# Dogs on Metro North



## Guest

What's the official policy on dogs on Metro-North? I imagine it's guide dogs only? My second question is what the unofficial policy is. I often see people with dogs that aren't guide dogs on the trains and the conductors don't seem to have a problem. They generally are on the smaller size, but I saw a golden retriever once (apparently not a guide dog). I wonder because I have a very calm and obedient and relatively small labrador that I would like to my parent's house in a month for Thanksgiving. I'm wondering how to do this (short of getting a ride or renting a car).


----------



## 1702

Paraphrasing the info found under FAQ's on the MTA/MetroNorth website, small domestic pets are allowed if they are in kennels or similar containers OR securely controlled on leashes and don't annoy other customers.

Pets shouldn't occupy seats and are subject to approval by the conductor. Properly-harnessed service animals for persons with disabilities are always welcome on MetroNorth.

In the case of the golden retriever that you saw, seems the conductor was being lenient. Since your dog is on the smaller side, looks like you're good to go!


----------



## Guest

1702 said:


> Paraphrasing the info found under FAQ's on the MTA/MetroNorth website, small domestic pets are allowed if they are in kennels or similar containers OR securely controlled on leashes and don't annoy other customers.Pets shouldn't occupy seats and are subject to approval by the conductor. Properly-harnessed service animals for persons with disabilities are always welcome on MetroNorth.
> 
> In the case of the golden retriever that you saw, seems the conductor was being lenient. Since your dog is on the smaller side, looks like you're good to go!


Thanks. I'll look more carefully on the site for that. I couldn't find it last time. I hope there is some kind of very clear guideline - my labrador is small for a labrador but labradors aren't that much smaller than goldens. I'd hate to get to the station and then be turned down. On the other hand, she is very, very obedient and calm. Can't imagine her annoying anyone, especially if I stood near the doors (and I'd get off in Stamford).


----------



## haolerider

You might want to get specific approval for this trip, since you are talking about going at Thanksgiving time - which is usually the busiest time of the year for train travel - crowded trains - standees, etc.


----------



## Guest

haolerider said:


> You might want to get specific approval for this trip, since you are talking about going at Thanksgiving time - which is usually the busiest time of the year for train travel - crowded trains - standees, etc.


Do you mean just calling in advance? Do you think that would do any good when talking to a conductor actually on the train? I suppose it's worth a shot...


----------



## AlanB

Guest said:


> haolerider said:
> 
> 
> 
> You might want to get specific approval for this trip, since you are talking about going at Thanksgiving time - which is usually the busiest time of the year for train travel - crowded trains - standees, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you mean just calling in advance? Do you think that would do any good when talking to a conductor actually on the train? I suppose it's worth a shot...
Click to expand...

Well if you can get the person on the phone to commit names, direct phone #'s, or to send you an email, then that would be extremely helpful with a conductor on the train.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

*are subject to approval by the conductor*

_It does not matter if you got Emails , pictures or personal ok from president of railroad, the policy is still:_

_*are subject to approval by the conductor*_


----------



## haolerider

Dutchrailnut said:


> *are subject to approval by the conductor*_It does not matter if you got Emails , pictures or personal ok from president of railroad, the policy is still:_
> 
> _*are subject to approval by the conductor*_


_I think if he had an email or the name of someone at Metro-North, it would go a long way with the conductor and I understand the comments you have bolded, but sometimes common sense dictates decisions._


----------



## Dutchrailnut

The common sense thing is the Conductor having last word.

A person in Customer service or someone okaying the dog has never seen the dog or seen how it behaves.

Thats why the Conductor has the last word.

If you muzzled your dog a Conductor probably won't care but trains and lots of people are stresfull to dogs and any bites or just jumping up at people could cost MNCR a lawsuit.


----------



## battalion51

The muzzle doesn't sound like a bad idea. Echoing what dutchrailnut said, it really doesn't matter in the end what customer service says, in the end it's the Conductor's train, and about the only person who can override him is a trainmaster or Superintendent, who are next to impossible for a normal passenger to reach.


----------



## haolerider

battalion51 said:


> The muzzle doesn't sound like a bad idea. Echoing what dutchrailnut said, it really doesn't matter in the end what customer service says, in the end it's the Conductor's train, and about the only person who can override him is a trainmaster or Superintendent, who are next to impossible for a normal passenger to reach.


