[Cagdu] Fw: [oregon-l] California state Board of Guide Dogs over-stepping bounds

[Ken Volonte]

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cheree Heppe [mailto:cheree at dogsc4me.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2009 8:42 AM
> To: oregon-l at acb.org
> Subject: [oregon-l] California state Board of Guide Dogs over-stepping
> bounds
>
> Cheree Heppe here:
>
> The portion of a letter appended below circulated via E-mail very recently
> And as a concerned consumer, I am responding.
>
> Many blind consumers feel that having Options for dog guide training 
> outside
> of California represent their best Hope for acquiring a dog guide that can
> guide, exhibit proper social Behavior and have good health. Many who are 
> not
> directly tied into the California State Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind
> believe the Board's function to be superfluous, Stifling, repressive,
> controlling and self-serving. Many blind consumers prefer receiving 
> Services
> through non-patronizing, consumer empowering agencies.
>
> The California State Board of Guide Dogs does not have, but would like to
> garner national and yes, international authority to force dog guide 
> programs
> Or individuals coming into California to accept the Board's self-imposed,
> Self-administered program requirements. However, there is in the ADA a
> functionally based requirement for dog guide work and not a badging
> requirement. Basically, this Federal safeguard means that if it walks like 
> a
> duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck and is in all respects
> duck-like, then it's a duck, even if the duck doesn't wear the
> "Duckie-booo-boo" label from Duckie-boo-boo, Inc.
>
> The largest program for dog guide provision in California, Guide Dogs for
> the Blind and other organizations of the same type with histories of
> embezzlement and hostile take over's in their backgrounds, are trying to
> pressure other professionals in dog guide circles to support and use
> formalized efforts at re-making the dog guide landscape into their 
> localized
> image. The re-making is being formalized through a Master's program in dog
> guide training through such well-known schools as San Francisco State with
> an Orientation and Mobility degree requirement and all that extra fluff.
>
> Most blind consumers are excluded from obtaining degrees in these areas.
> It's another top down, we serve and you lick it and like it sort of 
> approach
> to blindness services.
>
> We don't like it. If I obtain a dog guide outside of California or move 
> into
> California with a dog guide from elsewhere, it is none of the California
> State Board of Guide Dog for the Blind's business where my dog guide
> originates or who helps me with my dog, especially when such help may be
> provided by qualified staff from competing dog guide schools outside
> California.
>
> If I prefer to owner train a dog guide and show others how to owner train, 
> I
> have the right under ADA to do this in any state of the U.S. I want to 
> live
> in. I am an American and have owner/trained since 1989. I traveled with a
> dog guide since 1970 and decided to owner/train after one of the 
> California
> program's dogs bit me in the face while still at the school for a 
> correction
> I gave the trained dog over a cat distraction. At that point, I decided I
> was going to stop being a victim. If I want to avoid a dog selection
> bottleneck to knowledgeably select a breed and caliber of dog I prefer, I
> have that right as a free citizen, a competent person and the ADA.
>
> The State Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind doesn't defend dog guide 
> owners
> who are injured by negligence from schools within California and doesn't
> address internal negligence, as I myself discovered some years ago. I
> determined then I would never utilize the California dog guide programs
> because of the damage the Guide Dog Board inflicted on the California dog
> guide programs, standards and quality.
>
> Trying to force the rest of the dog guide programs, some who have achieved
> world prominence over the past one hundred years, to kowtow to the
> California model is asinine.
>
> If you want to save California money, muzzle this Board's and it's 
> minions'
> bid to bite off more than it can chew and eliminate this Board, which, if 
> it
> ever had one, has out-lived its purpose.
>
> The following letter which brought this most recent California Board of
> Guide Dogs for the Blind activity to my attention circulated via E-mail 
> very
> recently as follows. The headers and date had been removed prior to
> forwarding, so I cannot include this information about thisdocument.
>
> SNIP
>
> The original text of this letter can be found at:
>
> etter.shtml
>
> All grammatical, spelling and typographical errors in the document below
>
> are those of California state employees, and not my own. I guess they're
>
> feeling strapped for cash and really want that $100 a year per instructor.
