Where friends and Mastiff families gather
One branch of my extended family tree folks have been looking for a summer retreat, small family cabin(s) cluster for another mini vacation / family reunion this coming summer. (Less than 25 people and probably less than five separate pets that might be up for road trips, total.) Since we are all full fledged pet people, and we all have some pets that could travel well but others whom might do better staying in a local kennel or with friends, we were all attracted by the places claiming to be "pet friendly."
Big mistake for us to trust such advertisements. Big mistake. Just sharing such so you won't be blindsided as well.
We found a great place (pretty much the same distance from all our homes as we all live about as far apart - via the north & south directions - of each other in the continental U.S as possible) claiming to be "pet friendly" merely asking for a non refundable pet deposit of $50.00 (per pet.) That was /is doable and agreeable and more than acceptable for each of the adult pet parents who were / are willing to fork out the cash to cover our own fur kids & any potential damages they could cause (expenses) to the property owners if we chose to vacation on their property.
While the phrase, "non refundable pet deposit" is indeed an oxymoron (how is a "deposit" ever considered "non refundable?") If so it's a "fee" not a "deposit" as a"fee" is a cost or a fine. Again, just saying it's not a "deposit" if it's "non refundable," it's a fee, plain and simple.
None of us family member pet parent adults have a problem with paying the extra "fee" for the probable, extra housekeeping efforts it would cost to clean up after the pets (all the fur & slobbers & dirty paw prints) after our departure . . . especially if the housekeepers get a hefty bonus out of the ordeal.
And I can guarantee each of you that if any of our pets caused real damage to the property any of us pet people crazed family members would buck up and cover the costs of such . . . as that's just the way we roll!
Then, then, then . . . I read the "mouse print" of the "pet policy": No cats allowed, kenneled or not, and no dogs above 35 pounds allowed, either! Were they kidding? NO DOG ABOVE 35 POUNDS?
I guess that meant only Sampson's head was welcomed and well less than half of the other large, but not huge breed, family dogs & their individual body parts! Seriously?
Unfortunately, the "mouse print" part of the contract was very serious, and I'm grateful, at least, that I researched it thoroughly before transporting my lovely Sampson several states away!
I can only assume the contract means if you can't keep your dog in a big purse it was not welcomed at this so called "family, pet friendly" establishment and cats weren't considered "pets" at all. (And what about the poor kitty cats - most of which wouldn't want to travel anyway, but were not welcomed AT ALL under the "Pet Friendly" banner?)
What - what in the world - is the definition of "pet friendly" concerning such a limited, discriminatory policy? Seriously? A dog no heavier than thirty-five pounds? Seriously? I'm baffled! At least other sites I've visited in the past limited pets over 50 pounds from "pet friendly" status! Aarrgghh!
I know I'm preaching to the choir here @ Mastiff Guardian . . . but these self proclaimed "customer service hospitality" places should not be allowed to go unchecked as they spew such false claims as "pet friendly" entities: They are not "pet friendly" they are merely "small dog, kind of friendly." (And they also had rules about putting the small dogs in kennels if no one was in the cabin!)
I understand that is their property (the cabin owners) and they have the right to dictate restrictions, but next time you see the phrase "pet friendly" in an advertisement for a self-proclaimed service industry venue, read the "mouse print" and call them out when they misuse the phrase.
There is absolutely nothing "pet friendly" that discriminates against mid-size, large, & huge breed dogs, let alone kitty cats. At best, they should label their regulations as "pets we prefer, & only pets we prefer, may be welcome if we think we might approve." Honestly, I'd be happier with that claim than a "pet friendly" claim that discriminates at will.
Other than this random rant . . . all is well for Kansas City & the Sunflower Band! Sampy is still doing great after his elective surgery, too!
This incident just made my blood boil. Aarrgghh!
Then again, glad to do my part to just keep the conversation lively!
Take care, everyone! And stay warm! -Cindy & Samp-
I could write a book on this subject. Years ago I was married, lived in Fl and my husband and Dad were in the produce business. Meaning winters in Fl, until about May and then off to Jersey until Oct. Every year I had to find a house for all of us, kids, young adults and Mastiffs. What a nightmare this was. My way of dealing with this mess after a few years of, Oh, is this a dog?? etc.....was if it says "dog friendly" I say "how friendly"? I cut to the chase and say we have 2 Mastiffs, they are not destructive but they are BIG. And I always expect a large deposit and have never had to pay for any damage, just a good cleaning person to get the hair and drool. You would be surprised how many people are interested in them as they have never met one. Landlords suck, so it saves time and aggravation, to put it out there and go from there. Please don't be discouraged, Sampy needs a vacation too. If you need any good comebacks or smart remarks, let me know. I have a million of them. LOL.. Try my approach and see what you get.
I think these "landlords" should realize that for the most part "most"small dogs will use their carpets where our bigger dogs "never" use the house for their potty palace.Sure you may have a little more hair but that can be vac/swept up as to where pee in the carpets will leave a stain and an odor!If I was renting I would definately rather have the large dog than the small any day of the week(speaking from experience here).
Hope you find the perfect place soon!Sounds like fun!