Probably the best idea is to leave the dog at home and go visit your family - with no worries.


----------



## Guest

battalion51 said:


> Probably the best idea is to leave the dog at home and go visit your family - with no worries.


Because you can't love dogs in an apartment overnight.

I think I'll be fine taking her. Thanks a lot for the info everyone.


----------



## Guest

Guest said:


> I often see people with dogs that aren't guide dogs on the trains and the conductors don't seem to have a problem. They generally are on the smaller size, but I saw a golden retriever once (apparently not a guide dog).


The golden retriever you saw might have been a service dog. Guide dogs are for people with visual impairments and service dogs help those with physical disabilities. In addition to helping people in wheelchairs and people with balance problems there are also service dog that help people with invisible disabilities including hearing dogs and seizure alert dogs.


----------



## George Harris

Guest said:


> Because you can't love dogs in an apartment overnight.


Is this law or apartment complex rules or what?

We do this when needed. Just make sure there is plenty of water out and food and the dog knows where to go. For us, one tile floor bathroom with a floor drain is her toilet when she cannot go outside, which includes days with heavy rain. Scoop the solids into the toilet, hose down the rest with the shower (flexible hose) and everybody is happy.


----------



## Chris

I know this is a very late response, but people will find this on Google, as I just did, and it needs to be corrected. Dogs on a leash are allowed on the Metro North, during off-peak hours, and have been for many years. They do not have to be service dogs of any kind, nor have any special permit, nor do they have to be in a container. They just have to be well-behaved and under the control of their people. They're technically not allowed on the seats, but many conductors don't mind if you spread out a garment or blanket on a seat, as long as you're not keeping any humans from sitting down. It varies a bit--some conductors don't like it, but they all know that it's allowed. Many are happy to see a dog.

A muzzle is not required, unless your dog is aggressive towards people, in which case he is not well-behaved, which means he shouldn't be on the train at all, right? So it's not needed at all. Very few dogs need to be muzzled, and people will obviously assume a dog who is muzzled is aggressive, which creates more problems.

We've ridden on the Hudson Line many times with two different dogs, neither of whom were small. I've seen Labs and Goldens, and they were not guide dogs. People mainly seem pleased to have them there.

Sure, you have to leave your dog alone in the apartment sometimes, but if you have to be gone for more than eight or nine hours, you really should get a dog-sitter, or dog walker, regardless of whether they're going to soil your floor. Most serious dog people I know in the city arrange for their dogs to be walked while they're at work. Leaving one alone for many long hours every day is cruel, unless you have several dogs, or other animals with which they are friendly (many dogs and cats form close friendships, for example). You can always designate a place in the apartment where the dog is allowed to relieve himself. But it's a better option to see that he or she is walked during the day.

And best of all to take him with you, whenever possible. Our dogs want to participate in every aspect of our lives. If you don't like that, don't get a dog. Metro North has an unusually advanced policy regarding dogs on trains, and it's never caused any problems--nor has it on the Boston 'T', where leashed dogs are likewise allowed. In most of Europe, leashed dogs of all sizes on trains is the norm, and nobody blinks an eye. Hopefully America will be that civilized someday.


----------



## the_traveler

ALSO BE AWARE THAT THIS THREAD IS ALMOST 5 YEARS OLD !!!!!!!!


----------



## rrdude

(I know it's five years old)

But this comment just cracked me up, "Our dogs want to participate in every aspect of our lives." Really, is that what the DOG told you?









Seems like YOU want the DOG to participate in every aspect of YOUR life. I'm not saying that's good or bad, just my observation.

As for me and my dog. It's a dog. Period. It drinks out of mud-puddles, and eats dead, nasty, smelling things it finds when I go hiking / walking with her. It's a dog. Period. Somewhat of a companion, and I'm sure it would like to go everywhere I go. (I assume) but it ain't coming with me to 99% of the places I go. Why? 'Cause it's a dog. Period.

My dog is scared of the sound cicadas make. Why? 'Cause it's a _dumb-ass_ dog too.



(I'm sure the dog-lovers of the world now hate me, and will tell me if I get my dog into doggie-therapy, everything will be "poochie".)


----------



## Chris

The fact that you refer to your dog as 'it' kind of makes any further discussion pointless. And color me impressed that people are responding to this ancient thread, when they don't have any new information to impart. I only did it because this thread still pops up near the top of the page when I google "Metro North, Dogs". People should be properly informed, and nobody here seemed to know what they were talking about. Regarding trains or dogs.


