Yellowstone disappointment

[Podivin]

Originally Posted by 2Yung2 Quit

What agency is it that "licenses" service dogs?

A server where I often lunch said that the apartment she wanted to move to wouldn't allow pets unless they were service dogs.
So she went online somewhere and paid a nominal fee to get documents that stated her dogs were indeed service dogs.
So like so many other things, if you 'know a guy' you can get the correct paperwork.

[BFlinn181]

Originally Posted by Podivin

A server where I often lunch said that the apartment she wanted to move to wouldn't allow pets unless they were service dogs.
So she went online somewhere and paid a nominal fee to get documents that stated her dogs were indeed service dogs.
So like so many other things, if you 'know a guy' you can get the correct paperwork.

THERE IS NO CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE DOGS, there are lots of places that will print you a 'certificate' that isn't worth the ink and paper that it's printed on. SeeTheUSA's link explains all that, then offers a certificate for $39. -- No training or testing of your 'service animal' just a $39 certificate.

[sajohnson]

Originally Posted by UTTransplant

There are length restrictions on roads like Going to the Sun because the turns are too sharp for vehicles over a certain length. Short and simple. The lanes are less than standard width, and when a longer vehicle goes around a corner, the swing can pass into the opposing lane. No one is unnecessarily restricting vehicles; it is a safety thing. The sightseeing tours very carefully choose vehicles that meet the requirements. Other visitors should also.

As for the general observation that prime summer season is generally horrifically full in all our beloved parks, I know what my husband and I do - we go in the spring and fall. We leave the summer to those people who have school children or jobs that only slow summer vacations. In the summer you can find us in National Forests of the West and Midwest. We have been to Yellowstone as early as the second week of May and a Glacier the week before they close the campgrounds. Both of those trips were the best we have ever had, and we have been to Yellowstone probably 20 times. If people are restricted in the time of year and summer is all they have, get up early. There is never a long line coming into the park at 6:00 am. The thermal features are more visible in the cool air, and the animals are up and active. Leave the park at 2 or 3, have dinner, then come back about 6 pm. Parking lots are open and traffic is light. It is worth setting an alarm to see the beauty.

Very good advice! That is exactly what DW and I do as well. We are lucky enough to be able to visit the parks during the shoulder seasons and generally avoid the crowds and the issues that come with too many people in one place.

As for length restrictions, I would hope most people are aware that in general they are established for legitimate safety reasons. In fact, I said as much above.

We have been over Going to the Sun Road -- westbound and then back east to Saint Mary CG -- twice, on the Suzuki we carry. In fact, we bought the DRZ400 after realizing that GTTS Road has a 21 foot length restriction. Both times it was a gorgeous ride and we saw more than we would have in the View.

I am not suggesting that there should be no length, height, and/or weight restrictions in general, or on GTTS Road in particular. What I am saying is that after riding the entire length of the road, both directions, twice, it was very obvious that the View/Navion, and any RV or vehicle of similar size and length, could very easy and safely travel over Going to the Sun Road. We've been on *much* tighter roads that either a) had no length restrictions (which I questioned in some cases), or they had restrictions that were much longer (and reasonable for the road) like 31' or 35'.

Again, I agree that restrictions are sometimes absolutely necessary. We've been on roads where I wondered why there were none -- larger trucks were forced to cross the center line on curves or drop off the edge of a cliff. However, in some cases, restrictions are abused. Maybe "misapplied" would be more polite. GTTS Road is one of those cases. It's fair to say that a 45' Class A or even a long Class C should not be allowed on that road, but Class Bs and shorter Class Cs could be allowed with no problem.

There are simply too many people and too much traffic, in many areas of the US, not just national parks. I can certainly understand why the management at Glacier would want to reduce the overall traffic volume on GTTS Road, but the way they are doing it is disingenuous and heavy-handed. Maybe they should increase the length limit to make it more reasonable, and have a lottery to drive it just like the lottery the superintendent of Zion has proposed.

At the end of the day they are going to do whatever they want. Since we have the bike, the length restriction doesn't really affect us personally. I'm just using GTTS Road as an example of one of several policies that we've encountered that were 'less than friendly' to RVs.

