# Is Marriott finally getting more Pet Friendly?



## pwrshift (Feb 11, 2007)

Marriott may be getting more pet friendly. If you go to their site and click on 'more options' you get a second page. In the second section down (Keyword search) you can type in PETS WELCOME and find 88 pages of resorts that permit you and your pet for a fee. Some of the fees are for the duration of your stay, not daily. But, if you're staying only one night the fee is quite high in many cases -- better to stay at Westin.

http://marriott.com/search/findHotels.mihttp://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260072451052

Brian


----------



## Steve (Feb 11, 2007)

I hope Marriott is finally catching on and getting more pet friendly.  Marriott is really behind in this area...and they lose a lot of business as a result.  If only MVCI would become more pet friendly...that would be a major accomplishment!!!  

(Of course, a few anti-pet extremists will probably be along shortly to proclaim how they will never stay in any Marriott that allows pets.  And how just because they don't travel with their pet...or either have or know someone with allergies...somehow that justifies their belief that NO ONE should EVER be allowed to stay in ANY VILLA of ANY Marriott with a pet.)

It's a shame the intolerance that some people have towards pets.  But society is changing in this area...and Marriott needs to start catering to the large numbers of people who want to travel with their pets.

Steve


----------



## Jestjoan (Feb 11, 2007)

Speaking of intolerance...............


----------



## BocaBum99 (Feb 11, 2007)

My family is very allergic to cat and dog dander.  So, I want the NO PETS policies enforced and reiterated.  I also want fines imposed to violators to pay for thorough cleaning of those units which is only fair.

It is not possible to get rid of that dander in a simple cleaning.  If you want to bring your pet on vacation, send them to a pet hotel.

I think it's wrong that people impose suffering on others by bringing their pets into timeshares.  You can have your pets.  But don't force me to have them, too.

I felt the same way about smoke and I am thrilled that no smoking rules have been created and are now being enforced.  Aruba has a $300 fine if you are caught smoking in your room.  We need to same rules for pets.


----------



## Beverley (Feb 11, 2007)

I suppose I will set my self up for a bashing, however, ..... I like animals very much, but I am extremely allergic to cats indoors and dogs.  As a matter of fact, my sister is so alergic to dogs that her throat closes up after being in a closed in area with someone who has dog hair on their coat.  

There was a time we had 12 cats ... all outside cats.... they all lived long healthy lives, and so do I (so far ), enjoying there company without an asthma attack.  

When we purchased Marriott we asked if pets were allowed.  If the answer was yes we woud not have made the purchase.

Sorry ... I'm for the list so that I know which hotels NOT to book. I would not be happy if my timeshare was pet friendly.  I would even prefer that certain units be set aside to accomodate people who need service animals.

Beverley


----------



## jesuis1837 (Feb 11, 2007)

You couldnt say better Boca, totally agree with you there!


----------



## Larry (Feb 11, 2007)

BocaBum99 said:


> My family is very allergic to cat and dog dander.  So, I want the NO PETS policies enforced and reiterated.  I also want fines imposed to violators to pay for thorough cleaning of those units which is only fair.
> 
> It is not possible to get rid of that dander in a simple cleaning.  If you want to bring your pet on vacation, send them to a pet hotel.
> 
> ...



Totally agree !!!!!


----------



## Steve (Feb 11, 2007)

*It didn't take long...*

Jestjoan, Boca, etc...

You all have certainly proved my point!.  Intolerance lives.  The idea that there could be pet friendly buildings or pet friendly units doesn't even occur to some of you.  That way those with allergies could be separate from those with pets. 

But maybe some of you just couldn't care less how those who like to travel with their pets feel.  You want EVERY villa in EVERY resort to be completely free from pets.  That's what makes it intolerant.  I'm not suggesting that EVERY villa in EVERY resort be pet friendly.  I think there should be "pet friendly villas" and "no pet villas".  Much more inclusive way to think.

Steve


----------



## Cathy in Boston (Feb 11, 2007)

Some if not all of the Residence Inns allow pets.  They restrict it to a certain area of the hotel, first floor only, near the exit that is closest to the doggy toilet area (they provide a plastic baggie dispenser and a trash can - though an amazing number of people just sort of ignore this and leave their dog's gifts there for the rest of us to enjoy).  We've stayed at one in Baltimore many times (my father lives nearby), both with and without our dog.  They seem to do an excellent job of keeping the hotel clean and cleaning the rooms afterwards.  They charge a $75 "deep cleaning fee" and I think it is $10per night over the regular price for the room.