----------



## the_traveler

rrdude said:


> Really, is that what the DOG told you?


My dog tells me everything - including how our cats misbehaved while we were gone!


----------



## Chris

It's almost impossible to overstate how unusual Metro North's policy of allowing leashed well-behaved dogs outside a carrier on their trains really is--for the United States. Boston allows dogs on its subway trains. Seattle and San Francisco also allow leashed dogs on their light rail systems. And that's it.

We were just in Germany (without our dog--our friend Jerry, a very experienced dog-minder, stayed at our apartment with him with his own dog, for two weeks--he didn't accept nearly enough money for it either--you want quality friends, get a dog).

Not only are you allowed to just bring your dog on nearly any train, on a leash, with nobody saying a word about it--you go to one of their touchscreen ticket machines, and you see an onscreen button that says 'dog'. You buy a ticket for your dog, and on you go.

Think about all the extra revenue our rail systems miss out on by not going this way. Even Metro North doesn't charge you an extra penny for your pets. Which is nice, but I'd so much rather pay--say a child's fare--and have that practice extended to Amtrak, the MTA, etc.

The whole point of having a dog is to go places with him or her. Otherwise, get a cat. The whole point of having mass transit is to be able to go places without a car. We want to visit a friend of ours in Denver next year. She loves our dog, and we want to bring him, and he'll want to go with us (even rrdude admits that).

So to make this happen, I have to rent a car, burn gasoline, wear us down to a frazzle plotting routes, find dog-friendly motels, deal with the stress of driving for endless hours, put one more car on the nation's overcrowded highways, and then repeat the whole process to go home again. I'd much prefer the train. And my dog behaves perfectly, in trains and cars. He's perfectly house-trained, and will not relieve himself if there's a roof over his head. And people love meeting him, wherever we go.

It's just mindbogglingly stupid. If this was any kind of serious logistical problem, how come Europe, with a vastly superior rail system to ours, encourages people to buy tickets for their dogs and bring them along? German trains run on a schedule so tightly balanced that the slightest delay can lead to problems (that's why their trains nearly always run on time)--you think they'd screw that up to appease dog owners? They allow it because it works. And having been to Germany, I can say with absolute certainty that the dogs there are no friendlier or better-behaved than here--actually, a bit less friendly, on average. The people too, but that's a German thing--we didn't take it personally. 

So kudos to Metro North, which has had this policy for decades now, with nary a problem. If only the rest of the nation would pay attention. Dogs on mass transit works--in Canada, in Europe, in Australia, and everywhere it's been tried in the U.S.


----------



## rrdude

The problem in the USA doesn't rest with the dogs, _obviously_, it rest with the PEOPLE who don't train, clean-up after, or have control over their dogs. I imagine the US insurance carriers also have a say in this matter.


----------



## Bob Dylan

rrdude said:


> The problem in the USA doesn't rest with the dogs, _obviously_, it rest with the PEOPLE who don't train, clean-up after, or have control over their dogs. I imagine the US insurance carriers also have a say in this matter.


Nailed it for sure! Wonder if they could designate a "Dog Car" for Trains?? Oh yeah, they already have, the equipment on the Eagles/CONO/Sunset/Zephyr and Cardinal already qualify them for this designation! I love dogs too,at home and in the out of doors, but not on Trains :excl: :excl: :excl: All Helper Trained Dogs are usually better behaved than most of the passengers on LD Trains, so no problem with that! The real problem is where do they pee/poop etc. during the Loooooooong hauls on the LD Routes where there are no stops for hours and Im sure the Union doesnt want OBS to have to deal with Fido and Fluffy!(not to mention lawsuits when Lions/Tigers/Snakes/Hamsters /Birds etc. etc. arent allowed to go with their owners!) ^_^


----------



## guest

If you are in a sleeper with your dog, does the dog get free meals?


----------



## Jean

Just a small niggle, in the interests of accuracy, I can assure you that Guest Chris' assertion in post #20, that dogs are allowed on mass transit in Australia is wrong. Official guide dogs and other types of helper dogs (but they are very rare here) are, of course, allowed.

Jean


----------



## DET63

I have seen a number of dogs while traveling on Amtrak. Of course, they were painted on the sides of buses going the other way . . .

