Peacocks Can't Fly

[Joe Guy]

Emotional support peacock pouts after United Airlines rejection
Chris McGinnis Updated 3:12 pm, Tuesday, January 30, 2018

If you are an “emotional support animal” that accompanies your owner on airline flights, your traveling days might be cut short in the future.

First, Delta Air Lines recently announced it will crack down on passengers who want to bring service or emotional support animals on its flights. The carrier now requires documentation that shows the critter is current on its shots, and that it will behave on the aircraft (mostly by not attacking other passengers or pooping in the aisle).
TravelSkills with Chris McGinnis sponsored by

And now United Airlines is drawing media attention for telling a female passenger that she could not bring her emotional support animal onto a flight out of Newark – even though the passenger said she actually purchased a separate ticket for her companion.

Oh, did we mention the animal in question was a peacock?

In case you’ve never been close to a peacock, they are really big for a bird, and they have incredibly long tails. And unusually loud calls.

So what was the problem? “This animal did not meet guidelines for a number of reasons, including its weight and size,” a United spokesperson said. “We explained this to the customer on three separate occasions before they arrived at the airport.”

The United official added that the airline has nothing against emotional support animals per se – “we know that some customers require an emotional support animal to assist them through their journey” – but there are limits.

And there are rules: United requires customers to provide “documentation from a medical professional” if they need a furry or feathered friend, and at least 48 hours advance notice of their plans.

“We are reviewing our existing policy and plan to share more soon,” the spokesperson said, which means that a Delta-like crackdown is in the wings.

In announcing its new policy, Delta noted that some passengers’ emotional support animals were creatures like turkeys, gliding possums, snakes and spiders.

source

[RayThom]

WTF -- a peacock as an emotional support animal? This woman must be a real nut job.



How To Roast A Peacock:
https://aussiehunter.org/simple-easy-di ... ck-recipe/

[Big RR]

It just gets sillier and sillier; anyone who wants can get their animal declared an emotional support animal. I handle the affairs of a few landlords in my area and the latest thing we have been dealing with is a spate of "emotional support" animals to flout the no pets clause of the lease. The law is fairly clear on what is needed, including a prescription by a healthcare professional, but we have had people go into court with prescriptions from their podiatrists and chiropractors, as well as letters from on line social workers who have never met them but, allegedly, have spoken with them on the phone. Usually the courts will side with the landlords, but it costs a lot of time and money to go to trial. And the sad thing is that it trivializes the true need of some people to have such a support animal.

[BoSoxGal]

And yet numerous studies show that pets boost health and immunity in their human companions, lower blood pressure and lessen the likelihood of depression - dogs especially, but pets in general. Birds can be excellent companion animals, especially parrots who are very intelligent - peacocks are fairly clever too. We are learning more and more about avian intelligence so who knows?

Any person alive could benefit from emotional support, and if an animal provides that, why not? Emotional support animals don’t require special training and most therapists are all too happy to write a note for one; but like our whole mental health system, too many people who need it don’t have actual access.

Landlords shouldn’t be dicks about emotional support animals. But then, many landlords are just dicks in general. They’ll leave their properties to decline and become grungy and have broken appliances and heaters and all kinds of BS, but begrudge the tenants some animal companionship. Yes, some animals cause property damage - but most don’t. I lived in rentals for 23 years so I’ve seen plenty of what is on the market in my many searches for housing over the years. Landlords who expect market rent for places that haven’t been painted in years and have 25 year old carpet, etc. Money-grubbing slumlords are rampant.

[Big RR]

I agree there are plenty of landlords who do that, but there are many who do not as well. Pets are generally not the problem, it's the people who own them and refuse to control them; between the damage many inflict on the premises to near impossibility to getting insurance covering liability due to tenants owning pets, many landlords opt to not permitting tenants to owning animals, especially dogs and cats; birds are less of a problem, and many would not object to ownership of a bird, although then you'd get the jerk who wants town a raptor or a peacock.

As for the landlords I represent, they are the opposite of the money grubbing slumlords of which you write and invest heavily in keeping their properties up. They will comply with the law for emotional support animals, but expect their tenants to do the same as well (and this is not just getting you podiatrist to write a note or getting a generic note from an online mill). They don't want to be dicks, but they want to protect their investment. Sadly, some just insist on owning pets; as a pet owner myself I understand this, but then there are plenty of local apartment complexes that permit this, so those who have no special need but want their pets should seek these out.

IMHO, the greater problem is with how this is used on airplanes; many people just want to bring their pets and claim they are emotional support animals so they cannot be barred from doing so (and usually do not have to pay for their pet's carriage or keep them in a carrier). unfortunately there are many others, like my wife, who are deathly allergic to animals (in her case cats and many dog breeds--she always carries an epi pen for it), and their demonstrable physical needs are ignored. The ADA has made the choice that some disabilities are worthy of being accommodated, while others are not, and it is pretty ridiculous--sure someone may feel better because they have their cat with them, but someone else may feel "better" if their airway is no closing due to an allergic response. And the more animals you have on board, the greater the chance of such problems.

[rubato]

peafowl are horrible birds with an eardrum-shattering cry. Owning one should be grounds for deportation and loss of citizenship.

yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

with an eardrum-shattering cry.

I was just about to make that point...

If you think a crying baby is bad, how would you like to be listening this going on and on during a coast-to-coast flight:

[Joe Guy]

To a person who requires emotional support, that call means 'help is here for you' and it is very soothing.

It's not nice to make fun of people who are needy. We should all have to suffer for that person to show how sympathetic we are.

[Bicycle Bill]

More on the bird — and the birdbrain who owns it:

The peacock, reportedly called Dexter, belongs to Brooklyn-based artist Ventiko, who documents its life on social media.

"I have never left the house without having at least one person react," Ventiko told a local culture website in 2017.

The artist, whose real name is not known, told Bedford and Bowery that the feathery giant "really changed my life in a positive way".

She originally bought Dexter and a peahen called Etta for an art installation. She later found them a new home from which Etta and her offspring disappeared.

The loss affected Dexter's behaviour and Ventiko came to his rescue after hearing that the bird was housed in a garage. Following a failed stint at an upstate New York farm, Ventiko finally decided to welcome Dexter into her Bushwick loft.

Now involved in her photography and performance art, the exotic bird appears to enjoy his New York life.

However, he avoids public transportation, like the subway, because Ventiko doesn't "want to traumatise him".
source

Owned by a performance artist, who bought two of them for an art installation and then ditched 'em.  Bird supposedly has its own Instagram account, and is "now involved in [its owner's] photography and performance art".

I'm not Sherlock Holmes, but you don't need to be in order to draw these conclusions:
1)  The bird is a rescue animal and prop, and in all likelihood has never been 'trained' as any kind of support animal.
2)  If it can be 'traumatised' (Brit spelling, since I sourced this from the BBC) by using public transportation, it's not suitable as a support animal.
3)  If it can be 'traumatised' by using public transportation, then it probably shouldn't be flying at all ... even in the baggage hold.
4)  This was just some more of her so-called 'performance art' — or the woman herself is nuttier than a PayDay bar.
     Either way she was, as my mother might have put it, "acting like some damn-fool idiot" ...

-"BB"-