----------



## dougp26364 (Feb 11, 2007)

While I would love to take our dog with us on vacation, I can certainly understand NOT doing so because of others allergic reactions. At one point in my life I was so allergic to cat's that I could not go into a house that had a cat in it wether the cat was there at the time or not. That allergy has since toned itself down some but, I'm very aware of how sensitive to animal dander some people can be. 

The only way I can see allowing pets is if there was a way to completely eliminate any potential allergins from the room. Keep in mind that people allow their pets on their home furnishings, beds et..... I also know people who have never taken the time to properly house break their animals or do not clean out the liter box as often as is needed. 

Another issue will be noise. While one of our dogs is extremely quite, the other is just as vocal. He doesn't bark when we put him in his crate. He literally screams when we're gone. I bet he'd be real popular staying next to anyone in a timeshare.

And let's not forget the damage pets can do to a timeshare. Cat urine has to be one of the most difficult smells to get out of carpeting I've ever seen. I've also seen cats tear up furniture with their claws and dogs chew the heck out of any woodwork they can find. I'm reasonaby certain most of us wouldn't like having to pick up the dime in higher MF's to cover the cost of even a few destructive pets.


----------



## irish (Feb 11, 2007)

okay, i know i'm gonna get slammed here but i'm gonna say it anyway. i can't smoke in the room because of allergies etc.. but people are now allowed to bring there pets??? what about the allergies invloved there?? what about people who are deathly afraid of dogs?? liability questions? maintenance fees increasing due to the animal destroying the furniture and evacuating on the rug? 
i have pets also but i don't feel the need to bring them on vacation.


----------



## Smooth Air (Feb 11, 2007)

I can understand both sides of this debate. I love my Siamese cat. We are very attached to one another. He sleeps with me every night. When I go away I have a petsitter come in twice a day for an hour each time to keep him company. I phone home to see if he is ok. I miss him terribly when I am away. I am his "Mommy". I would love to be able to have him there with me. But...on the other hand, when I go to my villa @ Ocean Pointe I don't want to climb into bed @ night knowing that somebody else's dog ( or cat!) slept there the night before w/ his Mommy & Daddy! Unless Marriott can come up w/ a way to have "Pet Floors/Rooms" I can't see this happening. It's not about intolerance. It's just common sense.


----------



## Jeni (Feb 11, 2007)

Steve said:


> Jestjoan, Boca, etc...
> 
> You all have certainly proved my point!.  Intolerance lives.  The idea that there could be pet friendly buildings or pet friendly units doesn't even occur to some of you.  That way those with allergies could be separate from those with pets.
> 
> ...




Pet friendly buildings and units may eliminate the dander/allergy issue, but not the potential noise issue...or other issues. We love our 2 dogs and 2 cats, but I wouldn't want to hear our dogs barking, or someone else's dog(s) barking while I am on vacation. And what about pet waste? Are you now going to say that EVERYONE who travels with a pet cleans up the waste?

Jeni


----------



## dougp26364 (Feb 12, 2007)

irish said:


> okay, i know i'm gonna get slammed here but i'm gonna say it anyway. i can't smoke in the room because of allergies etc.. but people are now allowed to bring there pets??? what about the allergies invloved there?? what about people who are deathly afraid of dogs?? liability questions? maintenance fees increasing due to the animal destroying the furniture and evacuating on the rug?
> i have pets also but i don't feel the need to bring them on vacation.



Considering that animal allergies are more predominant that smoke allergies, I agree with you. I don't care for either the smell of smoke or someone else's pet in my Villa when I check in.


----------



## ondeadlin (Feb 12, 2007)

From a timeshare perspective, I think allowing pets and allowing smoking are very similar issues in one important way: The vast majority of owners would prefer neither be allowed in their units.

This puts boards in a position where they're going to usually ban both.

The challenges are also similar in the respect that "pet friendly" rooms will - like smoking rooms - always cost more to clean and maintain. Is that fair? Should a large cleaning charge be assessed? What about the owners who aren't do good about picking up after their pets? What about dogs that bark and cats that scratch?

Most places would just rather avoid all these issues, and I can't say I blame them (even though I've always owned a dog my entire life and couldn't imagine not having one).


----------



## dougp26364 (Feb 12, 2007)

ondeadlin said:


> From a timeshare perspective, I think allowing pets and allowing smoking are very similar issues in one important way: The vast majority of owners would prefer neither be allowed in their units.
> 
> This puts boards in a position where they're going to usually ban both.
> 
> ...