I think the regulations against taking dogs on LD Amtrak trains make a lot of sense, especially if issues regarding pet waste, allergies from pet dander, etc., are taken into consideration. Given that most European trains are short-haul, those issues, while perhaps still present, are not as likely to be a problem for travelers (and train crews) as they may be for American LD trains.


----------



## fredevad

I too was recently in Germany and the dogs on the trains was something I quickly noticed (the second week after we returned the car and started using our rail passes), no matter if it was a U-Bahn, S-Bahn, RE, ICE. Germany seems to be pretty dog friendly. There was a food vendor at the Hamburg harbor with a dog dish full of water next to the window labeled "Hund-Bar" that made me laugh.

I have to disagree about the German people not being friendly - I didn't talk to any strangers I would have considered unfriendly, they're just not as likely to start a conversation with someone they don't know. Everyone was helpful when I asked typical tourist questions (like where do I stand for second class, how do I know what car my reservation is in, etc).

BTW - Yes, I did buy a mug with a picture of an Inter City Express on it. Now every morning I can have "ICE Coffee".


----------



## Chris

rrdude said:


> The problem in the USA doesn't rest with the dogs, _obviously_, it rest with the PEOPLE who don't train, clean-up after, or have control over their dogs. I imagine the US insurance carriers also have a say in this matter.


People who don't train, clean-up after, or have control over their dogs are a whole lot less likely to want to take them on trips, or to to the trouble (and risk) of bringing them on mass transit--I saw plenty of badly-behaved dogs in Germany recently--I saw only well-behaved dogs on the trains. In fact, by allowing well-behaved dogs on trains (since all systems that allow leashed dogs stipulate the dogs must behave themselves) provides an incentive for people to train and socialize their dogs.

I don't believe insurance carriers have anything to do with the current policies. I've heard this before, and I've never seen the slightest evidence that it's true. If so, how come Metro North, the Boston T, and the Seattle & San Francisco transit systems allow large leashed dogs on their trains? Why is this practice so prevalent in Europe--and so successful that you almost never hear about it, because nothing ever goes wrong?

Honestly, I don't get why some people are so eager to bash their own country--America can handle this fine. There may have been a time, a century ago, when allowing dogs on trains would have meant scrubby backwoodsmen with fleabitten curs and coonhounds riding around with gentlefolk, but most dogs are cleaner than your average human--they don't sweat, they're usually treated with compounds to prevent fleas and other nasties, they're inoculated against rabies and other diseases (canine rabies is eradicated from North America--official), and the worst most of them would ever want to do is lick you. My dog wouldn't even do that unless you gave him reason to think you'd like it.

Amtrak stopped allowing dogs in baggage cars because (prepare for irony here) animal welfare groups were concerned over the dogs going too long without water or rest stops. They decided it would be easier to just ban them outright--somehow never occurred to them to look at the superior solution embraced by the superior European railway systems.

You can rationalize it nine ways to Sunday, but it's a dumb misguided misinformed misbegotten policy, that is holding back mass transit in this country. The number of households with dogs is massive, and perpetually on the rise, and people will do what they have to in order to travel with their best friends. Which means more cars on the road. Which means fewer dollars for Amtrak.

And yes, this thread is five years old, but it's still the second search result on the page when I google "Metro North, Dogs". And that's because the Metro North still allows dogs. On a leash. As it has for decades. And not a single lawsuit. Because dogs on trains WORKS.


----------



## Chris

DET63 said:


> I have seen a number of dogs while traveling on Amtrak. Of course, they were painted on the sides of buses going the other way . . .
> 
> I think the regulations against taking dogs on LD Amtrak trains make a lot of sense, especially if issues regarding pet waste, allergies from pet dander, etc., are taken into consideration. Given that most European trains are short-haul, those issues, while perhaps still present, are not as likely to be a problem for travelers (and train crews) as they may be for American LD trains.


A fair point, but dogs are banned from ALL Amtrak trains, not just long distance ones. A valid compromise would be to allow people to book a series of shorter hops to get where they're going--more revenue for Amtrak, more options for American travelers with pets. Dogs can go a long time without relieving themselves--after all, people with house trained dogs go to sleep every night, and wake up knowing that their chums are patiently waiting for them to get up and take them out--dogs have a very devout policy of not ****ing where they sleep, which they only break when absolutely necessary. The occasional accident would happen--not nearly as bad as the state of the bathrooms I've seen on some U.S. trains. Ew. :\

Here's a brief piece on how Amtrak's current policy came into being--

http://www.narprail.org/cms/index.php/resources/more/pet/

I'm sure the problem was worse at one time, but the dog-keeping culture has changed, and Amtrak should change with it. Or else resign itself to being dismissed as a travel option by millions of Americans.

