# With a neighbor like this....



## damaya

Man charged with shooting neighbor's beloved Bernese Mountain dogs - U.S. News=

I'd say there would be problems.

He would never had made his "I shoot first" comment because I wouldn't have bothered with a "why" question first.

Most likely I would have at least one charge out of the situation too. 
Shot the second dog "as it was running away".

Some people.


----------



## gsdraven

This was close by and I have some friends that are Berner breeders and have been very upset by this because it could have easily been one of their dogs. It's so very sad. They are such sweet dogs. My understanding is these aren't the first dogs he's shot either.


----------



## Nigel

Idiot! 

RIP Argus and Fiona


----------



## LifeofRiley

Wow, so tragic!!! I have never understood why people's first instinct would be to shoot a dog. In fact, I never knew it existed until coming to this forum. By that, I mean, there have been several threads were people have said they would shoot a stray dog that was near their livestock. I just don't think I will ever understand that!


----------



## Verivus

Well I guess I could see why he did it. Probably has had strays try and chase his sheep before and is no longer tolerant towards any dogs near his flock. Also, not everybody is a dog person and a BMD is certainly not a small dog and this guy finds not 1, but 2 of them in his yard. Not everyone is willing to approach loose dogs, even less when they're 2 huge ones. Not saying it was right of him to shoot first since they were not actively chasing, but I can understand why he did what he did. I don't know why he would shoot a dog that is running away though.


----------



## selzer

I understand it. People name livestock. They have a responsibility toward that livestock to keep them safe. They feel that people aren't caring enough for their dogs to keep them safe and if their dogs are coming on their land and near their livestock the dog has to go, and shooting the dog is the only sure way to eliminate the threat. 

Especially when cows are calving, or goats or horses are having young, anyone with chickens might take out dogs, because a dog around chickens or rabbits may kill them all. That happened to my vet, a dog got to her chicken and made a regular bloodbath. 

We are dog lovers here, but people love their other critters too. And too often displaced city folks move out to the country and suddenly think their dogs can just run free. A loose dog in farm-country isn't generally long for the world. If they dog get run over, or killed by a pack of coyotes, shot running deer, then they will likely be shot by farmers for bothering livestock. 

We can't change them, but we can keep our dogs safe. Accidents may happen, and they may be fatal too. Keep your dogs safe.


----------



## Dainerra

nope, agree with the guy 1000%.
Until you have tried to comfort a child who just watched a beloved family pet get ripped apart by the neighbor's dog, then you can't understand the "shoot first" 

Your dog is a beloved pet when it is in YOUR yard; in MY yard it is a predator.


----------



## codmaster

LifeofRiley said:


> Wow, so tragic!!! I have never understood why people's first instinct would be to shoot a dog. In fact, I never knew it existed until coming to this forum. By that, I mean, there have been several threads were people have said they *would shoot a stray dog that was near their livestock. I just don't think I will ever understand that![/*QUOTE]
> 
> You might if you have ever seen a cow disembowled by dogs or calfs mauled to death!
> 
> I am not condoning what happened, but .......................


----------



## Dainerra

when I was a teenager, there was a pack of roaming dogs that started attacking cattle as they were giving birth. They would actually rip the calf out of the cow as it was being born, killing both of them.


----------



## Caitydid255

I have to side with the farmer. In other articles it was stated that he had recently lost some sheep to dogs and he found the two dogs in the sheep pen. I felt horrible enough about losing several chickens to a stray dog, I couldn't imagine losing one of our cows or in this man's case, his sheep. I love dogs but I value my animals over one I don't know. 

Sadly this is another cautionary tale about leaving your dogs unsupervised in a fenced in yard. Sometimes tree branches take out your fence and the dogs escape.


----------



## LifeofRiley

Call me crazy, but it seems like there are a lot of other ways to handle what is most likely just a lost and/or curious dog than shooting it!


----------



## Nigel

selzer said:


> I understand it. People name livestock. They have a responsibility toward that livestock to keep them safe. They feel that people aren't caring enough for their dogs to keep them safe and if their dogs are coming on their land and near their livestock the dog has to go, and shooting the dog is the only sure way to eliminate the threat.
> 
> Especially when cows are calving, or goats or horses are having young, anyone with chickens might take out dogs, because a dog around chickens or rabbits may kill them all. That happened to my vet, a dog got to her chicken and made a regular bloodbath.
> 
> We are dog lovers here, but people love their other critters too. And too often displaced city folks move out to the country and suddenly think their dogs can just run free. A loose dog in farm-country isn't generally long for the world. If they dog get run over, or killed by a pack of coyotes, shot running deer, then they will likely be shot by farmers for bothering livestock.
> 
> We can't change them, but we can keep our dogs safe. Accidents may happen, and they may be fatal too. Keep your dogs safe.


I agree this might be necessary sometimes, but in this particular incident, after reading two separate news reports, these dogs were not chasing anything or anyone. Yes they were on his property, but to shoot first when there is no immediate danger to you or your livestock, why shoot? I don't under stand the mentality.


----------



## sparra

Nigel said:


> Yes they were on his property, but to shoot first when there is no immediate danger to you or your livestock, why shoot? I don't under stand the mentality.


Because you probably have never been in that type of situation.

I love the way these articles put photos up of the dogs looking so innocent and comment on how the dogs sleep with the kids....wouldn't hurt a fly....well two dogs together in amongst sheep is a disaster waiting to happen.
The owner is the one at fault for letting his dogs wander. Until you have seen your own sheep killed by dogs (in most cases you have to put them out of their misery) then you will most likely not understand.....very cute dogs, probably wonderful with everyone BUT very capable at killing sheep.


----------



## damaya

My mom lives across the street from a farm. The last time a cow got out of the fence and wandered across the street to her property - I didn't shoot it. I called the guy and told him he had a break in the fence.

Last week I looked out the back door and saw a large (larger than Icon) dog at the pool fence - I didn't shoot it. I opened the back door it left. I called animal control.

It wasn't a pack of wild dogs, it was the neighbor's dog. I know what my neighbor's dog looks like and if I ever find it at my house - I won't shoot it. I'll call him or walk to his house and let him know.

Sounds like a knee jerk reaction by a pissed off sheep owner.

(cut and paste from another article) Their instinct was to protect the sheep, but the property owner did not see it that way and shot both of the dogs dead.
Dog owner Mary Bock said her neighbor told her his reaction was to shoot first.
"He fired no warning, he didn't yell, he didn't make any phone calls, he didn't do anything,"

Several options other than to start shooting.


----------



## selzer

When you live in a town or city, livestock are not allowed within the village, town or city limits. Also discharging firearms within a town or city is usually some type of misdemeaner. So if you have a couple of Yorkies, and you see a GSD in your yard, you will probably be able to figure out some way besides shooting the dog to manage the situation. You can take your Yorkies inside and call Animal control. Yay, they come and take away the dog and give the owner a big fine, and that works. Good. 

Out in the country it is a whole other story. We have critters having babies out in the pastures. We have animals that we cannot just call and have them come in. We have flight animals, horses, cows, llamas, alpacas, goats, sheep, and then we also have little animals like ducks and chickens and rabbits. 

And we have guns. Because where there are flight animals, prey animals, there are also predators. There are coyotes and other varmints. And there are stray dogs. We have to protect our critters. 

Because what we don't have is animal control. Animal control in the country may be 1 guy who covers the largest county in the state. He won't bother with stray cats at all because "they are not domestic animals." He will not do anything about dog running loose if they are not strays. Yeah, even though the state has a leash law. If you call the sherriff, they will do absolutely nothing. 

The ONLY time anything gets done is if you kill someone's purebred dog (better if its a puppy), and they go to the newspapers about it. Then the sherriff deputy might come out and dig his toe into the earth and look all concerned and do absolutely nothing. 

The farmer is protecting his animals on his property. In my opinion, that's ok. Out here, its up to you to protect your dog.


----------



## damaya

sparra said:


> The owner is the one at fault for letting his dogs wander.


 
Argus and Fiona were Bernese mountain dogs, which are bred to be gentle, herding animals. _When they got past a hole in their backyard fence_

Read more: Two Dogs Shot Dead In Chester County - Dallas News | myFOXdfw.com

Apparently the owner did not know they were out.


----------



## selzer

damaya said:


> My mom lives across the street from a farm. The last time a cow got out of the fence and wandered across the street to her property - I didn't shoot it. I called the guy and told him he had a break in the fence.
> 
> Last week I looked out the back door and saw a large (larger than Icon) dog at the pool fence - I didn't shoot it. I opened the back door it left. I called animal control.
> 
> It wasn't a pack of wild dogs, it was the neighbor's dog. I know what my neighbor's dog looks like and if I ever find it at my house - I won't shoot it. I'll call him or walk to his house and let him know.
> 
> Sounds like a knee jerk reaction by a pissed off sheep owner.
> 
> (cut and paste from another article) Their instinct was to protect the sheep, but the property owner did not see it that way and shot both of the dogs dead.
> Dog owner Mary Bock said her neighbor told her his reaction was to shoot first.
> "He fired no warning, he didn't yell, he didn't make any phone calls, he didn't do anything,"
> 
> Several options other than to start shooting.


A cow or a horse is unlikely to kill your dog. It isn't the same. A dog is EXTREMELY likely to kill sheep, chickens or rabbits. 

If a cow or horse gets hit by a car, the owner of the horse or car, at least here in Ohio, is liable. 

Dogs are predators. We choose to live with predators. It is up to us to ensure that our predators are under control.


----------



## sparra

damaya said:


> (cut and paste from another article) Their instinct was to protect the sheep, but the property owner did not see it that way and shot both of the dogs dead.


Of course.....they were "protecting" the sheep......


----------



## damaya

you've got that much right.


----------



## selzer

German Shepherds are bred to be herding dogs as well, but some of them will attack sheep. Most shepherds want NO dogs around their sheep. The only dog they will have is one that they have raised with the sheep. Not a couple of dogs from down the street whose original purpose may have been livestock guardian.


----------



## sparra

damaya said:


> Argus and Fiona were Bernese mountain dogs, which are bred to be gentle, herding animals. _When they got past a hole in their backyard fence_
> 
> Read more: Two Dogs Shot Dead In Chester County - Dallas News | myFOXdfw.com
> 
> Apparently the owner did not know they were out.


So would this ever happen with your dogs?? It wouldn't with mine.....no chance they are getting out doing anything like this......just wouldn't happen...so it is still the owner at fault.

Just because the dogs are "herding" dogs doesn't mean they are not going to kill a sheep. GSD are "herding" dogs but you let most of the dogs on this forum in amongst a mob of sheep without any supervision and i have a feeling they are not going to "protect" the sheep.


----------



## Dainerra

Every problem dog I have ever encountered, the owners would tell you would never hurt a fly. But I can attest that they dang still hurt chickens and I have the photos and dead birds to prove it.
What would happen if I was in that farmer's shoes and called the police or animal control? They would tell me to shoot the dogs.
I don't shoot first unless the dog is actively attacking. I call, make a report with a description of the dog and have police notify the owners if I have an idea where the dog came from. The police tell the owners that, by law, the dog can be shot on sight. Yes, just for stepping foot in my yard.
I know where my dogs are at all times. Why? Because in the years I have lived here, the neighbor across the street has shot more than 20 dogs, that I know of. He is a friend and knows my dogs but if they were chasing his livestock, I would expect him to shoot them. It's MY job to keep my pets at home


----------



## Dainerra

It's pretty common for dogs that are completely trusted with livestock st home to kill animals at neighboring farms


----------



## Nigel

sparra said:


> Because you probably have never been in that type of situation.
> 
> I love the way these articles put photos up of the dogs looking so innocent and comment on how the dogs sleep with the kids....wouldn't hurt a fly....well two dogs together in amongst sheep is a disaster waiting to happen.
> The owner is the one at fault for letting his dogs wander. Until you have seen your own sheep killed by dogs (in most cases you have to put them out of their misery) then you will most likely not understand.....very cute dogs, probably wonderful with everyone BUT very capable at killing sheep.





selzer said:


> When you live in a town or city, livestock are not allowed within the village, town or city limits. Also discharging firearms within a town or city is usually some type of misdemeaner. So if you have a couple of Yorkies, and you see a GSD in your yard, you will probably be able to figure out some way besides shooting the dog to manage the situation. You can take your Yorkies inside and call Animal control. Yay, they come and take away the dog and give the owner a big fine, and that works. Good.
> 
> Out in the country it is a whole other story. We have critters having babies out in the pastures. We have animals that we cannot just call and have them come in. We have flight animals, horses, cows, llamas, alpacas, goats, sheep, and then we also have little animals like ducks and chickens and rabbits.
> 
> And we have guns. Because where there are flight animals, prey animals, there are also predators. There are coyotes and other varmints. And there are stray dogs. We have to protect our critters.
> 
> Because what we don't have is animal control. Animal control in the country may be 1 guy who covers the largest county in the state. He won't bother with stray cats at all because "they are not domestic animals." He will not do anything about dog running loose if they are not strays. Yeah, even though the state has a leash law. If you call the sherriff, they will do absolutely nothing.
> 
> The ONLY time anything gets done is if you kill someone's purebred dog (better if its a puppy), and they go to the newspapers about it. Then the sherriff deputy might come out and dig his toe into the earth and look all concerned and do absolutely nothing.
> 
> The farmer is protecting his animals on his property. In my opinion, that's ok. Out here, its up to you to protect your dog.


