Farmers shooting dogs

[stevvieboi]

agent must be one of the lucky ones where farm land near him has sufficent fencing around them, i dont think farmers up here know what that means,

[stevvieboi]

my purpose in starting this is to try and get more exposure for it, and the online government petition i have set up, i think laws dating back to 1953 and 1971 are long due an overhaul, as today dogs are a bigger thing in families life's the link is

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/25885

[Murphy Jnr]

Because

...

 

Of course animals get out, the fencing is makeshift at best in many parts but an entire herd is a bit suspect. I agree sheep follow but as their normally spread out over a field its unlikely that they all found a gap together. This was probably a drive to a nearby field.

[Agent Orange]

agent must be one of the lucky ones where farm land near him has sufficent fencing around them, i dont think farmers up here know what that means,

 

I must be

 

So, what do you propose instead of farmers shooting dogs?

[peewee84]

Why should the farmer shoot in the air if the dog is already scaring his animals? He has the right to shoot the dog. Besides, there is no certainty that the sound of the shotgun will scare the dog away.The fact of the matter remain, regardless of how the dog got there, dogs that are not in control are a menace to livestock and rightly, the farmer has the right to shoot.

 

If you don't want your dog to be shot, ensure it remains on a lead and/or properly secure your garden so it cannot escape

 

Umm because it would be the right thing to do rather than shooting someone's pet dead???! Or should he now not be expected to pay for the price of the bullet? I think we've already established he has the right to shoot the dog dead by law, but as I've said before, that doesn't mean it's morally right or the correct thing to do..

 

Sorry I didn't evade it just assumed that it was dealt with by Willman sufficiently enough.

 

I agree, not all owners of dogs avoid responsibility but the fact that some do has created the situation we are in now. It's not so unusual for owners to dispense with their own dog to escape penalty or prosecution for any number of reasons. I wouldn't and you appear honest enough to pay your dues also. Before the law was brought in this may have been the case but not anymore.

If and it's a big IF, there were an alternative workable even feasible method; and i really can't be doing with 'scare it away' or 'call it over' then yes it should be looked into. Incidences of dogs being shot are probably rare. In three years there has been no mention of it where I live, so either they have been lucky or people take heed of the consequence.

As far as the farmer is concerned, there are no accidental instances, there are only dogs on his land pure and simple.

 

So only the farmer's opinion matters and he will deal with it one way and one way only as he sees fit? Not on my watch, he may see animals as either pests or money making machines, but I don't.

 

 

 

my dogs are never left to roam, they are walked up in the forestry commission where its safe to let them off the lead, their call back is excellent, and very obient, she was the kind of dog that loved meeting new people and animals, loved everything she met, if we ever came anywhere near livestock she was put on the lead, cleaned up after them and prop disposed off, she was 14 months old, i work with dogs for my living and she was being trained to be part of my living, she was a very much loved and adored dog with so much character, worth prob more than 15 of his sheep, but that besides the point, she has never jumped the fence before, she has never ran away before, she they have always played safely in the garden before, this field very rarely gets used for livestock once a month a year if lucky, i have lived here 16 years and never has sheep being in it, its right beside a heavily built up area, where lots of dogs are and loads of peoples gardens are backed onto this field where the sheep will see dogs in peoples gardens, as some farmers rant about just seen a dog is bad for sheep, then is it not that the farmer should also be responsible for his sheep and putting them in this field was not that responsible, the field is a green belt with a public right of way through it, once owned by the coal board, i still have to check if it has being registered for agriculture use,

