Pit Bulls as Service Dogs

[Panacea]

OK, the mods nixed the service dog discussions over on CS on this thread, but of course there were some statements I wanted to respond to since my best friend Evil Empryss (a long absent CS member) uses a service dog.

It's COMPLETELY LEGAL to bring a service dog (seeing eye, seizure sensing, therapy, etc) into ANY store in the US.

That being said, they need to be identified as such. I've met MANY pits (pure and mixes) that are excellent service dogs.

True . . . and what people should remember is the identification can be verbal. All the owner has to say is, "this is my service dog." It can't be someone elses. Even in the original thread, the EW admitted it was her daughter who had the medical condition. I could not bring Evil Empryss's service dog into a store, unless I was bringing her TO EE who was already in the store.

Most service dogs wear vests or specially collars identifying them as service dogs, but it's not a requirement in most states. But it does save the owner a lot of hassles, and keep most people (but not all) from trying to pet the dog (who is a working animal and should not be petted or even acknowledged unless it is a THERAPY dog, which is a different thing).

It's possible everyone knew her, but from her outburst I gather other people did remark on it and thus her getting yappy. That and her outburst says she KNOWS the dog isn't allowed there so she's going on the offensive like that. Yes, service dogs can be any breed or mix of breeds, but it's not terribly often that a pit-mix is trained as a guide/service animal. From my understanding it has to do with training methods and a high prey drive.

Pits and pit mixes may not be a favorite of professional service dog trainers for the reasons you cite, but that would not keep a private individual from training their own dog to be a service dog . . . which is completely allowable. EE did this with her dog (a Carolina Dog). Goldie was a great service dog, and understood that when they left the house she was on the clock and went from lovable pet to serious professional. (She's semi retired now after getting loose last year and getting hit by a car).

So the point is, don't be surprised by any breed. People use service dogs for a wide variety of reasons from blindness or hearing issues (most common) to physical disabilities (which is what Goldie did) to mental disabilities (they're becoming more common with returned vets who have PTSD and TBI).

I was stopped once with my service dog when we went into a Walmart, <snip> The door greeter actually chased me and grabbed my arm to stop me from going further into the store, and started giving me attitude for not stopping. <snip> The whole time my dog was sitting there watching us curiously and calmly, ignoring all the people passing us.

Just shows you have a well trained dog

The greeter was COMPLETELY inappropriate. NOTHING permits him to put his hands on you, not unless you have assaulted him, and he is defending himself. You should have complained to a manager for a couple of reasons.

1) Even if you were hearing and the dog was a pet, he was unjustified to touch you. He could run in front of you and block your path and verbally confront you, but that's it. Or he could call security or the cops. But he cannot touch you. That's battery.

2) You don't EVER get physical with someone who has a dog! That's just asking to get bitten and it would have been HIS fault, but you probably still would have had to deal with Animal Control and possibly risked your dog being listed as "vicious" for having bitten someone.

[draggar]

Actually, according to the ADA the service dog does NOT need to have a cape or anything designating it as a service dog - but it is a very good idea to have it identified as such.

Service dogs are also only allowed where the general public or where someone in the same situation would be allowed in, not just everywhere (for example, the general public is not allowed in a restaurant's kitchen).

Pits are not common mainly because of their reputation but for some disabilities I think they would make a good service dog. Hell, we're training Luna (a wolfdog) to be a service dog. They're intelligent and have the stamina to do the work. My wife's organization is taking greyhounds out of rescue and training them for service dogs (despite dozens of trainers nationwide telling us that they're too "stupid" to do the work - despite they've never worked one).

The greeter was completely inappropriate and opened the store up to one hell of a lawsuit in many ways.

[bara]

I would be against breeds that tend to be aggressive as service dogs. This has nothing to do with a dislike of dogs, quite the opposite in fact. Its my distrust of people.

While I agree that just about any breed could be trained for service, if some idiot does something to one of the more aggressive breed's owner it could be problematic even though the dog would have been nothing more than protecting its master. Then of course the dog would be put down.

Ive been loved on by many pit bulls and rots and dobermans. These are often considered aggressive breeds. The only dogs Ive ever seen that are dangerous are ones that are neglected, abused, trained to be violent or sick.

My dog is a puddle of goo that loves attention and is magnificent with kids.... to be honest Ive never heard of a beagle attack.WATCH OUT ITS SNOOPY... RUN..