I understand all of this, I said in my earlier post that it can be necessary, but shoot first isn't necessary every time a dog enters your property. Had the dogs acted aggressive toward to owner or his animals, then I don't have an issue with it. Yes the owner of the dogs is responsible for their safety, but just out of respect for your neighbors, even if you dont know who they are, why not attempt to at least run them off before pulling the trigger. Sounds like he is being charged with animal cruelty and reckless endangerment, so I guess law enforcement deemed it unnecessary as well.


----------



## damaya

I'm not buying any of it. I'd like to think my dog will never escape me either, but I will never say never.

Keeping in mind that the majority of dog owners are not as anal / responsible as most of those on this board. _They got out of their fence. _That is not enough for me to condemn the people as bad or irresponsible dog owners. The reaction by the sheep guy is enough for me to still insist it was a knee jerk reaction. 

Selzer - You are right for the most part about livestock inside the city limits, but I happen to live right in the middle of town on 5 acres that has a live stock grandfather clause because it used to be a farm. Allowing me to have live stock if I wish. I still can't discharge a firearm though.

more:
"The single shot shotgun means he would have had to shoot he first dog, took the shell out, reloaded and shot the second dog," said Tom Hogan, Chester County District Attorney. 
Pilotti later, according to the criminal complaint, confessed to police that "At the time he shot, the dog was not pursuing any sheep." 
Court documents also show, the second dog was not near the sheep when he shot her either. Pilotti admitted, "He shot the dog as it was running away from him and the sheep." 

Even the shooter said the dogs were not pursuing the sheep, and that the 2nd dog was not even near the sheep.


----------



## sparra

Well I suppose the second dog would be running away from him if he had just shot the first one.
Sounds like the dogs had to be actively pulling his sheep down for him to have been allowed to protect them which seems a bit unfair......not being able to protect them BEFORE they were harmed......anyway....all newspaper reports so who really knows.


----------



## LifeofRiley

Yes, I have lived in cities for a long time. But, I grew up in a pretty rural area. 

One neighbor had a very large horse pasture, another was a large fernery, another really just an orange grove and a few "blocks" down a wildlife reserve. I understand rural. 

But, we took care of each other’s pets. A lot of dogs ran loose or got out through an accident. My grandparents, who lived with us, had a dog that got out a couple of times. The neighbors were great at making sure he found his way home. It would have been devastating to learn that someone decided to shoot him instead. And, one of the times, he was found at the horse stables. So, I guess I am really glad we had reasonable neighbors.

On top of that, my first experience with a GSD was with a dog that lived at the neighboring fernery. I would play with that dog all the time. In fact, anytime I called his name, he would come and we had the best of times just romping around together. I never met the actual owners until the dog passed of old age. They came to tell my parents because they knew how close I was with the dog and wanted me to know that he had passed so that I wouldn’t worry.

Sorry, but shooting first is just something that I do not believe is right!


----------



## selzer

Ok, here's the thing, the dogs are not necessarily going to attack the sheep when you are yelling at them, chucking stones at them and trying to run them off. That doesn't mean they won't come back while you are in the can. People cannot be outside 24/7. When they see a dog around their chickens or sheep, they have to take action. 

Right now I don't think my dogs will ever be AWOL. But if they were, and some farmer shot them, then it would be my fault. I wouldn't hold it against the farmer. And if he showed me a critter that the animal he shot injured or killed, it would be up to me to compensate him for that animal. We choose to own predators. It is up to us to control them.


----------



## sparra

LifeofRiley said:


> Sorry, but shooting first is just something that I do not believe is right!


Maybe it was a first for these dogs but not the farmer. Maybe he has had many dogs come onto his land threatening/killing sheep. Is he suppose to give every dog a "first" chance?? He would likely have no sheep left to kill. 
Who knows.....maybe in the past he has not shot first, maybe these dogs were the last straw for him.....just because they are sheep doesn't make them any less important to the farmer.....lots of maybe's..... 
Anyway....all this talk of sheep is making me hungry.....I am off to put my lamb roast in the oven for dinner.....


----------



## damaya

I've really read more on this than I ever planned.

more from the shooter:
"Pilotti admitted that the older dog was not pursuing or even close to his sheep, but was trotting slowly toward him when he fired his shotgun at the dog's head. Directly behind the dog and in the line of fire was a house with residents inside - facts that spurred the endangerment charge."

I still lean more towards irresponsible gun owner than dog owner.
He just comes off as a coward / hot head to me.

I'm glad none of my police officers or my animal control officer here in town have this thought process. Most responsible gun owners know that using it is a last resort not the first.


----------



## selzer

Every time we have this discussion, there are a bunch of people that come on attacking the shooter. But personally, I prefer to think that if my dogs go off my property onto someone else's they will get shot. Why? Because then I know what I need to do. I know I need to keep my dogs safe by keeping them at home. 

As German Shepherd lovers, we should all back up the farmer for shooting these dogs. Understanding how frickin' dangerous it is for dogs to be roaming about will make more people more careful. People being more careful means less dogs being run over, lost, or shot. 

People being all insensed about the farmer shooting the dogs want the world to be a nice cushy place for dogs. Which means people have that attitude that dogs will be dogs, accidents happen, oh well. And some of those dogs will be run over, and some will be shot, and some will be killed by wildlife. And then we all just say, Oh well, accidents happen. 

It is about responsibility. A farmer who sees dogs loose around his livestock and does nothing is not taking responsibility for the lives under his care. Dog owners who let their critters get out need to take responsibility too. 

When we take responsibility we can make a change that will better protect our animals. When we shift the blame on the old farmer/shepherd/ogre or the gun, then we are not responsible, he is, and there is no reason to change whatever we did that got our animals killed. So the next dogs we have might go the same way, but then it will be the driver that ran them over, or the hunter that shot them running deer. 

People need to be responsible for their animals. If they were, this wouldn't have happened. 

Also, the article won't ever tell you that this is the 4th time these dogs have been on this guy's property, that the guy called several times to the owners, that the guy called the sheriff and they did nothing. 

The sheriff deputy TOLD me to shoot the neighbor's dog, LOL. Whatever. The news won't tell you that because that isn't politically correct. They want you to see these pretty purebred dogs and make you all feel terrible that some horrible old guy shot them.


----------



## Orion's_Girl

Eeesh, this is one touchy subject! It definitely reminds me of the very same issue dealing with Grey Wolves straying from Yellowstone Ntl Park. Ranchers are at a loss because these animals basically just now recovered from being endangered, and they're attacking their livestock. There are too many of them in the area and ranchers have to take actions into their own hands and shoot the wolves. Granted, these are wild wolves, not domesticated GSD's, but this is still the same kind of issue. What happens if the wolves return to the endangered list, but some are still causing issues for ranchers? The rancher is going to face a serious problem! Lose your livestock or risk being fined/imprisoned for animal crimes. 

In my opinion, you should ALWAYS try the most peaceful option first. Not go out guns blazing, ready to shoot every predator that walks near your livestock. Shoot some freaking bullets in the air! That scares off nearly every animal. If you also know who the dog belongs to, contact the owners and say something like "LOOK, i've given this dog a warning shot, but if you can't control him, i have to take matters into my own hands." I think most dogs are merely curious about other animals..not killers. However, i do understand at the end of the day that the rancher/farmer does have to protect his livestock. This is how he makes a living. But honestly? I would be so upset and PISSED if he killed my dog! Sigh...it's hard. I would only have myself to blame if my own dog got loose like that. I just don't have a heart to shoot dogs. I never will. I can only hope that if i ever lived in a place this rural, my neighbors would be kind if my dog got out.


----------



## Dainerra

Shooting billets into the air is illegal and stupid. Simply the law of gravity -what goes up must come down.
The simple and most basic rule for owning a gun is never point it at something you don't intend to kill.
As selzer said, if every dog got a first chance, there wouldn't be any livestock left. Why? Because every pet owner thinks that their dog won't do something like that. So they continue to let their dogs roam. I've had people pay me for dead livestock and turn around 5 minutes after they leave to see the same dog back in my yard.
It doesn't take a dog using his teeth to kill livestock. They are prey animals and their first instinct if to run, especially if they have been chased before. They run; dog thinks it's a game and chases; sheep with a broken leg. Or a sheep ran to death out of fear. Then the next dog that enters the property sets of a chain reaction just by being there. Sheep are still dead because they panic at the sight of the dog.
The only reason this guy was charged is because there are pictures of cute friendly dogs in the media. It's almost lambing season, would people feel differently if there were pictures of fluffy little lambs trampled to death because a curious dog frightened the flock by barking at them? THAT is why people shoot first. Because the dog just being there easily equals dead livestock


----------



## Dainerra

Accidentally erased and the phone won't let me edit..

I have poultry and rabbits. Both are securely contained but very easily frightened. I've lost more than one bird because of dogs barking and charging at the fence. Some have broken their necks in a panic, others have simply died of "fright". Others have broken wings or legs and I have to kill them myself.Rabbits are the same. Sight of a dog causes then to panic.
At what point does it become the dog owner responsibility instead of mine?


----------



## damaya

selzer said:


> But personally, I prefer to think that if my dogs go off my property onto someone else's they will get shot.
> 
> _I don't know what kind of wild west Denmark,OH is but I prefer my neighbor would just use common sense and a telephone._
> 
> Understanding how frickin' dangerous it is for dogs to be roaming about will make more people more careful.
> 
> _I'm not sure you've even read anything other than whats been posted here. The dogs had escaped through a hole in the fence caused by a fallen tree limb. They were discovered missing about 5 minutes after they were put outside and shot 10 minutes after that._
> 
> People being all insensed about the farmer shooting the dogs want the world to be a nice cushy place for dogs.
> 
> _I think you are over the top with the above and the rest of that paragragh just made no sense. I am more sad for the family than mad at the dog killer. You honestly think there is anybody that believes the world should or could be "cushy"? Especially for dogs. _
> 
> It is about responsibility.
> 
> _It's about common courtesy, common sense, and little else._
> 
> When we shift the blame on the old farmer/shepherd/ogre or the gun, then we are not responsible,
> 
> _The farmer/shepherd/orge got charged so evidently the laws don't agree with your logic either._
> 
> People need to be responsible for their animals.
> 
> _I agee with this. The second part of that did not apply in this situation._
> 
> Also, the article won't ever tell you that this is the 4th time these dogs have been on this guy's property, that the guy called several times to the owners, that the guy called the sheriff and they did nothing.
> 
> _Need a link for that as I haven't read that yet._
> 
> The sheriff deputy TOLD me to shoot the neighbor's dog, LOL. Whatever. The news won't tell you that because that isn't politically correct.
> 
> _That's not even part of the story. Just stick to the facts mam. (Dragnet)_
> 
> They want you to see these pretty purebred dogs and make you all feel terrible that some horrible old guy shot them.
> 
> _To the 5 kids it didn't matter if the dog was a pure bred or a mixer from the pound. Me either for that matter. _
> 
> _And without looking back I'm pretty sure I've just called the guy irresponsible and a bad neighbor. I'm sure he's a terrific papaw._


Sorry I just don't agree with your opinion here. Your thinking comes off as twisted and over the top to me. Yes it would be wrong of me, and like I said in the first post if it happened to my family I would have been charged with assault.


----------



## damaya

Dainerra said:


> The only reason this guy was charged is because there are pictures of cute friendly dogs in the media.


nope. You're wrong too.

