someone in that says "This is my service dog," when that person has no proof. That happened once. Then a proper guide dog, was blamed for shitting on the floor, which the guide didn't do.
If I can't get help from Guide Dogs of the Desert, I'm screwed. It's not that I like it this way. It's just some of us get a really difficult situation. If I had my wish, it would be to be a "Normal lady, with a guide dog." But, I didn't choose the roll of life's dice. I'm dealing the best I can, and will eventually, need a dog guide. If I have to train him/her at home? I'll make sure the guide behaves. If I can train three cats to watch it on the biting, I can keep a dog guide from scrounging. At least, I think so. Laughing!
Blessings,
Sarah

## Post 10 by Liquid tension experiment (move over school!) on Wednesday, 08-Feb-2017 12:38:25

people underestimate the amount of training that goes into a working guide. They have to be trained in almost if not every situation you would ever find yourself in. The dog has to have the temperament to work well under high stress, be good around people, other dogs, in loud construction and city areas, bad weather, darkness, the list goes on. It has to be able to have the smarts to make choices, not just follow the given path such as a sidewalk. It has to be able to know the safest rout through construction for both it and you. It has to know that if your tall enough, it needs to watch for overhanging signs, tree's and scaffolding. It has to be able to pick different routs that you might not know because the given can not be passed for what ever reason. These dogs are bred for this, and it took deckades to set the breeding lines that the schools have. Most dogs can't handle the stresses of guiding, and you want to add a chair into the mix? sorry sarah, but unless you can put your dog in all of those situations, be able to work your way out if the dog does something wrong during the training process, and watch its body language at the same time to figure out how to fix the issue, home training a guide that will be able to do all of those things and mor, while compensating for not only you, but your chair, you want to have a business or trainer with experience do this. This could put you and the dog who doesn't know any better in danger. My advice, don't do it yourself.

## Post 11 by forereel (Just posting.) on Wednesday, 08-Feb-2017 15:20:09

Not actually. Lost of it is the dogs self preservation.
It won't walk in front of a car mainly because it doesn't want to get hit.
I just think if a dog were tested and could pass that test, who trained it, or were it was trained doesn't matter.
My first dogt was basicly a pet that wouldn't stay home when the kids whent to school. The owners felt because if that, he'd make a great guide dog for a blind person.
He wasn't raised in the program, but was a donation.
He past whatever test, then was trained to guide.
He was one of the best guides I was told, and believed it due to all the years I spent being his owner.
He was the sort of dog you could take to the beach, take off his harness and such and just walk around. He'd not leave my side, nor get distracted by all the stuff going on on the board walk.
This made going out with another person really relaxing because I didn't need to keep to much control. He just followed.
When it was time to get back to guiding, I could put on his stuff, and he'd simply get to it.
I had a girlfriend, and if she wasn't careful when she left in the morning to go to work, he'd follow her to the bus stop.
My trainer kept him at home much, and would take him shopping and such tings when she wanted to window shop she told me.
So, I'm not so sure.

## Post 12 by SilverLightning (I've now got the silver prolific poster award! wahoo!) on Thursday, 09-Feb-2017 0:02:48

If that were true wayne, there would not be a long list of instances where
guide dogs sacrificed themselves to protect their handlers. Its not just self-
preservation. Far too frequently it requires the dog to get hit to protect their
handler, and the dogs do so far too willingly for my comfort.

## Post 13 by forereel (Just posting.) on Thursday, 09-Feb-2017 9:10:44

I'll give you that, but that isn't just guide dogs, that is dogs that are attached to the owner.
You don't even need a special trained dog for it to become that way, or a person that know anything about guide training.
Pets are protective of the owners or family.
For that reason, dogs make great guides for the blind.
But in the case were the dogs aren't treated well, and this happens as you know by the blind, the dog still will in many cases do the job because it is protecting itself.
When you first receive your dog, it isn't attached, just doing what is was trained to do.

## Post 14 by Liquid tension experiment (move over school!) on Thursday, 09-Feb-2017 12:04:18

the point here is, with home trained guides, there is no way a blind person can safely put the dog through every situation it needs to be put through. no way. you can't watch body language. you can't be training in a revolving door and no when the dogs tail nose or paws are about to be pinched by the door until it happens. Just one example of many.