I mentioned another example above, and that is the lack of enforcement of parking rules. In many lots in many of the parks we've been to, there are no Bus/RV spaces at all. In some cases that is understandable. As others have pointed out and I agree, we do not want to, "Pave paradise and put up a parking lot". I'm completely on board with that -- even though in numerous cases it has meant we had to skip a view, trail, or some other attraction. But where possible, it would be nice to have *some* designated Bus/RV parking. It can be (and usually is) at the far end of the lot, I'm fine with that -- just somewhere where we can legally park. Often times, when there is Bus/RV parking, the spaces are occupied by cars and SUVs. Aside from being selfish and rude, that should be illegal. In all of our years of visiting national parks I've never seen even one car parked in a clearly designated Bus/RV spot with a warning or ticket on the windshield. If it is going to be a free-for-all then owners of RVs and buses should be able to park wherever they want as well. Of course we do not do that. An exception is when we can back into a regular space without blocking a path or sidewalk. In that case we are occupying only one spot.

We generally avoid all of that unpleasantness though, by traveling in the spring and fall. We've been out on Jackson Lake on a beautiful sunny day when no one else was in sight, except one couple at the boat dock. We had the campground practically to ourselves. We've had similarly wonderful experiences in many of the national parks. When there are few people there are generally no problems.

I do feel sorry for those who must go during the summer.

[SeeTheUSA]

Seems having a “service dog” is as easy as getting a handicap parking permit!

BTW, if I understand the OP correctly, the absense of a required leash in Yellowstone National Park was the reason for denial to building access, not whether it was a “service dog,” actual or pretend .... all dogs in Yellowstone are required to have a leash. Only “service dogs,” when properly leashed, can enter buildings there.

[sajohnson]

Originally Posted by Podivin

A server where I often lunch said that the apartment she wanted to move to wouldn't allow pets unless they were service dogs.
So she went online somewhere and paid a nominal fee to get documents that stated her dogs were indeed service dogs.
So like so many other things, if you 'know a guy' you can get the correct paperwork.

No doubt that is the case.

There are plenty of people who falsely claim their dog is a "service dog".

What I still do not understand is why so many people who posted in this thread immediately jumped to the conclusion that the OP and/or her husband are guilty of that.

None of us were there. How can anyone declare, with a straight face, that the OP's disabled husband is a huge liar, falsely claiming that his dog is a service dog?!

Honestly, I don't understand. Is it because there is a gut instinct to always defend park service employees, regardless of the situation, before all the facts are even known?

It may seem like I'm taking the OP's 'side' and I believe every word she has posted. That's not the case at all. There are any number of possibilities behind her comments. Maybe her husband isn't even disabled -- the walker is just for show so they can pull off their big service dog scam. 'Bwaa-ha-ha!' I seriously doubt that, my point is that we just don't know. Without any evidence to the contrary, the reasonable thing to do is to take her at her word -- rather than immediately assuming that she is stupid, dishonest, and deserving of utter contempt.

As I said above, some of the comments come across as if she insulted the poster's grandchildren or something. Way over the top.

[sajohnson]

Originally Posted by SeeTheUSA

Seems having a “service dog” is as easy as getting a handicap parking permit!

BTW, if I understand the OP correctly, the absense of a required leash in Yellowstone National Park was the reason for denial to building access, not whether it was a “service dog,” actual or pretend .... all dogs in Yellowstone are required to have a leash. Only “service dogs,” when properly leashed, can enter buildings there.

I just re-read the OP's original post and saw no mention of whether DH's service dog was leashed or not.

Did she discuss that in a later post?

[SeeTheUSA]

Originally Posted by sajohnson

I just re-read the OP's original post and saw no mention of whether DH's service dog was leashed or not.

Did she discuss that in a later post?

Too many prior post for me to reread ... just going from memory (which has been know to return erroneous result when queried).

[nothermark]

Too many too long posts to reply.
I think I made a comment that someone in a walker cannot control a dog on a leash. I stand by it. BTDT. The issue in Yellowstone is as much the wildlife that will go after the dog as it is the dog going after the wildlife. That puts me on the side of the Park.