"Directly behind the dog and in the line of fire was a house with residents inside - facts that spurred the endangerment charge."

source Chester County dog shooter will face charges after all

Have any of you sheeple even read anything about this or just have your opinion and sticking to it?


----------



## Dainerra

Yes, the kids are no doubt heartbroken over the loss of their dog. What about the old man's grandchildren who have sobbed over the sheep that they bottle-fed as a lamb being ripped apart by the neighbor's dog?
A couple years ago, I got an absolutely hysterical call from my children. I couldn't even understand them well enough to know what they were screaming about. I drove home at 100MPH and they met me at the door, still hysterical. The neighbor's dog (who was also loved by the children he lived with) came through our fence, ripped the door of the rabbit hutch off its hinges and proceeded to slaughter my daughter's bunny while she watched from the window. By the time I got home, there were pieces of her beloved bunny all over our yard. She had nightmares for months afterwards.
All of my neighbors know the law (I've called enough times and filed enough complaints to be sure of it!) and, now, any dog that is in my yard is probably going to be shot. If I see a dog wandering in the front yard, yes I will try to chase it off. Any dog in the BACK part of the property where the animals are? It will be shot. PERIOD. End of story. 
I've even had stray dogs jump my fence and try to come in my doggie door. That's a large part of the reason that I don't have it anymore. 
Yes, a hole in the fence is a tragic thing. Another reason that I don't use the doggie door any longer. Also the reason that you will see most people here advocate NEVER leaving a dog in the yard alone, no matter how securely it's fenced. Because things happen. 
I have been in this farmer's position more than once so if it were to happen to my dog, I'd be heartbroken. But I have no blame for him.


----------



## Dainerra

damaya said:


> nope. You're wrong too.
> 
> "Directly behind the dog and in the line of fire was a house with residents inside - facts that spurred the endangerment charge."
> 
> source Chester County dog shooter will face charges after all
> 
> Have any of you sheeple even read anything about this or just have your opinion and sticking to it?


the house was there the first time that the police investigated and they decided not to press charges. Only after the pictures of cute doggies and crying children did they decide to press charges about the house being in the line of fire.


----------



## damaya

Dainerra said:


> Yes, the kids are no doubt heartbroken over the loss of their dog. What about the old man's grandchildren who have sobbed over the sheep that they bottle-fed as a lamb being ripped apart by the neighbor's dog?
> 
> _I didn't read where a sheep was killed. Need a link for that too._
> 
> A couple years ago, I got an absolutely hysterical call from my children. I couldn't even understand them well enough to know what they were screaming about. I drove home at 100MPH and they met me at the door, still hysterical. The neighbor's dog (who was also loved by the children he lived with) came through our fence, ripped the door of the rabbit hutch off its hinges and proceeded to slaughter my daughter's bunny while she watched from the window. By the time I got home, there were pieces of her beloved bunny all over our yard. She had nightmares for months afterwards.
> 
> _We are NOT talking about you and your animals. That is part of the problem. Some of you are generalizing all this instead of being case specific._
> 
> All of my neighbors know the law (I've called enough times and filed enough complaints to be sure of it!) and, now, any dog that is in my yard is probably going to be shot. If I see a dog wandering in the front yard, yes I will try to chase it off. Any dog in the BACK part of the property where the animals are? It will be shot. PERIOD. End of story.
> 
> _I never said there wasn't a time and place. I am a multiple gun owner as well as have a license to carry. I maintain it was a knee jerk reaction._
> 
> But I have no blame for him.
> 
> _I do._


I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.


----------



## Dainerra

but, you see, all farmers deal with the same problem. I don't know anyone who hasn't lost livestock to a dog on multiple occasions. The biggest problem with dogs is that they are "spree killers." A single playful puppy can kill 30 chickens in less than 10 minutes. That is why you get the "shoot first" mentality. Because you know that there is never just one visit from a dog. And just because they didn't make it all the way to the livestock this visit doesn't mean they won't come back when you aren't at home.
You become immune because of all of the dog owners who just do NOT care. I have never had a single owner confine a dog that I have complained about. NOT ONE DOG. Most were back in my yard the same afternoon. One actually let the dog back out to roam the neighborhood while the cops were there talking to him!!


----------



## Mrs.K

Well, consider knowing one now. We never lost any live stock to a dog. We had Sheep, Goats, Chicken, Ducks, Turkeys, Cats and lots of horses and plenty of Shepherds. 

Never once killed a dog live stock. Not our own, not strays, not any other dog. Actually the Ravens did more damage than any other predator and you are not allowed to shoot them in Germany since they are protected. They mainly went for the baby chicken so until they were a certain age, we had to keep them locked up.


----------



## damaya

Dainerra said:


> but, you see


No. Obviously I don't. 
Still saying knee jerk reaction.


----------



## Nigel

Dainerra said:


> the house was there the first time that the police investigated and they decided not to press charges. Only after the pictures of cute doggies and crying children did they decide to press charges about the house being in the line of fire.


The house was there the first time, but the "farmer" lied about what actually occurred the first time.




Pilotti told police he had retrieved his shotgun and buckshot shells from his garage about 11:20 a.m. Feb. 12 after seeing the dogs in his pasture chasing his sheep.

Investigators were uneasy about that statement, so they questioned Pilotti again Thursday, authorities said.

This time, police said, Pilotti admitted that the older dog was not pursuing or even close to his sheep, but was trotting slowly toward him when he fired his shotgun at the dog's head. Directly behind the dog and in the line of fire was a house with residents inside - facts that spurred the endangerment charge.

After shooting the first dog, the police complaint says, Pilotti reloaded his shotgun and took aim at the second.


----------



## Syaoransbear

I absolutely don't see how it was necessary to kill the second dog, which was running away.


----------



## Dainerra

People were asking how someone gets to the point where they will shoot first, ask questions later. I've explained how you get to that point in your life.

Honestly, most dogs that disappear probably have been shot by either farmers or hunters - the most common rule is SSS (shoot, shovel, shut up). 
My neighbor, for instance, has killed dozens of dogs. The only reason I know is that he lets me know that XYZ dog won't be bothering my birds any longer. The owners of the dogs just shrug and go out and get a new dog.


----------



## codmaster

Syaoransbear said:


> I absolutely don't see how it was necessary to kill the second dog, which was running away.


 
Maybe so he wouldn't come back when the owner of the prey animals wasn't there and kill some more?


----------



## Blanketback

selzer said:


> But personally, I prefer to think that if my dogs go off my property onto someone else's they will get shot.


Same here! Although I know that not all of my neighbors own firearms, so it's not very likely, in the grand scheme of things I might prefer that my dog got shot. He could be hit by a car and die in the ditch, he could eat poison.... My absolute worst fear is that he rushes up to someone and barks at them, and the person is terrified and calls animal control, he's seized from me because "he attacked them" and then PTS. What a miserable end that would be for him. I've seen the AC kennels, and they're disgusting. As sad as this story is, the moral is: once your dog is off your property, you might never see him or her again.


----------



## Syaoransbear

codmaster said:


> Maybe so he wouldn't come back when the owner of the prey animals wasn't there and kill some more?


Kill some more? They didn't kill any in the first place.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Yeah, he should have told it straight the first time. that's true.

Still 1) it was a shot gun not a rifle with a long range

2) Stand Your Ground/Castle Doctrine only applies in the case of humans?

Livestock is considered personal property and in some states you can protect your personal property with lethal force. In the case of dogs it usually doesn't end up with the shooter being charged.

As someone who grew up in the country and had cattle and horses I can attest to the fact that stray/loose dogs represent a real loss to farmers. Often small farmers are getting by on razor thin margins (I don't know if this is the case with the shooter in this story but generally it's a truism).

Growing up in farm country there was an unspoken rule that if a dog got loose and onto the farmer's property it would probably be shot. We all knew it. The three S.S.S's - shoot, shovel and shut up. The farmer is 72 years old (per linked article that I did read in it's entirety). He's probably old school.

Further, when we had problems in the past and would ask neighbors to keep their dogs contained they often denied it was their dog or they felt their dog(s) had the right to roam. The former was usually easy to take care of. As one farmer told a suburbanite dog owner, "I shot the dog that wasn't yours."

I agree with Selzer. While this is tragic anyone who moves out to the country should be aware farmers have taken a lot of flack from city folks who move out and then complain about smells, flies, tractors going too slow down the road, and that dogs can't run free.





Nigel said:


> The house was there the first time, but the "farmer" lied about what actually occurred the first time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pilotti told police he had retrieved his shotgun and buckshot shells from his garage about 11:20 a.m. Feb. 12 after seeing the dogs in his pasture chasing his sheep.
> 
> Investigators were uneasy about that statement, so they questioned Pilotti again Thursday, authorities said.
> 
> This time, police said, Pilotti admitted that the older dog was not pursuing or even close to his sheep, but was trotting slowly toward him when he fired his shotgun at the dog's head. Directly behind the dog and in the line of fire was a house with residents inside - facts that spurred the endangerment charge.
> 
> After shooting the first dog, the police complaint says, Pilotti reloaded his shotgun and took aim at the second.


----------



## codmaster

Syaoransbear said:


> Kill some more? *They didn't kill any in the first place.*





*Maybe because someone was there to stop them? HHHMMM!*

Would you want to bet that free roaming dogs will NOT kill any livestock?

Many (most?) free roaming dogs, esp. in a pack, WILL attack and kill domwestic livestock! 

They are animals after all, and no matter what a deluded owner may think, little Fido WILL KILL! They are predators!

And they cannot be allowed to do so.


----------



## Nigel

Gwenhwyfair said:


> Yeah, he should have told it straight the first time. that's true.
> 
> *Still 1) it was a shot gun not a rifle with a long range
> *
> 2) Stand Your Ground/Castle Doctrine only applies in the case of humans?
> 
> Livestock is considered personal property and in some states you can protect your personal property with lethal force. In the case of dogs it usually doesn't end up with the shooter being charged.
> 
> As someone who grew up in the country and had cattle and horses I can attest to the fact that stray/loose dogs represent a real loss to farmers. Often small farmers are getting by on razor thin margins (I don't know if this is the case with the shooter in this story but generally it's a truism).
> 
> Growing up in farm country there was an unspoken rule that if a dog got loose and onto the farmer's property it would probably be shot. We all knew it. The three S.S.S's - shoot, shovel and shut up. The farmer is 72 years old (per linked article that I did read in it's entirety). He's probably old school.
> 
> Further, when we had problems in the past and would ask neighbors to keep their dogs contained they often denied it was their dog or they felt their dog(s) had the right to roam. The former was usually easy to take care of. As one farmer told a suburbanite dog owner, "I shot the dog that wasn't yours."
> 
> I agree with Selzer. While this is tragic anyone who moves out to the country should be aware farmers have taken a lot of flack from city folks who move out and then complain about smells, flies, tractors going too slow down the road, and that dogs can't run free.


Are you assuming the house is a safe distance away because he use a shot gun? Who's to say the house/property line wasn't 50ft away? We don't know the line of sight and I'm sure the police are aware of the effective range of a shot gun with what ever type of shells he used. The fact that he lied about it initially tells me all I need to know. 

I agree with most of what Selzer and the others are saying in regards to farmers protecting their livestock, but I don't agree it's a "one size fits all" approach to every encounter with a dog on your property.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Actually I didn't indicate whether I knew the house was a safe distance or not. I only pointed that out for the sake of accurate discussion that the gun used was a shot gun, which does_ minimize_ the question of range. As to whether the police are correct that will depend on how this comes down in court. 

We are all assuming some things to a certain extent.....in fairness right.

Agreed, misleading or lying to the police was a dumb thing to do and reflects negatively on him. I'm not sure why he did that, he may have been really taken by surprise because dogs being shot (when they are on the shooters property) and drawing a LE response is unusual...or at least it used to be especially in rural areas. Still, he should have just been straight up and honest.

I did notice at the end of the article it mentioned he expressed regret.

I hear you about the 'one size fits all' but you know.....(in general) a lot of people move out to the country and just don't think beyond the tips of their noses. They don't think about how hard it is to be a farmer and that it's NOT cute when their dog chases the calves. I've seen it so many times. _I think part of the problem here is some people don't realize that it is a chronic on going problem for farmers_.

If you move out to the country, make sure you keep your dogs contained.