## Post 15 by Shepherdwolf (I've now got the bronze prolific poster award! now going for the silver award!) on Thursday, 09-Feb-2017 16:57:02

I can see what people are saying about home-training a guide dog, and like I said, the few people who might be able to successfully pull this off can't really justify letting people do it in general.
That said, dogs that are willing to sacrifice themselves to protect their owners? I've seen that completely outside of guide-dog settings. Dogs, as I understand it, see those they associate with as part of their pack. This is why some dogs are protective of certain people they know well. But I don't know how much guide dog schools actually have to bother teaching dogs to sacrifice their own safety, because I think that's partially instinct. I've actually heard of non-guide dogs who hurl themselves into the legs of their owner to throw them backward so that they aren't hit by something or someone incoming, just to name one example of something similar.
This absolutely does not diminish the reality when it happens. It just means I think it has a lot to do with instinct, and maybe not so much to do with training. Tight bonding means that the dog, who will probably see itself as beneath the owner/handler, will sacrifice itself, will follow commands because that's just how pack mentality works.

## Post 16 by ADVOCATOR! (Finally getting on board!) on Thursday, 09-Feb-2017 19:59:57

So, that's it. No guide dogs for people who need wheelchairs, and can't see. Wow. Sorry, if I'm not giving up. I'm glad Moris Frank didn't give up, when they said Buddy couldn't be in the restaurant, and called him a "Pet."
Yeah, sorry I can't just give up. I just want independence. How unreasonable is that?
Blessings,
Sarah

## Post 17 by forereel (Just posting.) on Thursday, 09-Feb-2017 20:31:56

Well, I'd agree a blind person couldn't train a dog successfully due to not being able to visually put it to all the test it needs to be.
But, this is why I say, the dog, no matter who trained it, must pass a state or country testing to be certified.

## Post 18 by SilverLightning (I've now got the silver prolific poster award! wahoo!) on Thursday, 09-Feb-2017 20:52:34

I completely agree with you on that wayne. There should be some form of
certification. But then, I'm in favor of federal identification for guide dog
handlers, and treating it like getting a driver's license. But I'm in the minority
there.

## Post 19 by Liquid tension experiment (move over school!) on Friday, 10-Feb-2017 9:04:03

sarah, please don't bitch. I'm not telling you to give up. someone gave you an option, I am just telling you that unless the dog is bred and trained to do so, meaning guiding someone in a chair, I wouldn't home train a dog to do so. Its not fare to the dog.

## Post 20 by forereel (Just posting.) on Friday, 10-Feb-2017 12:26:53

Well, that's fair Cody. It is much like shopping for any service.
If I felt a licensed professional can and will do a better job, I'd seek that service too.

## Post 21 by Meglet (I just keep on posting!) on Tuesday, 14-Mar-2017 21:02:35

I don't know whether anyone can explain this to me (apologies for the tangent), but why exactly are handlers so vehemently, passionately against federal IDs? It would give them an extra layer of credibility, it would make it harder for service dog fakers to get away with stuff, and it would put handlers on a level with how a lot of society is managed. I've heard people complain that "a little piece of plastic should not govern my rights," but little pieces of plastic run a lot of the world. If I go into a bar without my ID, they have every right to throw me out. If I drive without the piece of plastic that verifies I'm qualified to do so, I should be sanctioned for it. If I try to enter my own apartment building without my key card, I can expect to be locked out. I've never heard a guide dog handler complain about that. So, what's so different about this?

## Post 22 by forereel (Just posting.) on Wednesday, 15-Mar-2017 8:29:22

An interesting observation.
I always thought that handlers from schools were certified in some fashion.
I knew that regular people could train dogs, and I've said I don't have a problem with that, but before a dog is released to a blind person, I always thought there was some testing that had to be past making the dog road worthy, so to speak?
I have also learned on these boards, that the receiver of dogs now don't have to pass basic mobility test, and I think that is a hazard waiting to happen.
When I trained, the first thing was done was to learn if I could travel.
I guess that is like you stated. If I want to buy a new car, I've got to show them I have a license to drive and insurance.
Now, sure, I can buy it, but I can't take it off the lot unless I have someone with these papers, or cards.
If a blind person doesn't have travel skills, a dog won't fix that at all.