[draggar]

There are very few examples of "aggressive" breeds - just poorly trained dogs.

Plus, who would decide what is an "aggressive" breed? My wife uses a Belgian Malinois as her primary service dog, a German Shepherd has her secondary, an Luna (vlcak / wolfdog) is being trained. ZJ (Malinois) is also going to be trained to be an AD.

All are considered "aggressive" and "dangerous" in some jurisdictions yet not many breeds would be able to do what my wife needs and not be an attraction.

[bainsidhe]

In the CS thread, I pretty much assumed the dog was a family pet, or else the woman would've identified the dog as a service dog. Regardless, unless the dog was HER service dog, it did not belong in the store. She was a grade A asshole.

I have utmost respect for service animals and I try to keep an open mind, but I can't help but quietly seethe when I see someone I believe is lying through their ass about their pet being a service animal. The worst offenders are always the folks with the little pocket pooches that are yipping, jumping and (not uncommonly) peeing onto the floor. Retail has made me bitter about some things.

Personally, I do wish service animals were always clearly marked as such. Dogs, especially large dogs, make me quite nervous. I'd freak out a bit if I were suddenly confronted by this woman and her large dog while shopping. That woman was an inconsiderate ass.

[guywithashovel]

I don't know much about service dogs, but it does seem to me that they should always be marked as such. Some people are uncomfortable around large dogs, and it would help if there could be a label to indicate that such animals are service dogs.

Also, we can argue and nitpick all we want about the whole "aggressive dog" thing, but fact of the matter is, some breeds really are more prone to aggression than others, and if you're going to have a dog like that for whatever reason, you need to accept that some people might be uncomfortable around the dog, even though you insist that he's the most gentle dog in the world.

[Android Kaeli]

I don't know much about service dogs, but it does seem to me that they should always be marked as such. Some people are uncomfortable around large dogs, and it would help if there could be a label to indicate that such animals are service dogs.

This. I'm not afraid of dogs, far from it actually, but I would have a better piece of mind at my job if service animals were labeled as such. I don't care what breed of dog the service animal is, be it a Great Dane or a Boxer, but I much rather the service dog has their vest on over taking the word of the owner that their dog IS a service animal. The big thing I'm always telling management over, is the fact that someone will eventually get bitten by a non-service dog. Not only would the owner be responsible for bringing the dog in, but the store AND the company would be as well for allowing the dog to come into the store in the first place.

I'm not against service animals, far from it actually. I'm against not only people bringing in their pets in and claiming they are service animals, but also not being able to do a damn thing about it.

[Andara Bledin]

Store, employees, and owner(s) should all be protected by the same law that requires that they allow the dog into the store in the first place.

However, it's very much worth keeping in mind that if the dog is acting unruly, whether it is a service dog or not, you can and should trespass the dog and it's owner until such time as the animal is once more under control.

The problem with service animal accouterments is that all that would do is give rise to a black market trading in such goods. The cheaters will still cheat and in some cases it would work against those with legitimate service animals, making it worse than useless.

Also worth remembering is that you can require that the customer tell you what service the animal performs. Most fakers won't be able to answer this question, and if they answer that it's some form of therapy dog, then their animal can be refused entry as that is not a recognized service under the law as it currently stands.

^-.-^

[Android Kaeli]

Key word: should. We should be protected, but I'm not too sure we would.

And it's odd that you should mention the requirement for the service. I was told by a previous ASM that we had to drop the issue once the owner said it was a service animal, regardless if it was or not. Because no matter what the service the animal performed, even if they did have one, we couldn't ask past "is your dog/cat/bird/etc a service animal?".

[Mongo Skruddgemire]

First of all, the American News Media wouldn't know a Pit Bull if it jumped up and licked them on the face. Some of the animals they've identified as a pit were frankly not even close.

And even if they weren't identifying mastiffs and chihuahuas as pit bulls, there is a metric fuck-ton of dogs out there that look a hell of a lot like the American Pit Bull Terrier.

Don't believe me? look at this page. I have a friend who is fostering one and even he took three tries to find the pit.

Secondly I think that there should be a cape or other obvious label identifying the dog animal (since it is no longer just dogs) as a service animal. Considering the rigorous training that they get and the tests they must pass before becoming a qualified service animal...they ought to be identified as such.