BTW- a neighbor who has goats (show/milk/meat) which I learned are worth some $$$ now-a-days was having problems with strays/loose dogs killing his goats. For some reason goats really kick that prey drive into high gear. He bought two Great Pyrenees and trained them to be live stock guardians. Last I spoke with him he had not lost any goats since....but indicated the pyerness would kill any dog that messed with 'their' goats. I wonder how that would play out in court.....







Nigel said:


> Are you assuming the house is a safe distance away because he use a shot gun? Who's to say the house/property line wasn't 50ft away? We don't know the line of sight and I'm sure the police are aware of the effective range of a shot gun with what ever type of shells he used. The fact that he lied about it initially tells me all I need to know.
> 
> I agree with most of what Selzer and the others are saying in regards to farmers protecting their livestock, but I don't agree it's a "one size fits all" approach to every encounter with a dog on your property.


----------



## Syaoransbear

codmaster said:


> [/B]
> 
> 
> *Maybe because someone was there to stop them? HHHMMM!*
> 
> Would you want to bet that free roaming dogs will NOT kill any livestock?
> 
> Many (most?) free roaming dogs, esp. in a pack, WILL attack and kill domwestic livestock!
> 
> They are animals after all, and no matter what a deluded owner may think, little Fido WILL KILL! They are predators!
> 
> And they cannot be allowed to do so.


No, it's because they weren't predatory dogs to begin with. He admitted that they weren't chasing his livestock, he shot the first dog as it was approaching him in a friendly manner, and the second dog was clearly scared off from the first gunfire. He could have caught them and held them. I think it's pretty heartless to kill an animal if they aren't being a threat to your livestock and if you had the option to capture them and find their owners. Just being a dog isn't a threat.


----------



## Nigel

Gwenhwyfair said:


> Actually I didn't indicate whether I knew the house was a safe distance or not. I only pointed that out for the sake of accurate discussion that the gun used was a shot gun, which does_ minimize_ the question of range. As to whether the police are correct that will depend on how this comes down in court.
> 
> We are all assuming some things to a certain extent.....in fairness right.
> 
> Agreed, misleading or lying to the police was a dumb thing to do and reflects negatively on him. I'm not sure why he did that, he may have been really taken by surprise because dogs being shot (when they are on the shooters property) and drawing a LE response is unusual...or at least it used to be especially in rural areas. Still, he should have just been straight up and honest.
> 
> I did notice at the end of the article it mentioned he expressed regret.
> 
> I hear you about the 'one size fits all' but you know.....(in general) a lot of people move out to the country and just don't think beyond the tips of their noses. They don't think about how hard it is to be a farmer and that it's NOT cute when their dog chases the calves. I've seen it so many times. _I think part of the problem here is some people don't realize that it is a chronic on going problem for farmers_.
> 
> If you move out to the country, make sure you keep your dogs contained.
> 
> BTW- a neighbor who has goats (show/milk/meat) which I learned are worth some $$$ now-a-days was having problems with strays/loose dogs killing his goats. For some reason goats really kick that prey drive into high gear. He bought two Great Pyrenees and trained them to be live stock guardians. Last I spoke with him he had not lost any goats since....but indicated the pyerness would kill any dog that messed with 'their' goats. I wonder how that would play out in court.....


When I saw he used a shot gun, I wondered about the same thing, are his neighbors close? IDK. One of my co-workers raises goats and they are becoming big business for pasture restoring and weed control, and meat, at least from what he tells me.

On the city/country thing, My sister and I are the only members of my immediate family who live in a city. My parents, uncles, most of my cousins etc... Are all either farmers or live on acrage/rural areas of Wisconsin, Minnesota and Ontario. I spent several summers learning why I never want to be a dairy farmer. It was to keep me out of trouble and it worked. One of my first lessons was the difference between hay and straw. I was supposed to put straw down for the cows when they came into barn to be milked, but not paying attention to what I was told, I threw down lots and lots of hay, maybe a little extra so the cows could be nice and comfy. Yes I got my butt chewed and then some.  farming is very hard work, often with little reward, I have tons of respect for these people.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

(in red) LOL! I bet you did! hehehe....I can imagine, thanks for the chuckle. 

Wanna get a good work out, bale and stack hay under the hot summer sun.  

My Grandpa was a dairy farmer in Canada! I'd rather run some beef cattle tho (grass fed if I have enough land) and maybe some dairy goats if I could...

It is hard work....but if I had to do it over again...I would not leave it behind.



Nigel said:


> When I saw he used a shot gun, I wondered about the same thing, are his neighbors close? IDK. One of my co-workers raises goats and they are becoming big business for pasture restoring and weed control, and meat, at least from what he tells me.
> 
> On the city/country thing, My sister and I are the only members of my immediate family who live in a city. My parents, uncles, most of my cousins etc... Are all either farmers or live on acrage/rural areas of Wisconsin, Minnesota and Ontario. I spent several summers learning why I never want to be a dairy farmer. It was to keep me out of trouble and it worked. One of my first lessons was the difference between hay and straw. I was supposed to put straw down for the cows when they came into barn to be milked, but not paying attention to what I was told, I threw down lots and lots of hay, maybe a little extra so the cows could be nice and comfy. Yes I got my butt chewed and then some.  farming is very hard work, often with little reward, I have tons of respect for these people.


----------



## Lilie

I have livestock. I will shoot stray dogs that come onto my property. It is my choice that for the dog's first offense, he'll get a spray of rat shot. Normally that will leave a great enough impression on him to never come back again. I don't care if the dog is just taking a casual stroll through my place or if it's stalking my livestock. He'll get the same treatment. 

If the dog decides that my livestock out weighs the risk of being shot and comes back for more, I won't use rat shot the next time. 

If you think poorly of me for making that stand, then I ask you to just picture a mother goat, with it's guts torn out trying to protect her twins. It was the neighbor's dogs. This goat lived long enough for me to be notified (by my neighbors) that there was screaming coming from my place. I rushed home to find her, still alive. The vet was an hour out. I had to shoot her myself to put her out of her misery. I had two orphan babies to bottle feed. All because someone couldn't keep their dogs on their own property. 

I ask you to picture a horse with drainage tubes running through both it's back legs because it was mauled by dogs. A very expensive show horse who never saw the inside of an arena again, but stayed on my feed bill till the day she died because it wasn't her fault that people can't keep their own dogs on their property.

I ask you to picture a horse with it's face split open because it was chased into a fence by dogs. Because people can't keep their own dogs on their property. 

Not only does it totally break my heart to see any animal in pain, it causes me great rage to see pain come to my animals because others can't take responsibility of their own animals. And it causes me great rage that I have to defend my livestock against people who are idiots and their dogs suffer for it. 

I keep a loaded rifle with rat shot. I will provide the benefit of the doubt for a dog that has escaped. Once. Once is all it gets.


----------



## codmaster

Lillie,


----------



## Lilie

codmaster said:


> Lillie,


As I sat and pondered as to the possibilities of what is was you wanted to say...I came upon the possibility that Zombies broke through your door at the exact moment you were going to post. 

I'm hoping that I'm wrong regarding that possibility.....


----------



## Verivus

Lilie said:


> As I sat and pondered as to the possibilities of what is was you wanted to say...I came upon the possibility that Zombies broke through your door at the exact moment you were going to post.
> 
> I'm hoping that I'm wrong regarding that possibility.....


:spittingcoffee::wild:


----------



## codmaster

Lilie said:


> As I sat and pondered as to the possibilities of what is was you wanted to say...I came upon the possibility that Zombies broke through your door at the exact moment you were going to post.
> 
> I'm hoping that I'm wrong regarding that possibility.....


 
And my guess is that you would be an expert on Zombies (just from your posts, of course).

But thank you for at least noticing - much appreciated!

And hopefully my post will be of real use to you as that was my hope that you could improve both you and your dog.


----------



## Lilie

codmaster said:


> And hopefully my post will be of real use to you as that was my hope that you could improve both you and your dog.


I always feel improved by your posts. Both from what you say...and what you don't say. Hondo however, just likes to look at the pictures.


----------



## pets4life

selzer said:


> A cow or a horse is unlikely to kill your dog. It isn't the same. A dog is EXTREMELY likely to kill sheep, chickens or rabbits.
> 
> If a cow or horse gets hit by a car, the owner of the horse or car, at least here in Ohio, is liable.
> 
> Dogs are predators. We choose to live with predators. It is up to us to ensure that our predators are under control.



I use to have a standardbred mare that would go out of her way to kill coyotes and try to kill dogs any chance she got. Even when she was in her stall she would lash out and try to grab the guard dogs used to guard the stable. I was told it was not that unusual specially with hotbloods and she was not even a hot blood.

The man should not have shot the second dog it was running away.


----------



## Gharrissc

We have two Flemish Giant Rabbits that we allow outdoor time on nice days. My husband has shot dogs who belonged to a guy who lived on the next property.I was furious when he told me what he had done,but after coming home to see how torn up the hutch was,I was tenatively glad that he did it. The rabbits were not harmed,but I was incredibly upset about the dogs and the lack of caring from the owner. We did let him know that his dogs were shot,and he just shrugged it off. 

This is the only time we have had to do this,and my husband does try to give dogs the benefit of the doubt.He doesn't go crazy shooting dogs,as we know that accidents can happen with dogs getting out. However, an accident shouldn't happen every week. 

Even though my dogs have been exposed to many types of animals,and are always gentle with them I would never say that it is impossible for them to hurt livestock if they are unsupervised.The only way to avoid what happened in this case is to make sure that you are diligent about your dogs' whereabouts.

As far as the second dog in this case goes, it shouldn't have been shot if it were running away.


----------



## sparra

Gharrissc said:


> As far as the second dog in this case goes, it shouldn't have been shot if it were running away.


 So what should the dog have been doing to make it OK?? In all seriousness of course it would be running away.....if it was standing there looking at him would that have made shooting it easier to accept??

I take anyone's opinion on this with a grain of salt if they have never been in the shooters situation......we have been so i fully understand why he shot those dogs. Dogs are not more important than sheep just because they are someones pet. We had 30 ewes taken out in one night by our neighbours dogs....yes they were "just sheep" but we had spent years selectively breeding them to get what we wanted.....years of work wiped out in one night......


----------



## Gharrissc

I am looking at this from a dog rescuer's point of view,which may be the problem. I don't have the 'farmer mentality' obviously.To me if the dog was running away,then it wasn't posing a threat. Honestly I think a lot of farmers get a little too gun happy when they see a dog. I've seen some who will any and every dog regardless. We aren't necessarily farmers because we have just the two rabbits who are pets.


----------



## damaya

Lilie said:


> I keep a loaded rifle with rat shot. I will provide the benefit of the doubt for a dog that has escaped. Once. Once is all it gets.


Completely understand and agree with this.



> Just being a dog isn't a threat.


This too. 
Just like all guys with long hair aren't pot heads, and all people with tatoos aren't outlaws. If somebody knocks on my door at midnight I won't open it and start shooting, however if they kicked my door in there is a firearm within reach, and it would be discharged. 

I have maintained throughout this thread that I think it was a knee jerk reaction, and nothing has been brought up that changes that. I do sympathize with the loss of anything someone cherishes whether that is a pet, farm animal or family member, but some of the opinions here just seem so tunnel visioned and over the top.



> I don't have the 'farmer mentality' obviously


If that represents the comments that I just called "tunnel visioned and over the top" then I'm glad I don't have that either.


----------



## Lauri & The Gang

Back when I had chickens and ducks I used to keep a loaded gun by the back door just in case.

My chickens were from run-of-the-mill breeding stock but my ducks - those things cost me between $15 - $25 EACH as babies. As adults I could sell some of them for upwards for $150 each.

I wasn't about to risk $3600 on the HOPE that a stray dog wouldn't harm them (either by physical confrontation of just by chasing them). I was ready to shoot first and not even bother asking questions.

Even if a dog never makes physical contact they can still cause an animals death by chasing them.


----------



## Lauri & The Gang

damaya said:


> I have maintained throughout this thread that I think it was a knee jerk reaction, and nothing has been brought up that changes that.


Ok, tell me then. I'm standing at my back door when I see a dog start running at my flock of ducks.

I have maybe 20 seconds before the dog reaches my flock.

I could try yelling at the dog. That would only take a second and I should be able to tell right away if it's going to work.

Let's say it doesn't and the dog keeps going. Now what? I'm down to 15 seconds before the dog reaches my flock. What else can I try?