As I recall I made a comment about the small MH. I stand by that. If one cannot use the facilities then why have them? I suspect the View or whatever they have was bought based on the "goes anywhere a car can" and/or fuel economy ideas. Again, BTDT they are ideas that most folks eventually outgrow. I think all I said was I would save the story to link to some other discussions.

As someone who is disabled I can tell you that all busy shower buildings are a pain. Aside from room there is the issue of everything being wet and often no dry place to sit and get one's pants on. Very understandable considering the conditions. That is why with the second RV we went a bit bigger to get a shower we could use. Again, it's another one of those things we learn the hard way. EVen at that the show is tight enough that I would not need my walker if I could stand long enough to shower. There are many places to grab and steady myself in a small bathroom.

[sajohnson]

Originally Posted by nothermark

Too many too long posts to reply.
I think I made a comment that someone in a walker cannot control a dog on a leash. I stand by it. BTDT. The issue in Yellowstone is as much the wildlife that will go after the dog as it is the dog going after the wildlife. That puts me on the side of the Park.

As I recall I made a comment about the small MH. I stand by that. If one cannot use the facilities then why have them? I suspect the View or whatever they have was bought based on the "goes anywhere a car can" and/or fuel economy ideas. Again, BTDT they are ideas that most folks eventually outgrow. I think all I said was I would save the story to link to some other discussions.

As someone who is disabled I can tell you that all busy shower buildings are a pain. Aside from room there is the issue of everything being wet and often no dry place to sit and get one's pants on. Very understandable considering the conditions. That is why with the second RV we went a bit bigger to get a shower we could use. Again, it's another one of those things we learn the hard way. EVen at that the show is tight enough that I would not need my walker if I could stand long enough to shower. There are many places to grab and steady myself in a small bathroom.

Regarding the question of whether the service dog was leashed, as I asked above:

"I just re-read the OP's original post and saw no mention of whether DH's service dog was leashed or not.

Did she discuss that in a later post?"

Maybe she did, I honestly do not recall. If someone would care to point out where the OP said her husband's service dog was not on a leash I would be the first to say that she was wrong to complain about that. However, as far as I know/recall, she never said the dog was off-leash.

As for which RV a person should purchase, that's a very personal decision that is entirely up to them. If they ask for advice I know many people are happy to give it, but the bottom line is that the buyers must consider all advice; input; reviews; features; price; reliability; resale value, etc, and make their own decision.

We may not agree with their decision, but we are not in their shoes.

DW and I happen to have the same model rig the OP does, the WGO View (an earlier model though, 2009 vs 2017). We have owned it now for 6 years, taken several coast-to-coast trips in it, racked up ~60,000 miles over all sorts of roads, and really enjoy it. We studied all of our options for a solid 3 years before we made our purchase. At least in our case, it is not "an idea we will eventually outgrow".

That said, to each their own. We would never presume to tell other people that they should buy a View/Navion (or other Sprinter-based RV) -- or insinuate that they are stupid for buying something else. That would rude and condescending, not to mention horrible advice in many cases.

I like to say that most people would prefer to drive a [pick a car/SUV that you like] that transforms into a 45' luxury coach when parked. I know we would. It's hard to argue with the room, comfort, residential appliances, etc -- all the benefits of a nice Class A. Like everyone else here (including I assume the OP and her husband) we considered all of our choices -- trailers; 5th wheels; and Class A/B/C motorhomes.

We were initially drawn to some of the nicer Class B rigs, but quickly realized that while they are easier to maneuver and drive, and they have some 'stealth factor', they are simply too small for longer trips (for us anyway).

The Class As and most of the Class Cs were simply to big -- again, for us. Everyone has their own perspective, preferences, etc.

We settled on the View/Navion as being as close to 'just right' as we could get. Above posts about Glacier aside, there have been very few (if any) places we could not go due to length/weight/height restrictions. We can generally fit in the driveway at the homes of friends and family. We like that.