## Post 23 by Liquid tension experiment (move over school!) on Wednesday, 15-Mar-2017 9:01:44

I was never against it. I always have my team ID in my walet

## Post 24 by Scarlett (move over school!) on Wednesday, 15-Mar-2017 20:12:28

I feel conflicted, as many probably do.
I know a few people who have trained really excellent guide dogs. And I'm sure there are others who haven't.
Equally, I know some people who got their guide dog from a school and work perfectly as a team...others, not so much.
So I do think that part of it is where the dog comes from, a school or home training. But equally much of it is to do with the handler themself.
It also makes me angry that the shitty behaviour of entitled non-disabled people should make it harder for genuine people who have trained their service dog, and done it well. One of those situations where a group of people spoil it for others.
I also think there are situations where being able to train your service dog is very useful. For example, at least in the UK guide dogs, the organisation, are very well funded. Organisations that provide dogs for physically disabled people not so much. So I can definitely see why people turn towards owner training, if not just for the freedom but also because it may be the only way they can actually get a service dog that they really do need.

## Post 25 by DevilishAnthony (Just go on and agree with me. You know you want to.) on Thursday, 16-Mar-2017 18:04:54

What about schools such as the guidedog Foundation and Guiding Eyes, which will do in home training? If I can, that's the way I'm going to go. The dogs are still trained by professional trainers. You're still working with an instructor, and it's all one on one.

## Post 26 by SilverLightning (I've now got the silver prolific poster award! wahoo!) on Friday, 17-Mar-2017 8:39:20

Going back to Meglet's question, I'm afraid I have absolutely no idea. I've had
arguments with handlers over this many times, even gotten kicked out of guide
dog groups over it. They've never had a better answer then, "I have the right to
it, so I shouldn't be controlled by the federal government". Which, at least in
america, is utter rubbish.

## Post 27 by Smiling Sunshine (I've now got the bronze prolific poster award! now going for the silver award!) on Friday, 17-Mar-2017 23:04:00

I've never understood the arguments against IDs for service dogs. I've always carried mine from GDB and while I haven't ever been asked to show proof of training, I certainly wouldn't have a problem doing so.

## Post 28 by Scarlett (move over school!) on Saturday, 18-Mar-2017 12:01:37

This post might interest you all on the issue: http://hilda.brannan.name/2017/03/an-open-letter-to-sasha-pfeiffer-regarding-the-proposed-fake-service-dog-bill/

## Post 29 by forereel (Just posting.) on Saturday, 18-Mar-2017 13:34:31

Ah, I see.
If the home trained dog is so good, what would it matter if that dog were then certified in some manner?
You trained your dog, and it is al good as any professionally trained dog, so maybe put it to the test?
I say this, because some standards should be kept as to these dogs level of expertise I guess.
Again, I don't have a problem with home trained dogs, but I do belive in some testing or whatever for them.
Suppose a person that owns a "service" dogt decides his or her dog doesn't need propber shots and such?
That dog puts others at risk along with human general health.
What if the home "service" dog was aggressive?
That was an interesting letter and helped my thinking.

## Post 30 by Scarlett (move over school!) on Sunday, 19-Mar-2017 16:10:48

Thanks, I definitely recommend leaving a comment on the blog with these kinds of questions. He is a cool guy and I'm sure would be able to answer them much better than I can, as I got my dog from a school.

## Post 31 by Meglet (I just keep on posting!) on Tuesday, 18-Apr-2017 0:56:21

Thanks for the responses, folks! I've done a bit more digging, and it seems to come down to two discrete things for handlers: dignity, and convenience. Dignity, because some of the ones I've spoken to consider being asked for ID to be an affront to their dignity (I'm still processing that one), and convenience, because logistically it's annoying to have to pull a card out every time you wander into a public establishment. That one I understand far better. There's also the matter of logistics: who will certify the dogs, including those who have been owner-trained? Who decides which schools are accredited and which not? Who does the testing? Does the certification need to be updated regularly? etc. etc. It's basically like any other form of certification: it comes with a whole lot of logistical issues that, if ironed out, could work smoothly, but which will be very difficult to implement to everyone's satisfaction.

## Post 32 by forereel (Just posting.) on Tuesday, 18-Apr-2017 11:39:12

Well, everyone isn't going to ask for the card. Just like an ID or licenses, you don't always get asked.
A plan like this will never make everyone happy, and a regulation board could be set up.
Maybe the health department would over see it.