This would shut a lot of people up if they were identified as such since denying someone access to a place of business on the grounds of bringing in a service animal would be even more scary since a ban of a licensed service animal in the line of its work would make the ACLU Lawyer's jobs a lot easier.

[KabeRinnaul]

While a dog's temperament is going to depend far more on nurture than nature (training rather than breed), it's been my understanding that Chows and Poodles were among the most ill-tempered naturally.

And wanted to headdesk a bit when I googled "most aggressive dogs" to double-check that and the first hit listed Pit Bulls as the most aggressive solely on the basis of they're in the news a lot and often poorly trained.

[lordlundar]

My neighbor has a pitbull as one of their pets. Now they have the "beware of dog" sign up, high fence and keep him on a pretty short leash because, though it's more of a CYA situation. Why?

Because this pitbull is a big puppy. This dog will always keep a healthy distance from me and I swear, if I so much as flinch in his direction, he will bolt all the way back to his back porch.

[LewisLegion]

And what would happen if someone was in a hurry for an emergency or other reason, and accidentally forgot the dog's cape/identifiers at home? What if they were lost, or destroyed in a fire, or stolen and the person with the service dog was waiting for a replacement?

While I think service dogs SHOULD always have a cape or other unique ID on them just to reduce hassle, making it a requirement creates more problems than it solves. Besides, the cape/ID/harness is no indication...you can buy one off of multiple sites with no documentation whatsoever, or even make your own.

What is an indication is the behavior of the animal. Even if the dog IS a registered, trained, certified, gold-plated service dog, if it goes into an establishment and acts in a threatening or disruptive manner (except, obviously, for doing it's proper alerts) it and its owner can be asked to leave or even banned from the premises.

[Kyree]

*Crackes knuckles* Wall of text incoming.

For this debate, everyone here needs to know the history of the pit bull, from the time of their creation until today.

(This is taken from someone at another forum I am part of. No, it's not a pit bull forum, it's an animal forum in general. I only post this because how she wrote it, is almost word for word how I would have. It explains things perfectly.)

The term "pit bull" applies to several different breeds of medium-sized fighting terriers originally created through experimental crosses with bulldogs and terriers, originating in the 18th and 19th century Europe and America.The aim of these crosses was to combine the strength and bite of a bulldog with the athleticism, gameness, and courage of a terrier to create an all purpose farm dog that could catch and drive cattle and hogs, clear the barn of vermin, hunt, and just do miscellaneous frontier era ranching tasks while also being a great family companion and babysitter for the kids. Later, especially after the banning of bull baiting as a sport, the focus was taken off of them as all-purpose farm dogs and they were developed and standardized as the fighting dogs we know them as today. These breeds include The American Pit Bull Terrier, The Staffordshire Bull Terrier, The American Staffordshire Terrier, and the Bull Terrier.

The APBT is what one generally thinks of when they think "pit bull." They are a moderate, medium sized dog that should weigh between 20 and 55 pounds, though the preferred range is probably closer to 35-50 pounds. They are happy, cheerful, athletic, eager to please goofballs that love everyone but can work their asses off as incredibly game, efficient hunting dogs when called on to do so. Unlike the other 3 breeds, dudley (non-black) noses are allowed and this does tend to charachterize them, though historically, black noses were preferred.

This breed is the original Bull and Terrier, the dog that started it all, created from crosses of old-school bulldogs and English White Terriers and standardized in 1898. The United Kennel Club was the first registry to recognize the American Pit Bull Terrier, and was actually created for the purpose.

SBTs are the smallest version of the pit bull; and are basically the UK's APBTs. They are very popular and common in the UK, but are pretty darn uncommon in the US. They can have a bit of a stubborn streak, unlike the APBT, which is about the only difference in temperament between the two. They were standardized in 1935 and a parent club was formed, and the first SBTs were brought to America in the 70's. They tend to average around 16 inches or so at the shoulder and weigh around 20-30something pounds, and are just more compact dogs in general.

The Amstaff began with APBTs as foundation dogs, with some bulldog and mastiff added in to increase size. They were created in the 1930's almost exclusively for the ring, and are larger (up to 80 pounds) softer, less drivey, and less often used for work that APBTs.

The Bull Terrier is the 19th century version of the Amstaff, in that it was created for the bench and not the pit, though they were originally fought and used for ratting for a short period of time. Like the SBT they can be a bit more stubborn that APBTs, and are less drivey and less often worked than APBTs, like the Amstaff.