Can't shoot into the air - that is very dangerous.

How long do I wait until I resort to shooting the dog?

By the time the dog gets within 25 feet of the flock they will start panicking. They will start running around and could injure themselves.

Do I wait until the dog has the first duck in it's mouth before I shoot?

I have close to $1000 invested in that flock (price of babies, cost of feed and cost of showing). How much do I have to lose before I'm "justified" in shooting the dog?

Do you know how quickly a dog can decimate a flock of chickens or ducks? If a dog is just doing it for fun - grabs a bird, shakes it a couple times and breaks it's neck - it can kill a bird every 5 seconds.


----------



## sparra

damaya said:


> This too.
> Just like all guys with long hair aren't pot heads, and all people with tatoos aren't outlaws. If somebody knocks on my door at midnight I won't open it and start shooting, however if they kicked my door in there is a firearm within reach, and it would be discharged.
> 
> I have maintained throughout this thread that I think it was a knee jerk reaction, and nothing has been brought up that changes that. I do sympathize with the loss of anything someone cherishes whether that is a pet, farm animal or family member, but some of the opinions here just seem so tunnel visioned and over the top.
> 
> 
> 
> If that represents the comments that I just called "tunnel visioned and over the top" then I'm glad I don't have that either.


Have you ever been in the situation of having livestock threatened??
Your comments to me say no.......you have little understanding of the damage dogs can do to livestock just by being present in their environment by your comments.
Most "city folk" don't understand "farmer mentality" cause they have never lived it......if farmer mentality means shooting a dog BEFORE they tear up your sheep then I have it and I'm glad I have it.


----------



## damaya

Lauri & The Gang said:


> Ok, tell me then.


_I did._



> I keep a loaded rifle with rat shot. I will provide the benefit of the doubt for a dog that has escaped. Once. Once is all it gets


I said I understand and agree with this. Don't make me repeat myself it doesn't flatter either one of us. I can't answer all those other questions for you. Do whatever _you _think you have to I guess.



> Most "city folk" don't understand


Give me a break sparra, I've lived in a town of 3300 people all my life. Most people here are as country as cornbread. I KNOW country. I live 2 minutes by car from a few hundred acre _working _farm that is right in the middle of our "corporate city limits".


----------



## Verivus

Lauri & The Gang said:


> I have close to $1000 invested in that flock (price of babies, cost of feed and cost of showing). How much do I have to lose before I'm "justified" in shooting the dog?


Damaya, I would like to hear your answer to this question since you're adamant that it is wrong to shoot.


----------



## LifeofRiley

Damaya is not adamant that it is wrong to shoot. The OP is simply stating that it should not be the first and only solution people consider. That, I don't know, if they just took a moment to assess the situation before going out guns blazing, they might discover there is a better solution!

Damaya, sorry if my assessment of your pov is wrong!


----------



## damaya

LifeofRiley said:


> Damaya is not adamant that it is wrong to shoot. The OP is simply stating that it should not be the first and only solution people consider. That, I don't know, if they just took a moment to assess the situation before going out guns blazing, they might discover there is a better solution!
> 
> Damaya, sorry if my assessment of your pov is wrong!


Thank you for not making me repeat myself _again._


----------



## Nigel

Verivus said:


> Damaya, I would like to hear your answer to this question since you're adamant that it is wrong to shoot.


The question all along has been about the scenario posted in the OP. 

" *Pilotti admitted that the older dog was not pursuing or even close to his sheep, but was trotting slowly toward him when he fired his shotgun at the dog's head"*

I don't see how someone can justify shooting a dog described in this manner.


----------



## LifeofRiley

Nigel said:


> The question all along has been about the scenario posted in the OP.
> 
> " *Pilotti admitted that the older dog was not pursuing or even close to his sheep, but was trotting slowly toward him when he fired his shotgun at the dog's head"*
> 
> I don't see how someone can justify shooting a dog described in this manner.


Agreed!


----------



## Gharrissc

Nigel said:


> The question all along has been about the scenario posted in the OP.
> 
> " *Pilotti admitted that the older dog was not pursuing or even close to his sheep, but was trotting slowly toward him when he fired his shotgun at the dog's head"*
> 
> I don't see how someone can justify shooting a dog described in this manner.


This


----------



## sparra

damaya said:


> _I did._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Give me a break sparra, I've lived in a town of 3300 people all my life. Most people here are as country as cornbread. I KNOW country. I live 2 minutes by car from a few hundred acre _working _farm that is right in the middle of our "corporate city limits".


Sorry doesn't cut the cornbread for me. Do you make your LIVING from raising livestock. I live on an 8500 acre sheep farm where our very existence depends on the livestock we raise and the crops we grow. have you invested hundreds of thousands of dollars into livestock and breeding programs??? Until you have you will never understand the heartbreak of losing your stock to a couple of wayward dogs.


----------



## selzer

I think it is the fact that the dogs were there that gave him the justification to shoot them. Soon spring lambs will be coming, and that old man can't be out with his sheep every moment. Having dogs on his property is extremely dangerous to his critters. 

At that moment in time the dogs were not doing damage. But this is the problem with all the humanizing of dogs and Lassie movies, we all think dogs will only kill if they are starving. While actually the reverse is true. A dog that is starving and weak is less likely to play a game of chase with cattle or sheep. That dog is going to be rooting in the garbage looking for whatever the ***** left behind. A strong, happy dog will see an animal it has never seen before, and if it turns tail and runs, that dog is going to chase it. It is ingrained deep into the dog's make up. It is what dogs do. 

The reason prey animals panic when they see a predator is because predators chase and kill them. That is what they do. they are dogs. They chase and they will also kill. 

Just being on the guy's property, in my opinion is enough to justify shooting the dogs.

And I really don't care about the 5 children either. Maybe this was exactly the way the newspaper article printed it. Maybe this was the very first time these two dogs were AWOL, and due to a tree taking down part of their fence. If that is the case it is sad, but no sadder than the dogs getting hit by a truck and killed. People embellish stories so that they look better, and the outrage is stronger. 

Be that as it may, the farmer had no way of knowing that these particular dogs had really good owners who had their boundary violated. The farmer only knew that the dogs were on his property, and dogs are a real problem. 

If the farmer violated a law relating to how he discharged his weapon, then he should be fined. But I think he was right to shoot both dogs.


----------



## damaya

I'll take yours a sentence at a time.



sparra said:


> Sorry doesn't cut the cornbread for me.
> _Don't care what cuts your cornbread._
> 
> Do you make your LIVING from raising livestock.
> _No_
> 
> I live on an 8500 acre sheep farm where our very existence depends on the livestock we raise and the crops we grow.
> _Good for you. Hope you do well._
> 
> have you invested hundreds of thousands of dollars into livestock and breeding programs???
> _No_
> 
> Until you have you will never understand the heartbreak of losing your stock to a couple of wayward dogs.
> _whatever_


I said way back we can agree to disagee. I also said I agree with protecting what is yours. We disagree on how to go about it. Leave it.


----------



## sparra

damaya said:


> I said way back we can agree to disagee. I also said I agree with protecting what is yours. We disagree on how to go about it. Leave it.


Oh don't get all annoyed about it. ..... we will agree to disagree


----------



## damaya

selzer said:


> I think it is the fact that the dogs were there that gave him the justification to shoot them. Soon spring lambs will be coming, and that old man can't be out with his sheep every moment. Having dogs on his property is extremely dangerous to his critters.
> 
> At that moment in time the dogs were not doing damage. But this is the problem with all the humanizing of dogs and Lassie movies, we all think dogs will only kill if they are starving. While actually the reverse is true. A dog that is starving and weak is less likely to play a game of chase with cattle or sheep. That dog is going to be rooting in the garbage looking for whatever the ***** left behind. A strong, happy dog will see an animal it has never seen before, and if it turns tail and runs, that dog is going to chase it. It is ingrained deep into the dog's make up. It is what dogs do.
> 
> The reason prey animals panic when they see a predator is because predators chase and kill them. That is what they do. they are dogs. They chase and they will also kill.
> 
> Just being on the guy's property, in my opinion is enough to justify shooting the dogs.
> 
> *And I really don't care about the 5 children either*. Maybe this was exactly the way the newspaper article printed it. Maybe this was the very first time these two dogs were AWOL, and due to a tree taking down part of their fence. If that is the case it is sad, but no sadder than the dogs getting hit by a truck and killed. People embellish stories so that they look better, and the outrage is stronger.
> 
> Be that as it may, the farmer had no way of knowing that these particular dogs had really good owners who had their boundary violated. The farmer only knew that the dogs were on his property, and dogs are a real problem.
> 
> If the farmer violated a law relating to how he discharged his weapon, then he should be fined. But I think he was right to shoot both dogs.


You too. You have taken the story blown it competely out of proportion with your own what-ifs to justify what you think is right. I didn't say you were wrong. I said I'd do it differently.

The bolded part is a really nice comment. I don't think I've ever said that in any situation. We did have a lady that recently crashed her car and she and her 4 children died in the fire, but she was a pill head so the kids probably never had much of a chance anyway. right?


----------



## damaya

sparra said:


> Oh don't get all annoyed about it. ..... we will agree to disagree


Are you kidding? I don't work. I could do this all night just for fun.


----------



## sparra




----------



## selzer

damaya said:


> You too. You have taken the story blown it competely out of proportion with your own what-ifs to justify what you think is right. I didn't say you were wrong. I said I'd do it differently.
> 
> The bolded part is a really nice comment. I don't think I've ever said that in any situation. We did have a lady that recently crashed her car and she and her 4 children died in the fire, but she was a pill head so the kids probably never had much of a chance anyway. right?


I think my next statement was that it would be just as tragic if the dogs were killed by a truck. The 5 children are the responsibility of their parents. The parents let the dogs get killed, not the shooter. Oh yeah it was the tree got the fence. Right. The fact is people should be more careful with their dogs if they don't want their kids to be heartbroken about it. Maybe that just wasn't possible. 

But really, the fence was ok when they let the dogs out. Suddenly a tree drops all by itself on the fence. No one heard this happen. There wasn't a huge storm or anything? I don't know, I just have a hard time believing the dogs were out there for 5 minutes and suddenly the tree fell for no reason on the fence and the people knew immediately, but by then the dogs are already over on a neighbor's property, who patrols his land lugging around a heavy shotgun, because 10 minutes later the dogs were dead sounds like the guy didn't have a lot of time to get his gun. 

But let's say he was in the house and the gun is at the door (because dogs and coyotes and whatever esle might be going after his sheep). 

I don't buy it. It is like my sister-in-law's meth-head kid's garage blowing up, and everything they owned, including the four kids' beds were all in that garage. Give me a break. Maybe it is all true the way they laid it out. 

The reason I don't care about the kids is because the kids will be devastated no matter how the dogs died. And a guy who has sheep to protect on his property can't be worrying about a bunch of kids that might be living with the predators in his yard -- that is not his problem. His problem is dogs in his yard where he has sheep. 

The death of dogs is hard on all ages of people. I don't really give more sympathy to people because they have not reached 18 yet.


----------



## Dainerra

damaya said:


> _I _Give me a break sparra, I've lived in a town of 3300 people all my life. Most people here are as country as cornbread. I KNOW country. I live 2 minutes by car from a few hundred acre _working _farm that is right in the middle of our "corporate city limits".



maybe that's it - you consider a town of 3300 people to be "country"? Where I'm from, that's considered living in a "big city"


----------



## Dainerra

got an email back from a friend of mine who is a Deputy....

"The farmer only did one thing wrong - the correct answer is "I haven't seen your dogs; I'll call you if I do"


----------



## Dainerra

Gharrissc said:


> I am looking at this from a dog rescuer's point of view,which may be the problem. I don't have the 'farmer mentality' obviously.To me if the dog was running away,then it wasn't posing a threat. Honestly I think a lot of farmers get a little too gun happy when they see a dog. I've seen some who will any and every dog regardless. We aren't necessarily farmers because we have just the two rabbits who are pets.


the reason that they do this, as I've said in other posts, is that just a dog wandering through the property (not even looking at the livestock) can cause a panic. One sheep runs, they all run. Step in a hole, broken leg. Trip and stumble, trampled by the flock. Fright can trigger premature birth. Either way, dead sheep is the most likely outcome. And that's just a dog wandering around.
Sheep run, dog says "Oh a game!!" and starts chasing them. Greater panic, increased chance of any of the accidents above. Dog grabs a sheep, sheep are running and screaming all over the place. Dog jumps on a lamb *SQUISH*. "Oh, this toy doesn't work anymore" so it grabs another. And another. And then another. 
The dog isn't "killing," he thinks it's a game. 
That is why a farmer will shoot a stray dog faster than a coyote - coyotes will generally kill enough to eat, dogs will wipe out an entire herd/flock because it's a game.
Much the same reasoning behind the push in the bird community against domestic cats - they kill for fun.