## Post 33 by forereel (Just posting.) on Tuesday, 18-Apr-2017 12:08:21

I thought about this a bit more.
When I had guide dogs, all came from schools specifically set up to train them.
I received one of these cards to carry, and I didn’t mind showing it if asked.
The thing is, seems as dog users, we’d want some regulations for our protection no matter who trained the dog.
Shop and restaurant owners could eject dogs for this reason.
In America, when I did have problems, I was able to have recourse, because my dog was legit, so to speak. Without that, I believe I’d have lost.
How could I prove the dog in a harness wasn’t just my pet I was passing off?
How can we justify our right to have an animal in a place of business, if anyone can just say they trained, so the animal should be allowed?
I think if you have to go to court for any reason, you might lose if your animal isn't specificly from a recognized school.

## Post 34 by lalady (This site is so "educational") on Tuesday, 18-Apr-2017 20:40:53

I agree with you Wayne. Having an ID with the name of the school who does the training provides proof that the dog is being used as a service dog. Without that proof, no one can really distinguish it from a regular pet. So it is really necessary to keep business owners from not allowing guide dogs in their place of business. I always carried my official school ID and was actually asked to present it several times. It was a life saver in those instances.

## Post 35 by SilverLightning (I've now got the silver prolific poster award! wahoo!) on Wednesday, 19-Apr-2017 4:40:32

The problem is, and I'm saying this as someone who firmly agrees with
Wayne, but the problem is that those ID's are not official. They're not
recognized by any governing body. They're just a picture of you with your dog.
Now, often times when we're asked to see them, they'll do. However, many
guide dog owners will refuse to use them, or even carry them, because its
technically a violation of the ADA to ask for them. People are not allowed to ask
to see identification proving that your dog is a guide dog. Which, in my opinion,
is an oversight which should be fixed imediately. There's no reason that owners
of restaurants should not be allowed to see documentation that we're using a
service animal who has been properly trained and vetted. I honestly do not
know why some guide dog users are so opposed to that.

## Post 36 by forereel (Just posting.) on Wednesday, 19-Apr-2017 13:18:24

Ah. I didn't know the ADA was in the way of this.
Sure, my card probably didn't mean anything to us that know, but business owners don't know, so it worked.
If the business owner wished, they could place a call and learn you are who you say, and your dog is actual a legit service animal.
I agree, that needs changing, and again, we probably need some sort of registering service.

## Post 37 by SilverLightning (I've now got the silver prolific poster award! wahoo!) on Wednesday, 19-Apr-2017 17:27:57

Not according to the law they can't. They are only allowed to ask if an animal
is a service animal, and what service it provides. They aren't given any recourse
to see if you're actually telling the truth when you answer.

## Post 38 by turricane (happiness and change are choices ) on Wednesday, 19-Apr-2017 20:20:09

from what I understand about th a.d.a which I had to read a while back, it states that an owner of a business can only ask what service the dog provides. do they guide us, warn of diabetic incidents, or whatever.
having a card is not a problem for me. sighted folks have licenses. what's the difference? a few years ago, the one time I had trouble with a restaurant, I didn't know better, and showed mine. after reading it thoroughly, they let me in, but treated me unpleasantly.
unfortunately, I wish I could say that I have met well mannered home trained guide dogs. unfortunately, my experience has been just the opposite. that being said, I've seen badly behaved dogs from schools too. the point is that we have to keep up our standards and training no matter from whence the pup originated.
conversely, one of the gentlemen in our building has a home trained service dog. reese is a seizure dog. he is one of the best mannered pooches I've ever seen. his master is out there every day giving him obedience training. he's a corgi and is very smart. I've seen him help his master a couple times.

## Post 39 by SilverLightning (I've now got the silver prolific poster award! wahoo!) on Thursday, 20-Apr-2017 5:06:35

I used the same argument. We have an id that allows us to be served alcohol,
and people are ok with that. But since the ADA gives people the right to have a
guide dog, apparently some users think that they shouldn't have to jump
through a few hoops to get them. Personally, I'd rather pull out an id, show it,
and get seated so I can eat than stand there trying to explain federal legal code
to some waitress making half minimum wage who is just getting more and more
pissed off that I'm taking up all her time and not letting her do her job. But
then, in the nearly ten years I've been using guide dogs, I've only had two
people say that I couldn't have dogs, and it was a simple misunderstanding.
Took all of thirty seconds to clear up.