What about those big blue dogs that everyone calls pitbulls? What are Gotti and Razor's Edge? What about bluenose/rednose/nose color?


Those blue, big headed, low to the ground, wide chested dogs are not APBTs, they are mastiff/APBT/English bulldog mixes known as American Bullies. . APBTs should be around 30-50 pounds, moderately sized, and as a general rule, most good breeders don't even touch blue dogs. Blue is an amstaff color, a total gimmick, and was brought in when mastiffs were bred into Amstaffs, and then dummies crossed those Amstaffs with APBTs to get RARE BLUE APBTS. None of the early APBTs were blue, and it's stigmatized to the point where blue dogs are pretty much automatically considered curs by anyone with half a clue. A blue dog CAN be a good dog, as color obviously does not define temperament and drive, but given the people that breed blue dogs, it's just not as likely.

Gotti and Razor's edge are the two most notorious American Bully bloodlines that popularized the image of pitbulls as tough, badass, ugly, mutted up hippo dogs. They are essentially destroying APBTs through being crossed into and mutting up good lines, as well as perpetuating the image of pitbulls are angry, bloodthirsty baby-killers.

"Bluenose" and "Rednose" dogs are simply dogs with blue or red noses. They are not a different "type" or "breed" of APBT, and nose color has absolutley no bearing on working ability, gameness, or fighting ability, and in no way affect the temperament or quality of the dog despite what gimmicky Back yard breeders would have you believe.

So what? Those blue hippo dogs look cool, why is it a problem?

The problem with this aside from health issues is that you are breeding a dog (pit bull) that should have extreme bite inhibition and tolerance towards humans with a breed (mastiff) that is used for human bite and protection work. They then call these dogs pit bulls, and in turn are one of the largest causes of breed specific legislation against pit bulls. The vast majority of cases where you see a pit bull mauling someone, it is one of these bully mastiff crosses.

To take a powerful strong and determined dog that is bred to never let go and keep on doing whatever it takes on until its finished and then breed it to a dog with low bite inhibition towards humans creates a dangerous and unsound animal.

it is not the dogs fault that it is poorly bred and has temperament issues, but it is causing a wonderful breed to face extinction. Pits never belonged crossed out with a dog that has low tolerance for getting agitated and biting people. They are one of the major problems with the pit bull image and breed today.

Well bred APBTs do not bite people and they do not maul children. American Bullies do, because the bite inhibition that APBTs have been bred for is thrown out the window as soon as the dog is crossed with a mastiff or a bulldog. The media and legislators do not see the difference between the two, so when they ban pit bulls, it extends to good, sound, healthy dogs as well as the mixes that are responsible for the attacks. To the people who decide whether or not the breed is allowed to exist, these mutts and APBTs are one and the same.

The American Pit Bull Terrier was selectively bred for bite inhibition towards humans. There are very, very few breeds of dogs that have that going for them when it comes to human aggression. Pit fighting dogs were bred to be highly dog aggressive, but spent most of their life as household pets that played with the kids, and just hung out most of the time. Several old school fighting books mention the number of fights a given dog was in, and even some of the most well known dogs were only fought 3-5 times in their lives- and the rest of their 12+ years were spent at home, being good family pets. Human aggression was never, ever, EVER tolerated for these dogs.

In pit fighting, 2 human handlers and a referee or two are constantly in the pit with the dogs, handling them, pulling them apart to reposition bites, separating them and allowing them to scratch again, sticking their hands in their mouths to separate them...and all of this had to be done without getting bitten. Any dog that bit a handler, at any point, for any reason, even during the heat of a fight, was swiftly dealt with and usually shot on the spot. And so, those dogs were not bred- only the dogs with ENORMOUS control and bite inhibition passed on their genes. Pit bulls were never, ever used for human guard work because they were supposed to exhibit zero human aggression. A real, decently bred APBT is almost incapable of biting a human.

The problem we have now is that of idiots Back yard breeding oversized dogs while having zero knowledge of the breed and what it stands for, breeding dogs of poor temperament, and breeding in mastiffs, american bulldogs, and other breeds that ARE used for human guard work, destroying a couple of hundred years of hard work to get this breed to the point where it never, ever bit humans. They're thugs that want the meanest, toughest, most vicious dog they can get, because THEY have fallen into the trap the media has set for pit bulls and bought into the "oh my god they eat babies" BS- and so perpetuate everything negative that has ever been said about this breed.