----------



## Dainerra

That is one thing that is most unique about AR's livestock/dog law - in most states, the dog must be actively engaged in harming the livestock. What "actively engaged" means is basically up to interpretation. That is why this guy is now being charged. (Hence the usual farmer rule of "SSS")
In AR, however, if I have lost livestock to a stray dog, I can legally shoot any dog that enters my property that looks like the dog that did it. If I didn't see the culprit, I can shoot ANY dog. Doesn't matter if they aren't doing anything. So, every time I lose a bird or have a dog charging the fences, I call the SO and I have a deputy come out to make a report. 9 out of 10 I saw where the dog went and the deputy can stop by and talk to the owners. He tells them that it is now legal for the dog to be shot on sight. The general response is a shrug and "oh well"

Here is another example of the farmer mentality, from the view of a dog owner. My neighbor a few years ago took in a hound dog. It was their son's (12 yr old) dog and she lived in a pen in the back yard with their cocker spaniel. Lucy was a fence climber and one day while I was gone, she killed a chicken that had flown over our fence into their yard. They asked me how much they owed me for the bird - nothing, it was my fault because the netting over the run was loose and I'd put off fixing it. 
A few days later, I came home from work. The neighbor met me at the car to say Lucy had escaped again and this time dug her way into the chicken run and killed 5 birds. He paid me for them and said "don't worry it won't happen again. Ben (the son) already shot her." Him and the son were very matter-of-fact about it - owning a dog that will bother livestock is too much of a liability.


----------



## balloons

As I'm reading through the comments on the article page the the OP posted (something I typically try not to do) I'm seeing a lot of people saying the same thing: These dogs were herding dogs, bred for herding, and protecting the flooooock, they would never hurt a sheep. .___.!!!!" Even though someone is there trying to tell them that the mere presence of a dog can cause panic within the flock and other such tragic things, people just do not grasp what could have happened. Not to mention the fact that just because a dog is bred to do something, doesn't mean it knows how to do it. Or even that it will do it. In fact, I think that it's much more likely that these pet dogs would maul the sheep than protect/herd.

Also, they are saying things like, "His shoot first policy is ridiculous, what if it had been a neighbor's child?!!!!" Well, would the neighbor child realistically pose a threat to his sheep?

I'm not going to sit here and pretend that I've ever lived or worked on a farm, that I have ever been around livestock, or that I've ever seen livestock destroyed by dogs. But I'm also not going to sit here and pretend like I know better than those that do or have. And I'm certainly not going to pretend like it doesn't happen.

My opinion on it is that if the dogs' mere presence near his sheep, regardless of their behavior, is likely to pose a threat, it's within his right to shoot first and ask questions later.


----------



## Dainerra

balloons said:


> Instead, they are saying things like, "His shoot first policy is ridiculous, what if it had been a neighbor's child?!!!!" Well, would the neighbor child realistically pose a threat to his sheep?
> .


is it bad that my first thought was "depends on the neighbor"? 
And, yes, I've actually had to threaten neighbors in the past that they would be shot if they were on my property again. Had a neighbor in WV that kept confusing my garage/tools with his own, usually when he thought I wasn't home. 
And, yes, I recently had children visiting next door that thought it would be fun to chase the chickens and let the bunnies out of their pen. And I've had more than 1 chicken stolen out of a secure pen in the middle of the afternoon, complete with footprints in the mud.


----------



## Nigel

Dainerra said:


> got an email back from a friend of mine who is a Deputy....
> 
> "The farmer only did one thing wrong - the correct answer is "I haven't seen your dogs; I'll call you if I do"


I don't think the Fed-ex driver/farmer had the option to SSS. I don't think the area where this happened is all that rural. Look up Chester Springs where the incident happened. I'm sure with that many homes so close, someone's gonna call the police to investigate. 


"Pilotti, 72, of Chester Springs, with two counts of cruelty to animals and one count of recklessly endangering another person."


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Yup and if you're trying to put weight on beef cattle the stress of being chased and harrassed by dogs can drop weight. In FL the stress and the heat could kill a cow, if it's a pregnant cow double the loss.


I've seen many a calf with it's ear half torn off too....gets infected and then a vet call in needed.




sparra said:


> Have you ever been in the situation of having livestock threatened??
> Your comments to me say no.......you have little understanding of the damage dogs can do to livestock just by being present in their environment by your comments.
> Most "city folk" don't understand "farmer mentality" cause they have never lived it......if farmer mentality means shooting a dog BEFORE they tear up your sheep then I have it and I'm glad I have it.


----------



## llamattude

Boy do I know what neighbors like this are like. We inherited my mother in laws Papillion, the little dog to say the least has been very hard to train not to run out the door. Before when she would get out the neighbor would help catch her and hand her over to us. Well, my mother in law had been buried all of three days, we had not worked with her during this time as our emotions were to out of control to help her any. We had an ice storm, everything was slick, and we were slow getting out the door for me to take my son to catch the bus. The dog runs out on us. We start trying to catch her and she runs right to the old man, he then as I'm bending down to grab her hauls off and kicks her across the yard, then starts screaming at me that I'm an idiot, the dog is an idiot, and my mother in law was an idiot. Then he comes after me like he is going to attack me screaming at me the whole time. So, I am terrified of this man. 

Now, here is the next thing. We have lived here 10 years, he has been our neighbor for that long. He has never really wanted to get along with us. He fusses about everything we do, I'm sure I could even call him and ask him when I used the bathroom last and he could tell me. We are not to even look at his place without him throwing a fit, yet he thinks it is fine for his dog to come over and do his business in our yard. (My dogs are not allowed in his yard when they get out on accident. We have a fence for my dogs and they stay there unless something crazy happens.) His dog his allowed to get in our trash, he sees no problem with that. He even walks his dog on the edge of our property so that he can come over on us and do his business. Yet, if I say something to him he comes after me like he is going to hurt me or something. 

Can't report him because we have to have proof and of course when I have a camera or my phone ready he is goody goody nice. He will talk to you like you are his best friend and then go to someone else and tell all kinds of lies.


----------



## pets4life

it is not very smart to keep sheep or any free range animal without something protecting them anyway eventually something will kill them and you will lose your money


----------



## pets4life

lamatude carry around mace or a taser and just use it on him if he gets near u or hurts ur dog. You cant let someone come at you like they are going to attack you.


----------



## Anitsisqua

I'm sorry this happened, but after seeing our goat, Hannah, and her twin kids mauled by "pet" dogs, I understand where the guy is coming from. Even though Hannah made it, it seemed like she was grieving for the kids. It was horrible. They were kept in a pen, but that didn't keep the dogs out.

I understand why he shot the dogs...especially if the sheep are his livelihood. Should his family be forced to take the hit because his neighbors can't control their dogs?

This is very sad all around, though.


----------



## GSDolch

Anitsisqua said:


> I'm sorry this happened, but after seeing our goat, Hannah, and her twin kids mauled by "pet" dogs, I understand where the guy is coming from. Even though Hannah made it, it seemed like she was grieving for the kids. It was horrible. They were kept in a pen, but that didn't keep the dogs out.
> 
> I understand why he shot the dogs...especially if the sheep are his livelihood. Should his family be forced to take the hit *because his neighbors can't control their dogs?*
> 
> This is very sad all around, though.



I think this hits the nail on the head. A lot of people seem to be coming at it from the angle of it being a one time thing, when in reality, when you live in a rural area, out in farm land, etc, more times than not, that is NOT the case.

Yes, sometimes dogs get loose, it happens, but that is a risk that is taken when someone chooses to life next to farmers who make their lives farming. This could be a good argument for getting to know your neighbors, having your dog know your neighbors so that the farmers in the area know your dog, and will, hopefully, even come to them. But lets face it, that is NOT the majority of the average joe smoe dog owner. 

I think many people are putting themselves in place of the dog owners and might be putting their own dog in the situation, the "what if" factor, if you will. I don't adhere to the 100% theory, so I can very easily put myself and my dog in this situation. My mix doesn't like cats, there have been a few, but if its an unknown cat that wanders into our yard, well, the cat has upped its chances of getting killed if he can't get out of the yard before I notice. But if here were to get out, no, its not something that really happens, no its not something that I let happen, but it HAS happened. Thankfully, my dog only got a broke leg out of it from tripping, but if he chased, cornered and got a hold of the cat in its own yard, then the owner of the cat has ever right to do whatever is needed to save his cat. I would expect nothing less, because I would do the same if my pet, or livestock were being attacked, or the threat was right there (IE: the dogs scarring the livestock)

The owner of the animal at large is the one responsible, it being an accident does not dissolve that responsibility.


----------



## Mrs.K

Man charged with shooting neighbor's beloved Bernese Mountain dogs - U.S. News


> I read the actual police report and have been following this story for a week. By his own addmission the dogs were no where near the sheep when he shot them. He saw them in the yard grabbed his gun and went out and shot the male Argus in the face at point blank range. Then Fiona the female was running away from him and the sheep he took aim and shot her. She dropped to the ground got up to try to run away again and fell down and died. There was no threat to his sheep. While I support his right to protect his sheep he acted irresponsibly here and deserves to pay for what he has done. There was a kids play set right on the other side of his fence. He also is no farmer. He has less than 4 acres and that is actually not enough land in his township to be even housing livestock. Please read more on the story before you stand up for this coward. He destroyed a family.


I found this in the comment section. If that is true...


----------



## Lauri & The Gang

LifeofRiley said:


> Damaya is not adamant that it is wrong to shoot. The OP is simply stating that it should not be the first and only solution people consider. That, I don't know, if they just took a moment to assess the situation before going out guns blazing, they might discover there is a better solution!!


But the problem is that in that "moment" you can lose thousands of dollars worth of livestock.


----------



## pets4life

ive had all kinds of ducks, geese poultry. My parents had goats, cattle etc..


Just having these alone with a gun they will eventually get killed and mutilated. Its kinda cruel having them with no protection. They need protection in form of guard animals. My family usually had a bunch of dogs that protected their animals. 

Ive never lost a bird to stray dog or a predator either. Its how you set up your animals. You need to pretend everything out there wants to kill and eat them because they do. IF dogs dont get them coyotes, eagles, bobcats, will.

Ducks and geese i had were muscovy, chinese geese, shetland ducks(rare) call ducks.


----------



## Lilie

pets4life said:


> Its how you set up your animals. You need to pretend everything out there wants to kill and eat them because they do. IF dogs dont get them coyotes, eagles, bobcats, will.


Not true. We have coyotes. They never come up to the house/barn/out buildings. They don't want to come near humans. I've lived in the same place for over 20 years. 

Domestic dogs don't have a fear of humans. They'll come up to a pen and do everything that can to get to the animals inside that are reacting to their presence. A coyote / bob cat etc. won't waste their time if the prey is too hard to reach. A domestic dog(s) will make a day of it. 

I have horse fence all around my property where I have livestock. It is an expensive fence to maintain. It would be cheaper (easier) to run smooth wire. But horse fence helps create a barrier between my livestock and irresponsible people's dogs. However, a determined dog(s) will find a spot to go under. 

You are correct in stating a person should do all they can to protect their livestock. I do all I can. Most folks with livestock will do all they can.


----------



## pets4life

oh trust me a coyote will jump a fence and go into your backyard take your cat or ducks or whatever here they will.

Depends on the area. I agree stray dogs or domestic dogs do much more damage than a coyote or coyotes. I live in the north. I do have friends in the south and there they have told me the packs of dogs there cause much more ****. Even a single dog can. 

Depends on the area. A coyote will often grab a duck or something and run off quick. WHile a stray dog will just ruin the whole flock. With sheep they will kill and eat as fast as they can while stray dogs will just try to kill the whole flock. But still protection in some form can prevent it.