The decision to go with a View was just a personal choice, not a "Big Furry Hat" declaration or judgment. I can certainly see why some folks decide that they'd rather have the extra space of a Class A and are willing to accept the downside of being somewhat limited in where they can go. Others choose a Class B for even more maneuverability and ease of parking.

There are no good or bad, right or wrong choices. Every RV has its own unique set of advantages and disadvantages.

Getting back to the OP, she has clearly been scared off -- I can't even get her to answer PMs -- but I'd guess that she and her husband went through the same decision making process we all did, and decided with both eyes open that they prefered to own a View rather than a rig with a shower that would be accessible. Their money, their choice -- and very likely, their best choice, all things considered. Only they know their priorities.

I have no doubt that DH would like to have a rig with the Taj Mahal of motorhome showers, but once again, that is only one factor of dozens, if not hundreds that determine which RV to purchase. In my ~10 years of reading posts on RV forums, numerous people have said that they do not even use the shower in their rig, and prefer to use the showers in parks.

Different strokes.

There's nothing wrong with opinions and advice. Although it's best if they are requested before being dispensed, the most important thing is the spirit in which they are given.

I see absolutely nothing in the OP or subsequent posts that justifies ganging up and jumping on the poor woman with both feet.

[kayak70]

Yeah, I made one small post in this long thread. After reading follow-ups I tried to stay away. It is the attitude of the country today regarding many things, this poor woman's post is just one example. Bam! She is guilty - handicapped husband Bam! She is guilty - has an illegal non legitimate service dog.


Who, just who, making those claims is justified in any way? I stand by my original post, AFAIK her husband has and is properly using a service dog. Everything else is jibberish because she posted something many old-timers thought was ridiculous. It was not, it was simply her experience.


This country as a whole would be far better off is we could do less pre-judging and accept others just a tad bit more. Go read the rules for a service dog again, ADA, VA. They are not only service dogs when they are guide dogs for the blind. You may not agree with it but it is the law - at least today. If the posters in this thread were given the opportunity (most of them) that law would apparently be abolished and those who might have benefited in some way (please do not let any one have a "benefit") would be publicly ridiculed, nailed to a cross and tarred and feathered and their RV confiscated because they were inept and should not be allowed to use it.


Go ahead, bash this post too - I give up.


Want to talk about really foolish stuff? I can tell you a few stories, in Yellowstone a few old-timers ("we come here every year for past 20 years") walking up within a few feet of a big bison to take photos with a silly grin, in Glacier a car full of young folks jump out and run behind a momma brown with two cubs closely following her to get a video on the cell phone. Now that is something you can berate with due cause!


We mostly do "shoulder season" visits to NP to avoid congestion. We are retired, easy for us to plan that way normally. BTW, just so you know. I have handicapped plates and no limp or missing appendages - ha! Go talk to the county! Or the VA or Soc Security or whoever, it is the law. I seldom take a handicapped parking space or camping spot, leave those for folks in a chair or walker or similar. I just bet that burns in your craw! If I'm having a bad day walking is limited and I have actually used a HP parking spot though. I even use the PH spots some businesses are installing now like Home Depot - got one, got a license plate too. Guess I should shut up and give it back to the Army?


It is a strange world in America today, just a bit different than when I was a kid. I can almost remember when folks were compassionate and cared for fellow citizens.

[sajohnson]

Originally Posted by kayak70

Yeah, I made one small post in this long thread. After reading follow-ups I tried to stay away. It is the attitude of the country today regarding many things, this poor woman's post is just one example. Bam! She is guilty - handicapped husband Bam! She is guilty - has an illegal non legitimate service dog.


Who, just who, making those claims is justified in any way? I stand by my original post, AFAIK her husband has and is properly using a service dog. Everything else is jibberish because she posted something many old-timers thought was ridiculous. It was not, it was simply her experience.


This country as a whole would be far better off is we could do less pre-judging and accept others just a tad bit more. Go read the rules for a service dog again, ADA, VA. They are not only service dogs when they are guide dogs for the blind. You may not agree with it but it is the law - at least today. If the posters in this thread were given the opportunity (most of them) that law would apparently be abolished and those who might have benefited in some way (please do not let any one have a "benefit") would be publicly ridiculed, nailed to a cross and tarred and feathered and their RV confiscated because they were inept and should not be allowed to use it.