These same people then don't socialize their dogs, torment them to make them "mean," chain them to a 10 pound logging chain, and leave them in a backyard somewhere to half starve and suffer. APBTs are insanely people oriented, and are high energy dogs- and if you take an unneutered pit bull, chain it in a backyard, never talk to it, never play with it, never exercise it, and never feed it...you very quickly end up with a sexually frustrated, pissed off, miserable, neurotic dog that has basically gone insane from lack of stimulation, lack of food, and lack of exercise. You have a recipe for disaster that was entirely created by stupid breeders and stupid owners.

What most media articles fail to leave out is that most fatal dog bites involve the following: (This is ALL fatal dog bites, not just ones reported as pit bulls)

-Unneutered male dogs
-That are left chained for long periods of time
-Are usually malnourished, parasite ridden, and otherwise ill
-Are all but completely unsocialized
-Are poorly bred

AND:
-They usually involve an unsupervised child
-Left alone with said hungry, miserable, emotionally starved dog
-Dog finally escapes its chain
-Dog goes nuts from years of misery, confinement, probable beatings, and near starvation
-Dog bites kid whose negligent parents should go to jail for leaving it alone with said dog in the first place. (And, if they are owners of the dog, for treating their dog in such a manner.)
-Media flips out because some random abused short haired mutt bites a kid, calls it a pit bull

(End quote)

The "pit bull" is no different than any other working terrier. If you want proof, look at a Jack Russell Terrier. What is the first thing that comes to your mind? A spit fire, reactive, tenacious, fearless dog. A dog that goes nutty most of the time, because it's owned by old people who never give it the stimulation it needs.

Pit bulls entire world revolves around it's family. They will do anything they can think of to please them. They were bred to do whatever their owner told them to do until either 1) they die, or 2) their owner says to stop.

That never quit attitude makes them great candidates for becoming a service dog. There are many, many pit bull service dogs. There are many pit bull search and rescue dogs. Why? because after all the other breeds are stopping from being hungry, tired, freezing cold, or overheating, the pit bull is all of the above but doesn't care. That person isn't found, their job is not done.

My foster dogs have gone on to great things:
Mo - Was adopted in march, Is now in advanced obedience about to go for her therapy dog test.
Boink - Was adopted in April and has since become a service dog for his owner.
Vito - Adopted last winter right before christmas. The family who adopted him had a deaf boxer who had many issues because of his disability. The wife also had balance issues. Vito has become a certified service dog for the wife, and has become an unofficial service dog for their dog. Most of the dogs' issues disappeared within months of Vito's calming presence.
Nugget - Nugget wasn't a normal foster, I was watching him for his owners because they had to move to a place that they couldn't have him. They moved after 4 months, and he has became a service dog for his owner.

So, with this terribly long wall of text, my opinion is that ANY breed of dog is just as viable as a service dog as any other. Like someone else said, there are breeds that will be better at certain things then others. A yorkie isn't going to make a great search and rescue dog, because it's so little and would get lost in the drifts of snow in the winter. But with a good owner, and proper training that yorkie can make an excellent therapy dog - going into hospitals and senior homes. With their love for people, pit bulls could be a great therapy dog, or a great search and rescue dog. They were bred to be an all purpose working dog, and continue to be so.

[Panacea]

I would be against breeds that tend to be aggressive as service dogs. This has nothing to do with a dislike of dogs, quite the opposite in fact. Its my distrust of people.

It's important to remember that some dogs thought of as "aggressive" are actually trained to be aggressive towards other animals not people.

Any dog can and will bite if provoked, and it's sometimes hard to know what provokes an animal if you don't know much about them. Too few pet owners take the time to learn how to be responsible pet owners and learn what triggers animal behaviors.

While I agree that just about any breed could be trained for service, if some idiot does something to one of the more aggressive breed's owner it could be problematic even though the dog would have been nothing more than protecting its master. Then of course the dog would be put down.

Breeds by nature are not aggressive. Some dog breeds are more dangerous than others in terms of how they bite; for example pit bulls bites are more serious than many other breeds because of how their jaws were selectively bred, and they were bred to keep biting once they started. That's not the same thing as naturally aggressive.