But to leave animals that have have had their natural defenses taken from them from domestic breeding on their own out there is unrealistic with out some sort of guard or electric fencing. People wont always be there to shoot. IT just creates hate and drama. Sometimes they are shooting a friendly animal sometimes they aren't. They cant wait and know for the damage to see. Just killing everything on site is a horrible protection method. It wont even work cause they arent always going to be there. The man already lost so many sheep to a pit. He will lose more sheep again in the future.


----------



## pets4life

we also gota understand if any of our gsds ever get out by mistake they will be shot pretty fast if they ever make to a farm.

if my dog ever got out she would just run around my house and look in the window if she was alone lol

if my dog ever hurt livestock id pay them for whatever i owe them and replace asap on the spot in cash that same day

too many people are just so cheap and don't own up to the damage their pets do, this is another problem for why people will shoot first


----------



## stealthq

Some people don't understand exactly how much some of that livestock costs, either. The stable where I used to ride keeps the show horses (which are usually, but not always, the most expensive) in the barn, but keeps the brood mares, foals, and lesson horses outside most of the time. I bet the average dog owner would be mighty shocked to learn that some of those brood mares cost tens of thousands of dollars. They had one that was in the hundreds of thousands - a young show mare that was taking a year off to be bred.


----------



## selzer

It is the attitude of non-farming people that gets me. My sister's friend wanted a GSD, and she got one out of my first litter as a Wedding present from my sister. She thought it was funny that the young dog was chasing her neighbor's horses, and did not try and stop it. It did not surprise me when her border collie and my pup got sick and died with all the marks of being poisoned one day after the other. 

People who do not own horses or cows or sheep or chickens or rabbits, really don't understand that compensating them for the cost of the animal is not going to make them happy. Think about it. Lets say your dog that you raised from a puppy, that you took to classes, that sleeps on your bed was attacked by your neighbors pit bull or Rottweiler and its guts were hanging out and though you rushed it to the ER, it died in your arms on the way there. The last thing you want to hear is the other dog's owner offering to give you $150 so you can go and get another one. You do not want them to give you $1500 for a new dog. It simply does not cover the pain and the horror of the thing. 

Someone comes on here and says dogs killed 30 ewes in one go, and people on here still act like these dogs weren't a threat and the guy who owned the sheep shouldn't have treated them as such.


----------



## codmaster

Stereotypes are terrible no matter which way they go - whenever anyone talks in"Generalities" - they are usually biased, predjusticed and WRONG!

I.E. "Farm people", "City people", "country people", "Big people", "old People", "Kids", etc. etc. and that is without even mentioning racial or religious stereotypes!

OR even dog breeds - I.E. "PIT BULL" being probably the worst one today.


I happen to agree with the folks who have live stock and will shoot most free running dogs on their own land! The risks are way too big!

On the other hand I would feel most offended if that beleif puts me into one group or another in someones mind. I am an individual and do not fit neatly into any stereotype!


----------



## pets4life

selzer have you ever been to an auction and seen how poorly these animals are usually treated? they are not treated anything like the way our dogs and cats are treated. You get the odd person that loves and cares for their pet. Many treat them like objects. Can you shoot and eat your dog for dinner? well they can do that with the livestock so its not the same kind of thinking or mentality. It is just about money 95% of the time.


I am not talking horses here, most horses can kill a dog pretty fast if they really want to and have a temper. I have spent a lot of time around horses. MOst equines dont have much of a problem dealing with dogs and are the least targeted. Sometimes in a blue moon stuff happens. I don't know why people are bringing horses into this. Most horses will smash a dogs face in when they had enough of them. Mares with foals are worse than a donkey with sheep. Dogs that try to menace horses are not going to last very long without being brutalized.


----------



## selzer

Codmaster, I know this is off topic, but is it actually possible for you to ever respond to a post without using exclamation points and words in all capitals? Maybe you are admonishing me for saying non-farming people in this thread, but you do this all the time, and I find that I am always feeling antagonistic toward you because you always seem to be shouting at me. 

I have never owned a flock of chickens. Chickens all look pretty much the same to me, and if I never read about people naming them, I might never realize that they have personalities and can be pets almost like our dogs. If I did not work in a tack room, I might never realize that people buy toys for their horses and have every bit as much of a relationship with them as we have with our dogs. Dogs and cats kind of have a special place because they live in the house and are pets to people wherever people may live, save some cultures that don't go for that stuff. But if cats and dogs and maybe birds are the only creatures that you see as pets, then it can be difficult to recognize that people care about their animals as much as you care about your German Shepherd Dog. 

While in general stereotypes are not helpful, there are fundamental differences in how people who own domestic animals and live in farm-country think and feel about the issue than people who have never had anything but traditional pets. It is not that the latter are incapable of comprehending it, but they may just have never considered it. And some are incapable of comprehending it. Those of us who live out there, run into these folks all the time. 

Everyone is an individual, but when new neighbors move in next door to me, I pretty much expect them to be transplants from some town or city, and I expect them to have to get to know how things are done in the country.


----------



## selzer

pets4life said:


> selzer have you ever been to an auction and seen how poorly these animals are usually treated? they are not treated anything like the way our dogs and cats are treated. You get the odd person that loves and cares for their pet. Many treat them like objects. Can you shoot and eat your dog for dinner? well they can do that with the livestock so its not the same kind of thinking or mentality. It is just about money 95% of the time.


I have seen people selling or dumping their dog. They are generally already divorced from the dog by that point, and they do give a who-ha what happens to it. You are looking at the wrong end of the spectrum. You are looking at the people who are dropping their dogs at a shelter, or selling them at the side of the road. 

People I know who take care of sheep, horses, or cows do know them all by name, and treat them very well. Many of them they have raised from birth. 

Yes, some are raised to be eaten. Just because you know this from the git-go does not mean you do not care about them. It just means that at a certain point they will be butchered for food.


----------



## pets4life

slezer when they have no use for their stock anymore when it doesnt produce milk or not worth the cost of feed what you think happens to it? You think they all get to live till old age kills them as a happy pet?


----------



## selzer

pets4life said:


> slezer when they have no use for their stock anymore when it doesnt produce milk or not worth the cost of feed what you think happens to it? You think they all get to live till old age kills them as a happy pet?



When the old milkers can't get up any more, they are generally butchered for freezer beef. And so what? Chickens will be put into a stew or pie. I don't know many who eat sheep, I expect the animals are butchered and used for dog food. And really, what does that have to do with the price of rice in China. We put down our dogs when their quality of life is such that we do not want them to suffer. What exactly is the difference? I can't see it. 

And what do many people do with pets when they are no longer cute or fun? Dumping a 13 year old dog at a shelter because it needs meds? Trading a dog for fishing gear? Dropping a bitch and pup at the shelter because they poop too much?


----------



## Nigel

selzer said:


> It is the attitude of non-farming people that gets me. My sister's friend wanted a GSD, and she got one out of my first litter as a Wedding present from my sister. She thought it was funny that the young dog was chasing her neighbor's horses, and did not try and stop it. It did not surprise me when her border collie and my pup got sick and died with all the marks of being poisoned one day after the other.
> 
> People who do not own horses or cows or sheep or chickens or rabbits, really don't understand that compensating them for the cost of the animal is not going to make them happy. Think about it. Lets say your dog that you raised from a puppy, that you took to classes, that sleeps on your bed was attacked by your neighbors pit bull or Rottweiler and its guts were hanging out and though you rushed it to the ER, it died in your arms on the way there. The last thing you want to hear is the other dog's owner offering to give you $150 so you can go and get another one. You do not want them to give you $1500 for a new dog. It simply does not cover the pain and the horror of the thing.
> 
> Someone comes on here and says dogs killed 30 ewes in one go, and people on here still act like these dogs weren't a threat and the guy who owned the sheep shouldn't have treated them as such.


All these stories in this thread, true and hypothetical are ugly scenarios and if it were happening to me I would pull the trigger, however these dogs did nothing. No history of getting out, attacking others animals, nothing as far as we know. If there had been prior complaints, I doubt this story would have made the news. 

I'm sure most dogs allowed to roam the country side will no doubt end up causing trouble, but that's most, not all. Given the shooters description of events, that's the honest version I'm referring to, I would have at least attempted to run them off. If they were not aggressive, I may try to leash them and try to identify the owner. If the dogs acted aggressive, then shoot them, but they should be guilty of something serious enough before I take their lives.


----------



## Lilie

pets4life said:


> selzer *have you ever been to an auction and seen how poorly these animals are usually treated? they are not treated anything like the way our dogs and cats are treated*. *You get the odd person that loves and cares for their pet. Many treat them like objects. Can you shoot and eat your dog for dinner? well they can do that with the livestock so its not the same kind of thinking or mentality. It is just about money 95% of the time.
> *
> 
> I am not talking horses here, most horses can kill a dog pretty fast if they really want to and have a temper. I have spent a lot of time around horses. MOst equines dont have much of a problem dealing with dogs and are the least targeted. Sometimes in a blue moon stuff happens. I don't know why people are bringing horses into this. Most horses will smash a dogs face in when they had enough of them. Mares with foals are worse than a donkey with sheep. Dogs that try to menace horses are not going to last very long without being brutalized.



You are so off in this entire post. So, so, so off. I take great offense in your comment about people and their livestock. You have no idea what you are talking about. 

Also, horses are flight or flight animals. ALL horses will have a reaction to a strange dog in their pasture. ALL Horses. You simply do not know what you are talking about.


----------



## Lauri & The Gang

pets4life said:


> But to leave animals that have have had their natural defenses taken from them from domestic breeding on their own out there is unrealistic with out some sort of guard or electric fencing.


Ok, so let's say the man in the article had a couple Great Pyrenees guarding his livestock. The two dogs come running over and his dogs go on the defensive. These dogs are NOT going to ask the intruding dogs if they have evil intentions. They are going to attack and most likely kill those dogs.

Then what happens? The mans dogs get labeled as "dangerous dogs" and they are taken away and put down.

Now you have FOUR dead dogs. Two that were just doing their job and two that should never have been off their property to begin with.


----------



## selzer

Nigel said:


> All these stories in this thread, true and hypothetical are ugly scenarios and if it were happening to me I would pull the trigger, however these dogs did nothing. No history of getting out, attacking others animals, nothing as far as we know. If there had been prior complaints, I doubt this story would have made the news.
> 
> I'm sure most dogs allowed to roam the country side will no doubt end up causing trouble, but that's most, not all. Given the shooters description of events, that's the honest version I'm referring to, I would have at least attempted to run them off. If they were not aggressive, I may try to leash them and try to identify the owner. If the dogs acted aggressive, then shoot them, but they should be guilty of something serious enough before I take their lives.


Dogs don't do their killing while you are out there, but the do come back. It is like catching a rat or mouse and taking it outside and releasing it. It will be back inside before you are. You can't be out with the sheep 24/7. You have to do what you can to protect them while they are grazing, and when they are in the fold, you have to protect the fold. Protecting the fold means killing dogs that come onto your land. They aren't there minding their own business. Dogs have no business on anyone else's land that you can afford not to mind. 

I love dogs as much as the next person, maybe more, but I respect them for the predators that they are. 

If this guy raised up dogs to protect his livestock against dogs, you would call him a dog fighter, or an ogre. The dogs would be just as dead. 

Furthermore, a BMD is not a little dog. The man was 72. And there were 2 of the dogs. Yes, it takes some imagination to think of BMDs killing an old man, but if he tried to catch them, who knows? It is not unheard of for older people to be killed by dogs. If I want to catch a pit bull on my land and call AC that's my business, it was a foolhardy deed in the least considering what happens to my dogs if I end up laid up for whatever reason. But my this guy is as old as my father, and the dogs are bigger than pit bulls, and there are two of them. 

If it was two Rottweilers, or two GSDs, or two pit bulls, no one would make that suggestion. No one should expect anyone to go around rounding up and managing dogs running at large.


----------



## selzer

This is really sad because if my dog does get loose, I want to know what became of them, so I am not thinking they are lost, freezing, starving, hurt, in a shelter somewhere, being euthanized, for months, and all the time they are dead and buried because a farmer was afraid to let me know the dog was killed.


----------



## pets4life

lillie i am far from off thats my own personal experience.

I don't know what im talking about? You think i am lying about how most people view their livestock as objects and what i have seen at auctions? Have u ever been to the poultry connection forum? 


Like selzer just admitted when they dont produce they are EATEN. We do not eat our dogs. 

ALso lillie i can show you videos of dogs mutilating lamas while they are still alive, with large horses grazing peacefully beside them with no care in the world and no reaction to the predation or carnage going on, so it puts your whole "all horses will react" theory to shame. 