## Post 40 by Liquid tension experiment (move over school!) on Thursday, 20-Apr-2017 8:51:01

I put up a post likie this on facebook, and got over 50 replys on all sides. so what I am going to do is go around the city this weekend asking business owners if they could, would it make them feel better if people had to show proof in form of a team ID and I am going to upload it to my VLOG.

## Post 41 by forereel (Just posting.) on Thursday, 20-Apr-2017 12:41:29

I used to get chased around all the time especially in places on the piers or beaches.
You step in to one of the little shops, and the clerks are following you saying, "no doggie, no doggie."
Most times that little card made them go away.
Other times, an short chat.
I've been evicted from eating places, one being a Mc Donald’s even with the card.
The manager couldn't physically touch me, so she called the security guard who refused to remove me. He explained the law, but she told her workers not to serve me, so in that event, I had no choice but to leave.
That experience paid well. Smile.
The others didn’t actually evict me, but had something to say. It seems the better places were the worst about this, but once it was explained to them they could be sued, they’d back off and also treat me fine.
The card made it just easier for me many times, and I honestly, until this board, thought schools and such what some legal standing or whatever.
Fine, if a business owner is only allowed to ask me what service the dog provides, well, the next time I want to take my lab to lunch, I'm gonna say, spiritual, protection, and companionship.
Laughing.
I also thought if your animal smelled, messed the floor, or was disruptive, owners could eject you, and I felt that was fair.
The school I trained at made it clear your animal should be well kept.
I personally would hate to have to eat near someone who's animal smelled bad, or was disruptive or whatever, so that I understand.
I have said here, a home trained dogs were fine, but I still feel it needs to pass some testing or be regulated or something.

## Post 42 by turricane (happiness and change are choices ) on Thursday, 20-Apr-2017 13:55:48

oh you are right. if the dog is disruptive or endangering another person, then they can get kicked out. the messing the floor is a gray area as far as I understand it.

## Post 43 by turricane (happiness and change are choices ) on Thursday, 20-Apr-2017 13:59:13

silver lightning I have also found that with so many othere situations the attitude we present makes a lot of difference to the willingness of someone to let a dog in. if we confront someone with hostility they are more likely to draw a line in the sand. you handled your situations correctly in my world. just calmly and clearly stating the law and your rights quickly solved the misunderstanding .

## Post 44 by hardyboy09 (I'm going for the prolific poster awards!) on Thursday, 04-May-2017 13:39:29

All dog guides are just dogs. They will try to eat food. It is up to you to correct them. Since my first dog guide, I guess I have gotten a lot more relaxed. I try to correct my dog if she eats stuff off of the floor, but sometimes, she wins.Like yesterday, she saw a French fry on the floor. I corrected her, and she did not eat it. Then, she got the same fry, even though I corrected her.

## Post 45 by moonspun (This site is so "educational") on Saturday, 13-May-2017 15:47:24

I think there's a reasonable argument for owner trained guide dogs. In the UK, Guide Dogs are very anti owner trained guide dogs, stating that the dogs couldn't be up to the same standards as professionally trained ones, given the limitation of the blind trainer in terms of seeing what the dog was up to etc. however, interestingly, they refused to test at least 3 dogs that I know of who were trained by very, very committed owners, to a standard that, in 2 out of the 3, was frankly far above that set by the average guide dog in this country *based on my own experience of the dogs I see*. The owners offered to pay for the costs of testing, staff time, and certification, but they wouldn't test. I can't get my head around why. If the dogs were poorly trained, they wouldn't have qualified. Is it perhaps that they don't want to open the doors to other avenues of training, as it will reduce their own throughput?

## Post 46 by SilverLightning (I've now got the silver prolific poster award! wahoo!) on Saturday, 13-May-2017 19:39:27

If it were me, my reasoning would be the following. If we test dog A, we have
to also test dog B, and C, and D, and e and F and G and H I J K L and so on.
And how many of those dogs are superbly trained? If you can only think of three
examples, is it safe to assume that a vast majority of home trained guide dogs
meet a set standard? Or is it more likely that most do not, and there are those
three outlyers which do? So why would they waste their time testing a bunch of
dogs just for most of them to fail?