I think you're wrong on one point. While I agree that the majority now favors non-smoking, I believe the vast majority would prefer to bring their pets on vacation with them. While smokers may have become the minority pet owners are still the norm. Almost every house around us at least has at least one pet and almost everyone I know has a pet of some sort or another.

Many of those pet owners are distressed to leave their pets at home and only do so because they are not allowed to take them. If they were allowed, I'm pretty sure they'd take them with them rather than pay to have someone watch them.


----------



## Cathy in Boston (Feb 12, 2007)

Actually, I doubt I would ever bring my dog on an actual vacation.  We bring her only to Baltimore, and the only reason is so my 81-year-old father, who will not get on a plane to come see us, can enjoy seeing her.

And in my opinion, even if a hotel allows dogs, if you can't keep your dog from barking loudly and if you are not willing to clean up after him or her, you should not be allowed back with the dog.  Then again, maybe you should not have a dog to begin with.


----------



## m61376 (Feb 12, 2007)

Although I am not allergic, my husband and daughters are very allergic to animals and left-over dander would ruin a vacation. Yes- they can visit a friend's home with an animal, but must take medication. They should not have to take medication for a week and suffer with the discomfort or allergic reactions because someone brought a dog the previous week. They should not have to avoid an area because dog owner(s) are congregated outside. Their allergies don't infringe on others' vacations; others, and their animals, shouldn't infringe on their's.

Secondly, we all know that there are people who, shall we say, lack common courtesy. Do you honestly believe that even if dogs were only allowed in certain units they wouldn't venture elsewhere? Are owners going to be monitoring their pets all day- of course not? If dogs are allowed in villas they will find their way around the pool, around the beach, etc., which is a big problem for those who suffer from allergies and a potentially dangerous situation. Even great animals can be overwhelmed by lots of people, innocent little hands reaching out to pet them, etc. Everyone I know who has an animal has, at one time or another, scolded the dog for snapping/growling/nipping even at a family member. 

Marriott sold owners a vacation which they have the right to continue to be able to enjoy. Changing the smoking rules prevents owners from infringing upon each others' useage/enjoyment and heightens physical safety/personal health. Starting to allow dogs would infringe upon others' use and pose a threat to safety/health. I would be furious if Marriott started to allow dogs to share the villas.

Of course, service animals fall into a different category. For the rare occasion where this is necessary a thorough cleaning is the responsibility of the ownership as a whole. Service animals are so well-trained that misbehavior is not an issue.


----------



## ondeadlin (Feb 12, 2007)

I think you're taking your personal feelings and trying to extend them to a majority view, i.e. most people want to be bring their pet on vacation.

I love my dog. Absolutely love him. My parents love their dog. My mother in law loves her dog. None of us - and I took an e-mail poll - would ever consider bringing them on vacation even if we were allowed. The reasons why - I asked - varied from "why would I want the hassel?" to "I think it would be more stressful than enjoyable for XXX".

So I'm going to respectfully disagree, and not just based on my own little poll, but because I travel a lot and have never heard many people voicing a desire to do this.


----------



## dougp26364 (Feb 12, 2007)

ondeadlin said:


> I think you're taking your personal feelings and trying to extend them to a majority view, i.e. most people want to be bring their pet on vacation.
> 
> I love my dog. Absolutely love him. My parents love their dog. My mother in law loves her dog. None of us - and I took an e-mail poll - would ever consider bringing them on vacation even if we were allowed. The reasons why - I asked - varied from "why would I want the hassel?" to "I think it would be more stressful than enjoyable for XXX".
> 
> So I'm going to respectfully disagree, and not just based on my own little poll, but because I travel a lot and have never heard many people voicing a desire to do this.



Personally, I hope you're right. It's just that with our friends the feelings run the other way.


----------



## Hoc (Feb 12, 2007)

Rather than repeat myself, I'll just point to this thread, which discusses the topic ad nauseum.  The fact is that there are just some bigots out there who hate dogs and/or cats, or the fact that people can have such a close relationship with them, that they would want to bring them on a vacation.  No amount of reason will change their minds, and they always bring up irrelevant issues, like allergies, phobias, and usually poop and germs come up somewhere.  All irrelevant, all unfounded.  But you'll never convince them of that.  So, I don't even bother trying anymore.


