Farmers shooting dogs

[Murphy Jnr]

At the end of the day, either ruling on side of the farmer or on the side of the dog owners is going to have some problems. That's life, not many things are perfect. But there is always a scale between extremes and I'm pretty sure that the law can be tweaked slightly as you put it so it doesn't involve the out-right shooting of a dog regardless. If it was going to do any good, I'd sit down and list all the alternatives and arguements for my case and I do think there would be many..

 

One of the problems will be who to believe. If a dog is busy minding his own business and in the field and is shot, who's to say that it was up to no good or not? The word of the farmer will be hard to disprove or prove either way so a third party will be necessary. Without an owner present or there but out of sightand assuming that the gun is still an accepted method, will he scare or kill?

[stevvieboi]

@upinwath and jonny 5 had you taken the time to read my posts you would see that i did not let my dog loose in a field with sheep, she was locked in my garden that i would have said was well secure, surrounded by fences and 8ft conifers, never thought for a min she would be able to jump that, and when my old collie who is 17 half the time does not know where she is decided to run out onto the road, which none of my dogs have ever done, you dont have time to think oh my dog is going to jump the fence to try and get to me where i have ran out to get my collie back safely, she was locked in the back garden while i went to do this, and the field may not even be farm land, as it was once coal authority with public right away, upinwrath you are prob right when you say up your own arse as you prob only see the light when you open your mouth, at the end of the day its only an opinion and only yours

[Jonny5]

@upinwath and jonny 5 had you taken the time to read my posts you would see that i did not let my dog loose in a field with sheep, she was locked in my garden that i would have said was well secure, surrounded by fences and 8ft conifers, never thought for a min she would be able to jump that

And yet the dog got out. I have sympathy because I I'm not sure there is any way you could have done things differently. But the bottom line is the dog DID get out. Really you should be putting it down to experience but you seem to be wanting to blame the farmer or the law. And that I don't find acceptable.

[cgksheff]

............ its right beside a heavily built up area, ........

 

I don't think so.

You may have different words up there, but if I have you identified correctly, no-one is going to describe your village as "heavily built up".

 

Stick to the facts. There is nothing wrong with asking for the laws to be reviewed, but you don't help your case.

 

 

........ once owned by the coal board, i still have to check if it has being registered for agriculture use,

.........

 

It isn't relevant to your case.

In these Acts "agricultural land" is simply land that is used for agricultural purposes i.e. it had sheep on.

Land-Use Classification has no bearing.

[stevvieboi]

its like kids really, take your eyes off them for a min and they are off getting upto whatever, do we shoot them for being out of control, the guidelines by the nfu states to use a gun as last resort, which a lot of farmers do not, he made a statement to the police she was just standing their when he shot her, it is not he field and as farmers bang about even seen a dog worries them, then why on earth put them into a field where 60-70 houses surround this field, gardens back to back with this field, of which i know 20 dogs live around are customers of mine, the law dates back to 1953 and 1971, i do not condemn the farmer his right to protect his livestock, but where they are not being mauled or killed then some alternative put in place, reading some forums where farmers have threatened people on common land waving guns at them, is showing that they take the law into their own hands, and seem to think they are above it all, use the excuse for sheep worrying, and yes you are right i do blame the farmer, he did shoot her, he has to accept responsibility as to where he put them, i grew up on a farm and i would not put animals at such a close distance to families and dogs, as i said it's a two sided coin

[stevvieboi]

its not a village its a town, population of 20k

[stevvieboi]

right next to a nature reserve and dog walking area, which i dont use, i prefer to use the forestry commission land

[Shogun]

I lived in New Zealand as a kid and they had a lot of trouble with dogs worrying sheep and cattle the farmers there would not mess about they would shoot any dog on there land, to see what a dog can do to do to a sheep or a cow is horrendous,I love dogs my self but they are still wild animals and will act on instinct and once a dog gets the taste for sheep worrying you will have a hard time stopping it doing it, I think in your case it was a bit unfortunate but the farmers will protect there animals at all costs and the laws are on there side,I just hope other dog owners read this and learn from it.

[peewee84]

In the eyes of the law, it's right. I really don't understand how you can argue that a farmer is wrong to shoot something that is harming or killing his animals.No, I think you misunderstood my point. Someone said that farmers shoot dogs on a whim. I merely pointed out, that you cannot say preventing serious harm or damage is doing something on a whim.

 

But it wasn't harming or killing any animals!! "It could have.." "It might have.." That's all they are, "coulds" and "woulds", and now the dog is dead. I don't care if the law justifies that, the law is wrong and needs changing to be a bit more understanding and flexible.

 

If the dog is clearly attacking an animal then fair enough. "It may be too late by then" you say. What, like it's too late for the dog? But no-one seems to care about that...you do the best you can, and if it ends bad it's unfortunate, and take steps to make the dog owner pay where possible but you cannot go shooting dogs on "coulds" and "maybes". The world doesn't work like that, not a just and fair world anyway. We as human beings are capable of exercising common sense, compassion and reasoning above all other species. It's not the dogs fault we have integrated them into a human world and expect the rules of nature to no longer apply to them, and if they follow their instincts we shoot them dead.

 

 

Bottom line is the dog wasn't supervised properly, got onto farm land and could have cost the farmer a lot of money.

 

It a real shame for the dog as it's not its fault, but don't really see how the farmer morally let alone legally in any way wrong.

 

The law is right. Stevie only has himself to blame for not controlling his dog.

 

Could could could...

[cgksheff]

.........

 

Could could could...

 

 

Did. Did. Did.

 

.......... got distracted by the sheep in the field and worried them, .........