Go ahead, bash this post too - I give up.


Want to talk about really foolish stuff? I can tell you a few stories, in Yellowstone a few old-timers ("we come here every year for past 20 years") walking up within a few feet of a big bison to take photos with a silly grin, in Glacier a car full of young folks jump out and run behind a momma brown with two cubs closely following her to get a video on the cell phone. Now that is something you can berate with due cause!


We mostly do "shoulder season" visits to NP to avoid congestion. We are retired, easy for us to plan that way normally. BTW, just so you know. I have handicapped plates and no limp or missing appendages - ha! Go talk to the county! Or the VA or Soc Security or whoever, it is the law. I seldom take a handicapped parking space or camping spot, leave those for folks in a chair or walker or similar. I just bet that burns in your craw! If I'm having a bad day walking is limited and I have actually used a HP parking spot though. I even use the PH spots some businesses are installing now like Home Depot - got one, got a license plate too. Guess I should shut up and give it back to the Army?


It is a strange world in America today, just a bit different than when I was a kid. I can almost remember when folks were compassionate and cared for fellow citizens.

Beautiful kayak70, thank you -- and thank you for your service!

[kayak70]

Originally Posted by sajohnson

Beautiful kayak70, thank you -- and thank you for your service!

Thanks, and so you will know; it was my HONOR serving this country and being there with the Best and Brightest, great young men who felt the same way.

[MTSam]

Originally Posted by UTTransplant

There are length restrictions on roads like Going to the Sun because the turns are too sharp for vehicles over a certain length. Short and simple. The lanes are less than standard width, and when a longer vehicle goes around a corner, the swing can pass into the opposing lane. No one is unnecessarily restricting vehicles; it is a safety thing. The sightseeing tours very carefully choose vehicles that meet the requirements. Other visitors should also.

Annnnnd that is exactly it! UTTransplant has said exactly what I have said earlier... You can't make the TURNS with the oversized vehicles. This is why you don't see the full fledge buses in GNP (think Greyhound) but you do see a ton of the smaller tour buses that can handle these situations.

Hang around long enough and you will see entire sides ripped up, torn off, when a vehicle can't "borrow" to stay in it's lane, or is longer than restrictions and can't handle the rocks that jut out on turns... I've seen it so many dang times!! But if you think you know better than the park service and wish a ticket, have at it -- while you irritate everyone behind you...


Meanwhile, I'm still not picking sides regarding the OP and the Park Service, but I am passing this along for those who are asking about Service Animals. As you can see it's gotten to be a real issue in Montana...

Montanan drafts legislation to penalize fake service dogs | KECI

[BFlinn181]

Originally Posted by MTSam

Annnnnd that is exactly it! UTTransplant has said exactly what I have said earlier... You can't make the TURNS with the oversized vehicles. This is why you don't see the full fledge buses in GNP (think Greyhound) but you do see a ton of the smaller tour buses that can handle these situations.

Hang around long enough and you will see entire sides ripped up, torn off, when a vehicle can't "borrow" to stay in it's lane, or is longer than restrictions and can't handle the rocks that jut out on turns... I've seen it so many dang times!! But if you think you know better than the park service and wish a ticket, have at it -- while you irritate everyone behind you...


Meanwhile, I'm still not picking sides regarding the OP and the Park Service, but I am passing this along for those who are asking about Service Animals. As you can see it's gotten to be a real issue in Montana...

Montanan drafts legislation to penalize fake service dogs | KECI

That's well and good that Montana is going to tighten the abuse, but if you look at a map of Yellowstone, none of the visitor centers or campgrounds within the park are in Montana, and all of Yellowstone is considered part of the Wyoming district Federal Court. A really interesting fact is that legal scholars have said that the section of the park that is in Idaho is a "Free Fire Zone" where a crime could be committed and you couldn't be put on trial because there is no jury pool that could be used.

https://nerdist.com/due-to-a-legal-l...national-park/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-E4OqN9tJnw