----------



## Cathy in Boston (Feb 12, 2007)

Okay after much internal debate, I am going to go ahead and assume that the post above is meant as a joke.


----------



## m61376 (Feb 12, 2007)

and in case you weren't kidding...:
Hoc-
Gee...I grew up with a dog, who died on my 21st birthday. The following month I married the love of my life, who once quipped that I would have to choose between him and a dog, since he is very allergic and is asthmatic- so a dog truly poses a health risk (trust me- not "unfounded"!!). Unfortunately my kids inherited his allergies. Sorry if wanting to spend quality time with my family without anyone being sick makes me a bigot :annoyed: :annoyed: :annoyed: !!!!


----------



## Steve (Feb 12, 2007)

m61376 said:


> Their allergies don't infringe on others' vacations; others, and their animals, shouldn't infringe on their's.



Actually, if their allergies are the reason that I can't stay with my dog in ANY villa of ANY Marriott timeshare, then your family's allergies are most definitely infringing on my vacations.  

Furthermore, the fact that you can't bear the idea that there could be "pet friendly" villas and "no pet" villas is extremely intolerant...whether you choose to acknowledge it or not.

Steve


----------



## Hoc (Feb 12, 2007)

m61376 said:


> and in case you weren't kidding...:
> Hoc-
> Gee...I grew up with a dog, who died on my 21st birthday. The following month I married the love of my life, who once quipped that I would have to choose between him and a dog, since he is very allergic and is asthmatic- so a dog truly poses a health risk (trust me- not "unfounded"!!). Unfortunately my kids inherited his allergies. Sorry if wanting to spend quality time with my family without anyone being sick makes me a bigot :annoyed: :annoyed: :annoyed: !!!!



And you tell me how that affects you -- or him -- when you are staying in a room that has never had a dog there, in a building that has never had a dog there, just because another room in another building is designated as a "pet" room.

Unfounded.


----------



## m61376 (Feb 12, 2007)

Hoc said:


> And you tell me how that affects you -- or him -- when you are staying in a room that has never had a dog there, in a building that has never had a dog there, just because another room in another building is designated as a "pet" room.
> 
> Unfounded.



It doesn't- provided that the dog stays in the room and is relatively quiet. The problem is that the dog doesn't stay in the room 24/7. The problem is on the elevator (which is potentially a big issue) and the grounds. Separate buildings isn't practical at many resorts which have only a few large buildings. And- let's be honest- you may be extremely considerate of others and be careful with your pets. However, many people aren't. I would hate to have to leave the area where we are sitting because someone adjacent to us brings along an animal. And- let's face it- it is sometimes hard enough to get people to properly supervise their kids. I think allowing dogs at the resorts would be inviting problems. Sorry if that categorizes me as intolerant Steve....


----------



## TomF (Feb 13, 2007)

Humans trump pets.  Period.


----------



## winger (Feb 13, 2007)

My son has had many allergies since he was about 1 yo. His allergy to cats and dogs is 4 out of scale of 6.  NO DOGS OR CATS AT MARRIOTTS, please!


----------



## dougp26364 (Feb 13, 2007)

Hoc said:


> Rather than repeat myself, I'll just point to this thread, which discusses the topic ad nauseum.  The fact is that there are just some bigots out there who hate dogs and/or cats, or the fact that people can have such a close relationship with them, that they would want to bring them on a vacation.  No amount of reason will change their minds, and they always bring up irrelevant issues, like allergies, phobias, and usually poop and germs come up somewhere.  All irrelevant, all unfounded.  But you'll never convince them of that.  So, I don't even bother trying anymore.



Allergies are not irrelevant to some people. At one point in time, my allergies to cats was so dibilitating that I could not breath through my nose nor see through my eyes if I entered a room where a cat had been. My eyes would literally swell shut. 

What brought this allergic reaction on I'll never know. Up until my sophmore year in high school, I didn't have a problem with cats. Then one afternoon I had a friends siamese cat on my lap and all heck broke loose. From that point forward I've had issues with cat dander but, after several years the allergy has susdided enough that I can be in the same room with a cat, I just can't hold them on my lap or allow them to rub up against my legs. 

My step-son has a serious allergy to cats that renders him unable to breath through his nose when exposed to cat hair/dander. This cause him a lot of problems and would  be a major problem while on vacation.