>
> And boy, I hope this doesn't mean TSE will just hunker down and get one or
>
> two instructors licensed by California and thereby limit who can come out
>
> here to do follow-up. Let the games commence. --Carla Department of
>
> Consumer Affairs Disability logo Letter to out-of-state schools Re:
>
> Compliance with California State Law Pertaining to Guide Dogs Dear
>
> Out-of-State School: On July 8, 1947, Governor Earl Warren signed into law
>
> the Guide Dog Act. This act was established to keep out maverick guide dog
>
> schools, protect the visually impaired by setting minimum standards of
>
> training, provide oversight for the disposition of donor funds and
>
> maintain minimum competency of training for licensed guide dog
>
> instructors. The purpose of this letter is twofold. First, the Board
>
> wishes to inform all out-of-state schools the statutes requiring
>
> compliance with licensure requirements for instruction in the state of
>
> California. Second, the Board has a process for compliance - namely the
>
> examination for an instructor license. If a candidate for licensure meets
>
> the minimum requirements to sit for the examination, they are eligible for
>
> licensure status. The examination is given twice per year and involves a
>
> one-day Written Exam and a one-day Oral/Practical Exam. Fingerprints are
>
> also required before taking the examination. First, California law
>
> requires a license for the sale or the giving of a guide dog. Business and
>
> Professions Code section 7210 requires that: It shall be unlawful for any
>
> person to sell, offer for sale, give, hire or furnish under any other
>
> arrangement, any guide dog or seeing-eye dog or to engage in the business
>
> or occupation of training any such dog unless he holds a valid and
>
> unimpaired license issued pursuant to the provisions of this chapter.
>
> Second, California law requires guide dog instructors to be licensed. An
>
> instructor "means a person who instructs blind persons in the use of guide
>
> dogs or who engages in the business of training, selling, hiring, or
>
> supplying guide dogs for the blind." California law as set forth in 16 CCR
>
> section 2284 requires: Anyone instructing a blind person in the use of a
>
> guide dog must be licensed by the Board, provided, however, that a school
>
> may employ apprentices to assist in such instruction. No apprentice shall
>
> act as an instructor except under the direct and immediate supervision of
>
> a licensed instructor. Last, B&P Code Section 7213 provides that:
>
> Violation of any provision of this chapter is a misdemeanor. The process
>
> for obtaining an instructor license begins with an examination. To qualify
>
> to take the examination, the individual must have the following
>
> qualifications as set forth in Statute (B&P Code Section 7209) -- which
>
> states the following: [P [erson to be eligible for examination as an
>
> instructor must (1) have a knowledge of the special problems of the blind
>
> and how to teach them, (2) be able to demonstrate by actual blindfold test
>
> under traffic conditions his ability to train guide dogs with whom a blind
>
> person would be safe, (3) be suited temperamentally and otherwise to
>
> instruct blind persons in the use of guide dogs, and, (4) have had at
>
> least three years actual experience, comprising such number of hours as
>
> the Board may require, as an instructor, and have handled twenty-two (22)
>
> man-dog units; or its equivalent, as determined by the Board, as an
>
> apprentice under a licensed instructor or under an instructor in a school
>
> satisfactory to the Board. Applicants for the instructor license are
>
> required to take both a written and practical/oral examination. Applicants
>
> must provide a 15-30 minute video demonstrating instruction skills. A
>
> panel of subject matter experts will review the video and evaluate the
>
> candidate's oral defense of said video. The five steps to licensing are
>
> available on the Board's Web site. Applicants may also obtain the
>
> application for examination at
>
> www.guidedogboard.ca.gov
>
> The instructor
>
> licenses are good for one year and are renewed each year thereafter for a
>
> fee of $100. Along with the fee, an instructor must provide the Board with
>
> evidence of continuing education (either 8 hours of course/seminar
>
> attendance or 16 hours of attendance at meetings of guide dog users or
>
> organizations of the blind). If you have any questions about the laws
>
> cited above, please feel free to contact me at (916) 574-7825. Thank you.
>
> Sincerely, ANTONETTE SORRICK Executive Officer, State Board of Guide Dogs
>
> for the Blind
>
> END SNIP
>
>
>
>