and @ angelfire perhaps she might not have being where she should have being, but at some points in life some adults and kids should not be where they should be, some kids run unruly down streets in supermarkets, but do we shoot them, kids are not watched every second of the day, take your eyes off them for a minute and they are off and getting upto whatever, some cause damage to our own property, but if we try to protect it we end up in court even jail, in my case mine was locked in the back garden while i went after my old collie who had ran out onto the street, and my girl i reckon has looked through the cat flap seen me running out the driveway, and had jumped the fence at the back to try and get to me that way, i can only presume this as they are dogs who never seem to give me a break and are always at my feet, and for this she has being shot dead, farmers just use this now as an excuse, had he followed the guidelines in the nfu, fired above her head, she would have ran for her life she hated loud bangs, as she was just standing their at the time he shot her, had he walked upto her she would have gone to him, but no he shot her dead instead, she did not kill or maul any sheep, they were not lambing yet, i am not trying to stop them from protecting their livestock, but where they are not being mauled or killed then some other alternative should be taken, new guidelines put in place.

 

Exactly, so should the dogs be shot in their own gardens if they are seen by the sheep or the sheep hear them bark? Has the farmer got no responsibility whatsoever?

 

I think this is clearly an exceptional case when common sense and reasonable force should have been executed. Instead a self-righteous farmer got trigger happy and shot someones loved pet dead. Well done.

[Agent Orange]

Umm because it would be the right thing to do rather than shooting someone's pet dead???! Or should her now not be expected to pay for the price of the bullet? I think we've already established he has the right to shoot the dog dead by law, but as I've said before, that doesn't mean it's morally right or the correct thing to do..

 

But the farmer does not see the dog as a pet. The farmer will see a dog as a pest, a pest that shouldn't be on his land scaring his animals.

 

Oh, I hate to be pendantic, it's cartridges not bullets

[Swampster]

I am not saying it doesn't, but I bet you any money, if the livestock causes damage or become a danger then the farmer could be prosecuted.

 

Therein lies the answer.. the same could and should be applicable to dog owners as opposed to blowing away dogs on a whim..

[Agent Orange]

Therein lies the answer.. the same could and should be applicable to dog owners as opposed to blowing away dogs on a whim..

 

Have you considered how difficult that would be? The dog would have to be identified and somehow traced back to it's owner, if the owner is nowhere to be seen. It won't happen because, unless all dogs are tagged, it would be impossible.

 

Farmers do not blow away dogs on a whim. Scaring sheep might not seem too serious to you, but I can assure you it is.

[Murphy Jnr]

So only the farmer's opinion matters and he will deal with it one way and one way only as he sees fit? Not on my watch, he may see animals as either pests or money making machines, but I don't.

 

I don't agree with the outcome but I have no argument with the law that's in place either. I have dogs and I feel the same as you do. If it can be tweaked in some way then great but sensibly what are the options!

Fine you disagree with the current law but you have to supply alternatives and as paying for damage is an unlikley one due to irresponsibility then what else?

 

In response to your 'only the farmers opinion matters' yes. If he shot one of mine on his land my only responses given the different natures of the dogs I have would be, 'but she wouldn't have done anything' or; to be honest given that some of them would cause mayhem, hold my hands up and suffer the pain of losing them.

The point is I know the law and as I said I don't put them or myself in the position of breaking it.

If the law changes it wont make any difference to me. They still wont get off all the time there are animals in the field.

[Swampster]

Have you considered how difficult that would be? The dog would have to be identified and somehow traced back to it's owner, if the owner is nowhere to be seen. It won't happen because, unless all dogs are tagged, it would be impossible.

 

Farmers do not blow away dogs on a whim. Scaring sheep might not seem too serious to you, but I can assure you it is.

 

Hmm, from various anecdotal accounts that I've heard it's tended to be more a case of shoot first ask questions later... which to me, spells on a whim

 

If the dog is in the thick of it, then it's almost certainly too late to do anything with a shotgun.. unless you're willing to risk taking out or injuring half the herd with your shot from those 'cartridges'.

 

Or it's more about a revenge shooting after the damage is done.. (which is not unheard of either).

 

Anyhoo.. I've had enough of circular arguments for one day; the Mrs has a whloe heap of things for me to do apparently... and to the OP.. I've signed your petition!

Edited January 12, 2012 by Swampster