I'm NOT an animal bigot. We own one dog and keep my step-daughter dog since he's very vocal (just doesn't work in an apartment). We also have two birds. Personally, I'd LOVE to take my little Scotty dog with me on vacation. She's house broke, doesn't bark at anything and plays well with strangers. But, having first hand experience with your "irrelevant" allergies, I know what she could do to someone with a severe reaction to animal dander and how uncomfortable she could make someone with a mild/moderate reaction. 

I'm not an animal bigot. I just understand what an allergic reaction can be like.


----------



## pwrshift (Feb 13, 2007)

*NYC is going to the dogs!*



TomF said:


> Humans trump pets. Period.


 
Even Trump loves pets!  

The tide is turning:

http://www.nycvisit.com/content/index.cfm?pagePkey=1442

As you can see from this article, the big NYC hotel chains are more dog friendly and Marriott appears to be adapting ... with the Marquis and others.

The Westin in Hilton Head is a great place for dogs too ... they have special rooms set aside for pet owners and provide a Heavenly Doggie Bed, a food dish, room service for Rover if needed, and even pet sitters if you want to go to their Barony Restaurant for dinner!  It's surrounded by the Marriott Barony TS where they don't permit dogs, but I guess the Westin was there first!     There are certain rules that Westin insists on for pet walking, noise, etc. and the times you can take pets to the beach but you and your pet are very welcome.  

Brian


----------



## Hoc (Feb 13, 2007)

dougp26364 said:


> Allergies are not irrelevant to some people. At one point in time, my allergies to cats was so dibilitating that I could not breath through my nose nor see through my eyes if I entered a room where a cat had been. My eyes would literally swell shut.



I've said it before, and I'll say it one more time: pet dander allergies are *irrelevant* if you are staying in a non-pets room, and are not being exposed to it.

I personally have an allergy to bees.  Yet, I make no demands that resorts do not grow flowers on the grounds, despite the fact that they attract bees.  I recognize my responsibility to live in this world, and do not expect the world to adapt to my particular impairments.  And, let's face it, on a scale of 1 to 10, pet dander allergies are extremely minor when compared to bee alergies or peanut allergies, both of which carry a severe risk of anaphylactic shock.  Getting rid of the anti-pet prejudices, people with dander allergies have to recognize this to be true.

Yet, you don't see resorts prohibiting the eating of peanuts in elevators, in the rooms or on the premises.  You don't see resorts undertake a bee eradication program, or cutting down all of the flowers and bee-attracting plants from the grounds.  Nor do you see people demanding that they do so.

What is the difference between this and the demands to refuse to allow pet-rooms and no-pet-rooms?  Prejudice, and nothing more.


----------



## Hoc (Feb 13, 2007)

TomF said:


> Humans trump pets.  Period.



I rest my case.  Rational discussion does not work with these people.  Bigotry knows no reason.


----------



## Cathy in Boston (Feb 14, 2007)

Are you seriously asking what the difference is between someone who is allergic to peanuts being in the same elevator with someone who is eating peanuts and someone allergic to pet dander staying in a hotel room next door to someone with a dog in the room?  *You have to E A T peanuts to have an allergic reaction.*  Dander is in the air and can easily travel under doors, etc.  As a vehement nonsmoker who has lived in apartments next door to smokers, and been stuck in hotel rooms next to or above smokers, I can understand why it might be a problem to have a non-pet room right next to a pet room.

Separate buildings is a better idea, though, as others have stated, at least 50% of pet owners are not responsible enough to make sure their dogs are cleaned up after and properly socialized.  Trust me, I've dodged enough dog s**t at the Residence Inn (while picking up my own dog's mess) to know.

There is plenty of bigotry in the world (and on this board) without you using that ugly word in such a ridiculous manner.


----------



## ondeadlin (Feb 14, 2007)

In the end, this is a silly argument, because the premise is totally off. There is no movement toward allowing pets at Marriott timeshare, or most timeshares for that matter.

I fired off an e-mail to a friend on a board, asking him about the pets issue. He said - as I expected - that owner sentiment has run 8-1 and 9-1 against setting aside some rooms for pet owners the last two times they've sent out surveys (he's served on the board for 10-plus years, on and off). Obviously this is an older property, I'd imagine the numbers would run even higher against at a new resort, but that's just my own opinion.

Timeshares and hotels are, as we all know, different animals. A hotel chain may make a few pet-friendly rooms available at its discretion and serve a segment of clientel in the process. They take all the risks - pet mess, guest complaints, etc. -- and have no one to answer to.

