[jimworcs]

Gary,
Apology accepted, no problem... these things can really wind people up and I am sure the last thing your wife wanted was a 450 mile road trip. I can imagine your frustration.

I agree with PHX. Effectively, Southwest's current policy seems to be written so ambiguously that the passenger is left at the whim of any employee who takes a dislike to the pet or owner. It is ridiculously vague..

or any other characteristics that appear incompatible with air travel.

What the hell does that mean?

Butch,
I fully accept the the Federal Law in relation to the carriage of service animals. I have worked with people with disabilities all my life... however, I do not agree with this policy. I consider it to be dangerous to others and it is not a reasonable accommodation. It has lead to ridiculous situations of passengers travelling with "support geese". I do not consider dogs in the cabin of an aircraft to be safe. I am not anti-dog... I have a dog and understand how attached we become.

I consider someone who requires any assistance dog, should be assisted on the aircraft, the dog placed in the hold and reunited with the animal immediately on disembarkation. If necessary a carer should be allowed to travel with them. In any event, a dogs ability to assist a person with a disability in the confined space of an aircraft is severely limited, and for this and other reasons, I think it is inappropriate.

Phx..

Southwest only flies pets in the main cabin accompanied by a passenger. They do not accept animals for transportation in the baggage hold

I realise it is cheaper to transport in the cabin, than to make the handling arrangements required for animals. However, this can be recoved in charges. I do not feel that naimals belong in the cabin...period.