Service dog training by its very nature emphasizes a dog that ignores outside stimulus except when performing a specific task in some cases (for example, if it is a mental health service dog for a person with crowd issues, it would be trained to interpose itself between its owner and people, and nothing more). Goldie helps Evil Empryss with her physical disabilities; steadies her if she is having trouble walking, and helps her get up if she falls or gets stuck in a chair. The rest of the time she ignores all people, even if they try to interact with her.

My dog is a puddle of goo that loves attention and is magnificent with kids.... to be honest Ive never heard of a beagle attack.WATCH OUT ITS SNOOPY... RUN..

I say again . . . all dogs are capable of biting.

In the CS thread, I pretty much assumed the dog was a family pet, or else the woman would've identified the dog as a service dog. Regardless, unless the dog was HER service dog, it did not belong in the store. She was a grade A asshole.

There's no doubt in my mind the EW in that thread did not have a service dog, or she would have said so.

I have utmost respect for service animals and I try to keep an open mind, but I can't help but quietly seethe when I see someone I believe is lying through their ass about their pet being a service animal. The worst offenders are always the folks with the little pocket pooches that are yipping, jumping and (not uncommonly) peeing onto the floor. Retail has made me bitter about some things.

There are rules that regulate service dogs. If the dog is behaving badly with any of those behaviors, the owner can be asked to leave regardless of whether it is really a service animal or not.

Some of the very small breeds are being used as mental health service dogs, so you never know what you'll run into. If the dog is well behaved, then the owner is likely telling the truth.

Personally, I do wish service animals were always clearly marked as such. Dogs, especially large dogs, make me quite nervous. I'd freak out a bit if I were suddenly confronted by this woman and her large dog while shopping. That woman was an inconsiderate ass.

Understandable, but the ADA is specific on this. The dog does not have to be marked.

But yes, that woman was an inconsiderate ass.

This. I'm not afraid of dogs, far from it actually, but I would have a better piece of mind at my job if service animals were labeled as such. I don't care what breed of dog the service animal is, be it a Great Dane or a Boxer, but I much rather the service dog has their vest on over taking the word of the owner that their dog IS a service animal. The big thing I'm always telling management over, is the fact that someone will eventually get bitten by a non-service dog. Not only would the owner be responsible for bringing the dog in, but the store AND the company would be as well for allowing the dog to come into the store in the first place. .

A SC could always put a vest on a dog and make the same claim of a pet that is not actually a service dog. You can tell if they're telling the truth by the way the dog behaves. While you can't question the claim, if the dog misbehaves then the dog can be asked to leave.

IF a service dog bit someone, the owner is still liable. If a store let such a dog into their property (service animal or not) in good faith, then the law will shield them from liability.

You can't insist someone put a vest on a service dog; that would be a violation of the federal law. Most service dog owners I know DO use the vests because they don't want the hassle of arguing with store owners or other customers.

Store, employees, and owner(s) should all be protected by the same law that requires that they allow the dog into the store in the first place.

However, it's very much worth keeping in mind that if the dog is acting unruly, whether it is a service dog or not, you can and should trespass the dog and it's owner until such time as the animal is once more under control.

The problem with service animal accouterments is that all that would do is give rise to a black market trading in such goods. The cheaters will still cheat and in some cases it would work against those with legitimate service animals, making it worse than useless.

Also worth remembering is that you can require that the customer tell you what service the animal performs. Most fakers won't be able to answer this question, and if they answer that it's some form of therapy dog, then their animal can be refused entry as that is not a recognized service under the law as it currently stands.

^-.-^

Actually, I don't think you can ask what service the animal performs though most owners would probably tell you. EE would always call Goldie her "mobility dog." All the owner has to say is, "this is a service animal," and that's it.

Since you don't have to pay to register a service animal, there is no black market. EE made Goldie's service dog vest, but could have easily bought one online (she's cheap).

I got into an argument with a store owner in a small local town a couple of years ago over Goldie. He kept trying to kick us out and yelling about the Health Department, I kept yelling back, "Americans with Disabilities Act, Service Dog!"

He called the cops, who told him we were in the right.

Goldie never flinched, barked, whined, or acted as if anything was going on at all. She just sat there quietly.

But the ADA doesn't mean you can force a poorly trained or unruly animal on a store owner. If the animal is acting badly, you can ask it to leave on those grounds.