A timeshare board, on the other hand, sets rules that reflect the majority sentiment. Fair or not, this typically means that certain segments - pet owners, smokers - are not catered too. No sign of that changing at all.


----------



## Cathy in Boston (Feb 14, 2007)

ondeadlin said:


> Timeshares and hotels are, as we all know, different animals.



Pun intended?


----------



## jme (Feb 14, 2007)

*leave pets at home*

Pets are wonderful....we have a Cairn terrier and we adore him, BUT....we would never take him on vacation ( we don't allow him indoors at home, either), and my personal opinion is that pets (and dogs specifically) should not be allowed at timeshare resorts, at least at the recent newer upscale Marriotts...ever! 

They cause a smell that is hard for pet-owners to notice, but others , like me, can walk into the room and know one has been there. And, "stuff happens", and those incidents can NEVER be adequately cleaned from carpets and pads...it's NOT POSSIBLE to remove that 100%!!!! Any resort in which there is a weekly turnover should have a no-pets policy. Hotel rooms, too.  If people cannot understand that, they should buy a beach house or mountain house and enjoy their pets there. I feel it's quite selfish and bordering on rude for guests at vacation resorts to insist on accommodations for ANIMALS .....animals that cannot read and therefore cannot adhere to basic health standards.....(not to mention the allergen issue, which can actually be life-threatening).  

As for those "resorts which advertise that they are pet-friendly", that is great....but I'll bet most folks would read that and never go because of it. It's a matter of 2% of the population imposing their (smelly & annoying) wishes on the 98%. Did you stop to think that probably 90% of that 98% actually HAVE pets at home but left them there just because they realize it's inappropriate. Thank goodness for the thoughtful 90%.  

Just to add another "thought", there should be a similar rule for "wild, mischievous, and crazy teens" who terrorize resorts....but that's a whole story in itself. One bad group can ruin families' vacations.  jme


----------



## Hoc (Feb 14, 2007)

Cathy in Boston said:


> *You have to E A T peanuts to have an allergic reaction.*



No.  Inhalation of peanut dust will do it, as well.  And you don't have to eat bees to have an allergic reaction.


----------



## grupp (Feb 14, 2007)

Hoc said:


> No.  Inhalation of peanut dust will do it, as well.  And you don't have to eat bees to have an allergic reaction.



What happens if someone, with a cat sitting on their lap, eats a peanut butter covered bee while petting a dog.  Could be real problems. 

Gary


----------



## Smooth Air (Feb 14, 2007)

And, on Gary's hilarious note, I think we shd move on to other topics!


----------



## jlr10 (Feb 14, 2007)

Speaking as someone who was charged and bitten by a dog "That would never hurt anyone" and who was charged by a dog on Kauai "Who never did that before"  I think the bigger concern here is liability.  Do you think if someone brings their dog on vacation and they bite someone that they are going to be content just having first aid?  Most likely they will sue the owner of the dog and the owners of the timeshare.  I admit I am biased against having pets in timeshares but the bigger issue is what are the ramifications of the pets that get out of hand.  I know those pets all belong to someone else and your pet would never do that, but the issue is there is an exposure.  So bigotry or not I don't think it is a good idea.   IMHO


----------



## jme (Feb 14, 2007)

*good point*



jlr10 said:


> Speaking as someone who was charged and bitten by a dog "That would never hurt anyone" and who was charged by a dog on Kauai "Who never did that before"  I think the bigger concern here is liability.  Do you think if someone brings their dog on vacation and they bite someone that they are going to be content just having first aid?  Most likely they will sue the owner of the dog and the owners of the timeshare.  I admit I am biased against having pets in timeshares but the bigger issue is what are the ramifications of the pets that get out of hand.  I know those pets all belong to someone else and your pet would never do that, but the issue is there is an exposure.  So bigotry or not I don't think it is a good idea.   IMHO



Great point. And just think how many A/C's Marriott would give you for that one! (You don't actually think they would give you CASH, do you?)  jme


----------



## Hoc (Feb 14, 2007)

jlr10 said:


> I think the bigger concern here is liability.  Do you think if someone brings their dog on vacation and they bite someone that they are going to be content just having first aid?



And despite the number of people who are hit by flying golf balls, I don't see any resorts digging up their courses.  Despite the number of injuries and drowning deaths related to swimming pools (I would guess that there are more of these than dogbite cases annually), I don't see the concrete trucks out there, filling in the resort swimming pools.

The difference?  Again, anti-pet-owner bias.