Allergies keep getting raised as an issue, but again, there's just no evidence this is real. There are enough trains around the world that do allow dogs and cats, in or out of carriers, to know that's not a serious problem. People with pet allergies need very close prolonged contact to be affected, and can always change cars--or avoid cars designated as pet-friendly. In practice, probably even this measure would be unnecessary--it's not a problem on Metro North. No transit system can guarantee an allergen-free environment--might as well ban all peanuts from the trains--they can actually kill people. Nobody goes into anaphylactic shock from being near a dog. Can I get strong perfumes and colognes banned from public conveyances because they make my eyes water?

In Moscow, feral dogs routinely enter the Metro (enabled by the type of gates they use), and ride around on their own--they've learned to use the trains to get around. People mainly don't mind them--many actually enjoy seeing them. Incredibly adaptable animals. Now if they were leaving messes all over the floors, and bringing on serious allergic attacks, don't you think there'd be some kind of public outcry to stop this?

Americans have a lot of good qualities, but we seem to have a larger percentage of anal-retentives than most countries.


----------



## Chris

fredevad said:


> I too was recently in Germany and the dogs on the trains was something I quickly noticed (the second week after we returned the car and started using our rail passes), no matter if it was a U-Bahn, S-Bahn, RE, ICE. Germany seems to be pretty dog friendly. There was a food vendor at the Hamburg harbor with a dog dish full of water next to the window labeled "Hund-Bar" that made me laugh.
> 
> I have to disagree about the German people not being friendly - I didn't talk to any strangers I would have considered unfriendly, they're just not as likely to start a conversation with someone they don't know. Everyone was helpful when I asked typical tourist questions (like where do I stand for second class, how do I know what car my reservation is in, etc).
> 
> BTW - Yes, I did buy a mug with a picture of an Inter City Express on it. Now every morning I can have "ICE Coffee".



I met many friendly helpful people there, but they are much more reserved, particularly with strangers. There's a good deal of regional variation, as there is in any country, and younger people tend to be more outgoing. They also consider it socially acceptable to stare at you (this has been remarked upon by many travelers there). Hey, it's their country. And they have a LOT of good ideas we could learn from. Like, you know, dogs on trains.

I saw nothing about the dogs there that would make them any more suitable as riding companions on a train than most American dogs I meet (and I go out of my way to meet dogs wherever I go, as you've probably gathered). I saw quite a few German dogs who were not well behaved or friendly at all--I just never saw them on trains. Nor have I seen any bad behavior from dogs on the Metro North. Something about the environment of the train tends to mute canine behavior. They're either very subdued, or just plain delighted to be going somewhere with their people.

And as the article I posted above makes clear, they were allowed on Amtrak trains--in compartments--until 1976. They were not banned for biting people, or for causing allergy attacks, or for peeing onboard, or for making noise. They were banned from passenger cars because Amtrak couldn't be bothered to vacuum up some stray hair, and then from baggage cars because Amtrak couldn't be bothered to make sure they got to their destinations safely.

And this is just one reason why Amtrak has been such a huge success in recent decades. Irony alert.


----------



## Chris

Jean said:


> Just a small niggle, in the interests of accuracy, I can assure you that Guest Chris' assertion in post #20, that dogs are allowed on mass transit in Australia is wrong. Official guide dogs and other types of helper dogs (but they are very rare here) are, of course, allowed.
> 
> Jean


I didn't say they were allowed on all trains (that's not true even in Europe, though most rail systems there are dog-friendly), but FYI--

http://www.metlinkmelbourne.com.au/using-public-transport/animals-on-public-transport/

Never been to Melbourne? Hey, I've never been to San Francisco.


----------



## Emily

*********************** Year Old Topic *********************************

Thank you to Chris Guest. I had heard rumors about dogs being allowed on off-peak trains. I have a friend in NYC that I vacationed with and she, her dog and her mom all love my dog. They are always asking me to come visit with her but driving to and parking in the city feels like a nightmare. Now I believe I will go by train.


----------