----------



## MikeM132 (Feb 16, 2007)

Brian: I think you agree that a hotel room and a timeshare condo are two different things. The owners decide in the latter case. I knew there were no pets allowed up front. The smoking issue is something else---that is changing after the fact. Although a rules change is often allowed by the HOA, if I were a smoker and sometime after spending 20,000+ for a week from Marriott then told I had to go outside to some smoker's corral, I might be a little upset. 
A dog or cat does not have the same rights as a human. Sorry to break the news to some on this forum. If a resort allowed pets then changed to not-allowed, I would agree they have an argument. NOT in Marriott's case, as this was very clear upfront.


----------



## bwenzel (Feb 16, 2007)

MikeM132 said:


> Brian: I think you agree that a hotel room and a timeshare condo are two different things. The owners decide in the latter case. I knew there were no pets allowed up front. The smoking issue is something else---that is changing after the fact. Although a rules change is often allowed by the HOA, if I were a smoker and sometime after spending 20,000+ for a week from Marriott then told I had to go outside to some smoker's corral, I might be a little upset.
> A dog or cat does not have the same rights as a human. Sorry to break the news to some on this forum. If a resort allowed pets then changed to not-allowed, I would agree they have an argument. NOT in Marriott's case, as this was very clear upfront.



I totally agree 100%.  See my post under the smoking section.  We have a cat that we love dearly, but I absolutely would not bring her on vacation with us.  

I can also tell you that I too have been bitten by several dogs, unprovoked, mind you, and as they say, once bitten, twice shy.  I am adamantly opposed to having pets at any Marriott resort.


----------



## grupp (Feb 16, 2007)

*Pets Banned from Pet Expo!*

On my way to work today, there was an ad for the Pet-Expo this weekend. At the end of the ad there was disclaimer that animals are not allowed at the Pet-Expo and advised everyone to leave their pets at home. I am completely amazed at the intolerance of the organizers of this Expo and plan on boycotting. 

It appears the Bigots are tying to take control by infiltrating the Pet-Expo. 

Gary

P.S. There appears to be no such restrictions for golf equipment, so this is clear case of discrimination.


----------



## Cathy in Boston (Feb 16, 2007)

Gary - I love your sense of humor.  Your posts on here are priceless.


----------



## pwrshift (Feb 16, 2007)

I think that's not done when it comes to Marriott and I'd like to know IF any Marriott timeshare HOA has surveyed their owners regarding pets? I've been a long time Marriott TS owner, with 6 of them, and have never ever had a survey form to fill out. I'd vote YES so maybe they pre-qualifiy their mailings? Some survey!

Brian



ondeadlin said:


> ...I fired off an e-mail to a friend on a board, asking him about the pets issue. He said - as I expected - that owner sentiment has run 8-1 and 9-1 against setting aside some rooms for pet owners the last two times they've sent out surveys (he's served on the board for 10-plus years, on and off). Obviously this is an older property, I'd imagine the numbers would run even higher against at a new resort, but that's just my own opinion.


----------



## Smooth Air (Feb 16, 2007)

Brian, let me start by saying that I think your dog is a very handsome creature! What is his/her name? Beautiful Canadian dog! I am also Canadian! Now.... about the pet survey which you have never received. The reason you have not been sent a survey is b/c this is a non-issue. There is no survey. And, there will not be one. I am sorry to have to tell you this, but that is the way it is. Many of us are Marriott TS Owners & many of us are pet-owners/lovers. But, we leave our pets @ home b/c, for the most part, that is the humane thing to do....our pets are happiest @ home....in their own environment. I have a 13 year old Siamese cat & I love him more than you could ever imagine ( well, you can probably imagine...). But, Air Canada will not allow me to bring him on the plane w/ me. So, I wld have to stow him underneath w/ the luggage when I fly to Florida from Toronto. Well, that is not going to happen!!! When you go to BeachPlace, do you drive? That is not an option for me & my cat. So, my cat stays @ home w/ his cat sitter & I call him every day. I do not think that animals belong in Timeshare properties. The concept of "time sharing" does not envision sharing the premises with an animal. Maybe there is a market for that but it is not my Marriott! And, I hope it stays that way. It's just not right to impose your animal on a "Non-animal" person!  Or, on any person.... even an "animal person". Doesn't matter how gorgeous your dog is!


----------



## Steve (Feb 16, 2007)

smoothair said:


> It's just not right to impose your animal on a "Non-animal" person!  Or, on any person.... even an "animal person". Doesn't matter how gorgeous your dog is!



It's also not right to impose your antagonism towards pets in timeshares on those of us who love to travel with our pets.  There should be plenty of room at most Marriott resorts for those who like to travel with their pets as well as those who don't.  This "one size fits all" mentality is not very inclusive...to say the least.

You also mention that maybe there is a market for timeshares that allow pets but not at YOUR Marriott.  How about my Marriott?  I'm both a Marriott timeshare owner and a Marriott shareholder.  Since when did my ownership become subservient to yours?  

We don't have to agree on this issue and, indeed, we do not.  But some of your comments are a bit arrogant.

Steve


----------



## Jeni (Feb 16, 2007)

Steve said:


> You also mention that maybe there is a market for timeshares that allow pets but not at YOUR Marriott.  How about my Marriott?  I'm both a Marriott timeshare owner and a Marriott shareholder.  Since when did my ownership become subservient to yours?
> 
> We don't have to agree on this issue and, indeed, we do not.  But some of your comments are a bit arrogant.
> 
> Steve



How is it arrogant that when you purchase into a TS property with a NO PETS rule, you expect it to stay that way? If you want to take your pet to a timeshare, find one that allows them. For those of us Marriott owners who bought into the system NOT wanting to deal with the noise, dander, hair, and poop, let it be. We are not "bigots" or "intolerant"- some of us simply expect to get what we paid for. Frankly Steve, for a moderator, I am surprised that you are not, well, more moderate in your approach. This is a dead issue- time to let it go.


----------



## Smooth Air (Feb 16, 2007)

Sorry, Steve. I am sorry if my comments came across as arrogant. This is an emotional issue. There are many competing  interests involved here. We have the pet owners who want to share their TS w/ their beloved pet. There are the pet owners ( like me) who want to share their TS w/ their pet but believe that the beloved pet is happier at home. There are the people who, for a variety of reasons, do not want somebody's elses pet anywhere near the bed where they will be sleeping. There are pet owners who don't allow their pets to come into their homes...so they certainly aren't going to want them in their timeshare. It's a complicated issue. Again, I am sorry if my comments came across as arrogant. That was not my intention, Steve.


----------



## m61376 (Feb 16, 2007)

It is pretty sad that expressing one's opinion is labelled as "intolerant," "arrogant," and "bigotted." I really don't think that Tug was created for name calling; I am paticularly surprised that, as was pointed out by Jeni above, even a moderator has difficulty discussing this civily.

You and/or your loved ones should never suffer an allergic reaction to an animal. However, if you had to watch someone wheeze, or your child's eye swell close because they touched a cat hair, perhaps you'd understand that, for many of us, our objections are very well founded. And, if you consider some of the acrimonious statements made by those staunchly defending their pets' rights, can you blame many of us for being skeptical that even if there were units set aside strictly for those with animals, their animals' rights would supercede other guests' rights, at least as far as some of the pet owners are concerned? 

Before many of us get disgusted with each other I think that this discussion should be closed.


----------



## jancurious (Feb 16, 2007)

I find this whole argument ridiculous.  This is a capitalistic society and if Marriott thought they could make more money by segregating a portion of their timeshares for animals (and charging the people wanting to use them more for damages, potential liability and cleaning) they would.  

I am all for that (each to their own)………… but I don’t think it will happen because what the pet lovers would have to pay to cover those charges would be ridiculously high and that would be without Marriott even making extra profit.  When I asked the assistant manager at Newport Coast what they charge owners who bring a pet that is not a service animal she said, “$800.”  All of that money is paid to an outside service company which comes in and shampoos all of the furniture and carpets.  Drapes are removed & cleaned and the bed is taken apart and cleaned.  That is just the cost for the cleaning!  Add some extra for an insurance rider for bites and then damages and you are talking a big number.

So by all means……..those who want this – go to your homeowner boards and propose it.  If you are willing to pay the extra costs and it could work, I say more power to you.

Please, however, do not label those of us with pets that chose not to even consider bringing them on vacation as “bigots.”  I think the proper term is just more considerate of others……………………….

Jan


----------



## barb1228 (Feb 16, 2007)

> jme said:
> 
> 
> > Pets are wonderful....we have a Cairn terrier and we adore him, BUT....we would never take him on vacation ( we don't allow him indoors at home, either)
> ...


----------



## Dave M (Feb 16, 2007)

For reasons that should be obvious related to various posts this evening, I am closing this thread.


----------