And guard dogs don't always kill what goes into the pasture unless the dogs really press it. How often do you see dead dogs in a pasture with a great pyr? ALmost Never. They are defensive not offensive animals. They will ward off the dogs and chase them off. Thats their job. Its almost never is a blood bath.


----------



## sparra

Lilie said:


> You are so off in this entire post. So, so, so off. I take great offense in your comment about people and their livestock. You have no idea what you are talking about.
> 
> Also, horses are flight or flight animals. ALL horses will have a reaction to a strange dog in their pasture. ALL Horses. You simply do not know what you are talking about.


Agreed!!!

I love how it is flipantly said "It is just about money 95% of the time".
Well when you make your living from them....too right it is about money BUT our ewes get the royal treatment on our farm. We have about 2500 of them at the moment all about to lamb in a couple months time. They are given supplements, grain and vaccinations and all sorts of goodies to keep them healthy and in prime condition to make lambing easier on them......I don't know them by name but surely that doesn't mean we don't care about them and make it any less serious when we find then ripped apart. My DH sobbed when he found his ewes dead and dying.....so just to set the record straight....it is not just about money 95% of the time


----------



## pets4life

I hate to say this but what if that ewe could not produce wool anymore? would he still sob when he had to butcher it? 


Sorry but i am just trying to separate farmers mentality from someone who sees a dog as a family member. If they really meant as much as people say they do they would have had some sort of expensive protection and would not be at the mercy of what is out there.


----------



## Lilie

sparra said:


> Agreed!!!
> 
> I love how it is flipantly said "It is just about money 95% of the time".
> Well when you make your living from them....too right it is about money BUT our ewes get the royal treatment on our farm. We have about 2500 of them at the moment all about to lamb in a couple months time. They are given supplements, grain and vaccinations and all sorts of goodies to keep them healthy and in prime condition to make lambing easier on them......I don't know them by name but surely that doesn't mean we don't care about them and make it any less serious when we find then ripped apart. My DH sobbed when he found his ewes dead and dying.....so just to set the record straight....it is not just about money 95% of the time


Not to mention the countless sleepless nights during lambing (calving) season. And all the monies spent to keep momma alive when things go south. 

Folks who utilize their livestock as their lively hood consider every head just as you consider money in your bank account. They depend on that herd to pay the bills the following year, sometimes even that year. Every drop of rain counts. Every grain of feed. Every ounce of weight on that animal determines if that rancher will make his mortgage, feed his family, send his children to school. 

The people who have livestock as a hobby has just as much invested in their livestock as folks have in their house pets. Perhaps taking a greater financial risk. Just as great heart ache when things go wrong.


----------



## Lilie

pets4life said:


> I hate to say this but what if that ewe could not produce wool anymore? would he still sob when he had to butcher it?
> 
> 
> Sorry but i am just trying to separate farmers mentality from someone who sees a dog as a family member. If they really meant as much as people say they do they would have had some sort of expensive protection and would not be at the mercy of what is out there.


What right would I have to send my dogs into your home?


----------



## Lilie

pets4life said:


> ALso lillie i can show you videos of dogs mutilating lamas while they are still alive, with large horses grazing peacefully beside them with no care in the world and no reaction to the predation or carnage going on, so it puts your whole "all horses will react" theory to shame.


Are you seriously attempting to tell me that while the dogs chased and ran down the lamas that the horses simply grazed? You are aware they are PREY animals? 

It is not a theory. It is 40 years of experience in the equine industry.


----------



## GSDolch

pets4life said:


> I hate to say this but what if that ewe could not produce wool anymore? *would he still sob when he had to butcher it?*
> 
> 
> Sorry but i am just trying to separate farmers mentality from someone who sees a dog as a family member. If they really meant as much as people say they do they would have had some sort of expensive protection and would not be at the mercy of what is out there.



I can't speak for him, but I know plenty of people that would. Just because its part of a cycle doesn't make the lose of life any less painful. Adhering to the way life works doesn't mean someone is heartless, just because an animal isn't a "pet" like a dog doesn't mean they are void of the emotions of life and death.

I feel like this is probably something that you will say you also don't understand, but from a spiritual/religious POV, in cases like this, the animal is taken care of, then when it is slaughtered thanks is given, then the animal is consumed and becomes a part of me as I am a part of it. Thats, all I'll say on that lol.

It's life, there is a cycle, going by that cycle doesn't mean one doesn't care.


----------



## pets4life

lillie yes i am telling you that they killed off all the lamas and all their foals while the horses just grazed. THey didnt spook they didnt run they did NOTHING. NO panic no nothing they just ate grass. THere was so many large dogs the people who took the video were too scared to go in there because they thought they were going to get killed themsleves. So they took the video and called the police. I can show you the video in pvt if you want. I dont know if i am allowed to show it here as its really vile.

Horses are prey animals but even coyotes go into their pastures here and hunt mice and rabbits the horses ignore them. They are prey for big cats mostly. Equines like donkey are prey animals also but used all over north america to protect sheep from dogs. Do not use a mini.


----------



## LifeofRiley

Nigel said:


> All these stories in this thread, true and hypothetical are ugly scenarios and if it were happening to me I would pull the trigger, however these dogs did nothing. No history of getting out, attacking others animals, nothing as far as we know. If there had been prior complaints, I doubt this story would have made the news.
> 
> I'm sure most dogs allowed to roam the country side will no doubt end up causing trouble, but that's most, not all. Given the shooters description of events, that's the honest version I'm referring to, I would have at least attempted to run them off. If they were not aggressive, I may try to leash them and try to identify the owner. If the dogs acted aggressive, then shoot them, but they should be guilty of something serious enough before I take their lives.


Like Nigel, I agree that no one wants to see livestock harmed. And, like Nigel, I believe the appropriate reaction is very context-dependent. 

So, back to the situation that launched this thread and some additional context…

It appears the area where this happened is zoned “*residential*,” not “*rural*.” Looking at the census figures would back that up. Population density of 256.6 p/square mile. I have read unofficial accounts that the property in question was 4 acres. The municipal ordinance is that a minimum of 10 acres is required to own livestock. 

In this case, I believe the shooter had more reasons to believe that these dogs were simply neighbor dogs that accidently got loose than vicious sheep-eaters that would return at a later time to take down his flock. I believe this because:

1.	He said the dogs were not chasing or otherwise bothering the sheep when he shot them.
2.	I read an account where he states that he noticed the dogs had collars on… leading your average person to believe an owner could be found and spoken to.
3.	The area in which he lives would suggest as much!!!! These are not large plots. Many of the plots in the area are 1-2 acre. It is dangerous to be firing guns given the residential nature of the neighborhood.


----------



## sparra

pets4life said:


> I hate to say this but what if that ewe could not produce wool anymore? would he still sob when he had to butcher it?
> 
> 
> Sorry but i am just trying to separate farmers mentality from someone who sees a dog as a family member. If they really meant as much as people say they do they would have had some sort of expensive protection and would not be at the mercy of what is out there.


You really do lack understanding in these things and are showing it more and more with every post you make.
We actually run donkeys and alapcas with our ewes but they are no match for more than one dog **** bent on killing our sheep......it just doesn't work that way. I get the feeling you think it it is fine for a dog to kill sheep because it is a family member and the sheep aren't.....
No my husband doesn't sob everytime we sell prime lambs to be killed and eaten.....we kill our own meat and quite happily sit at the dinner table and eat it......but in your eyes if that means we have no right to feel devastated when our neighbours dogs senselessy tear our ewes apart then it just tells me a lot about the person I am pointlessly arguing with here.
As for the horses....if it is true then that would be a HIGHLY unique event....they were killing their foals and the horses just stood there eating??? or maybe you mean they were killing the cria which is the correct term for a baby llama......either way very unusual.

And that's all I have to say about that.......


----------



## selzer

I suppose if they held dog fights regularly outside a pasture, horses might get used to it so long as the dogs never entered their pasture. But horses smell pretty well, and they would definitely be nervous when an animal is being torn apart. And mares with foals are going to be on edge. Also, people with llamas and horses, not having a gun to take out varmints is kind of weird, or is that in Canada? Even there, I would think that livestock owners would be able to have weapons of some sort -- pitch forks? The idea that a bunch of people would sit their filming dogs eating their animals and not even trying to stop it, Very weird. Dog fighters? No, they wouldn't be calling the police.


----------



## damaya

Well some of you really came in and took a dump on this thread. It turned out as bad as my "first trip to the dog park" thread where I got called a bad owner.
You cluttered the facts of the case specific with 
"well what if..."
"you've obviously never...."
"you don't understand..."
"farm people...."
"city folks..."
"you're wrong...."
"I'm right...."
"do you know what a duck costs?....."

I have been considerate enough to agree that what's yours is yours, and if you have to discharge a firearm to protect it, by all means do so.

However, some of the tunnel visioned folks refuse to see the other side of the coin for whatever reason. More of a "I'm country and I can kill it if I want to" attitude. Which is certainly telling of their overall personality. For you to condemn someone to wrong because it's not what you think is childish at best.

This man with 4 acres and some sheep has been compared to an 8500 acre "we do it for a living" situation. Wild packs of roaming dogs at large compared to 2 escaped family pets. 

Nobody has mentioned the rat shot again since I did after the "once chance" poster did. Try, just try to step out of your mindset put the facts or facts as we have been told (because I think I remember somebody blaming the reporters) of this story and tell me that at least the rat shot would not have been better in this instance. 



> You really do lack understanding in these things and are showing it more and more with every post you make


This, and sparra I'm not picking on you for any other reason than _ a show of hands please_ who else in this thread lives on an 8500 acre place? Right. Probably nobody. So of coarse there is a "lack of understanding". You go downhill from there on expressing any amount of usable knowledge on what is not understood. Why don't you tell me about the basic operation of a BWR type reactor? Without google. 

With some people it is really hard to figure out if they just want to argue or simply don't have any conversation skills.

Now why don't we all go pet our dogs, brush our horses, fluff our ducks, and choke our chickens.
Yeah I know you won't. Bring on 10 more pages. 

these internetz bring out all kinds


----------



## Jack's Dad

[/QUOTE]these internetz bring out all kinds[/QUOTE]

It sure does.


----------



## sparra

damaya said:


> Well some of you really came in and took a dump on this thread. It turned out as bad as my "first trip to the dog park" thread where I got called a bad owner.
> You cluttered the facts of the case specific with
> "well what if..."
> "you've obviously never...."
> "you don't understand..."
> "farm people...."
> "city folks..."
> "you're wrong...."
> "I'm right...."
> "do you know what a duck costs?....."
> 
> I have been considerate enough to agree that what's yours is yours, and if you have to discharge a firearm to protect it, by all means do so.
> 
> However, some of the tunnel visioned folks refuse to see the other side of the coin for whatever reason. More of a "I'm country and I can kill it if I want to" attitude. Which is certainly telling of their overall personality. For you to condemn someone to wrong because it's not what you think is childish at best.
> 
> This man with 4 acres and some sheep has been compared to an 8500 acre "we do it for a living" situation. Wild packs of roaming dogs at large compared to 2 escaped family pets.
> 
> Nobody has mentioned the rat shot again since I did after the "once chance" poster did. Try, just try to step out of your mindset put the facts or facts as we have been told (because I think I remember somebody blaming the reporters) of this story and tell me that at least the rat shot would not have been better in this instance.
> 
> 
> 
> This, and sparra I'm not picking on you for any other reason than _ a show of hands please_ who else in this thread lives on an 8500 acre place? Right. Probably nobody. So of coarse there is a "lack of understanding". You go downhill from there on expressing any amount of usable knowledge on what is not understood. Why don't you tell me about the basic operation of a BWR type reactor? Without google.
> 
> With some people it is really hard to figure out if they just want to argue or simply don't have any conversation skills.
> 
> Now why don't we all go pet our dogs, brush our horses, fluff our ducks, and choke our chickens.
> Yeah I know you won't. Bring on 10 more pages.
> 
> these internetz bring out all kinds




And that's all I have to say about that.......


----------



## damaya

sparra said:


> And that's all I have to say about that.......


That's the best post you've had in this whole thread.


----------



## sparra

damaya said:


> That's the best post you've had in this whole thread.


Probably......


----------



## LifeofRiley

Really, for those of you that are defending this particular situation, please look at my last post and see if, perhaps, you feel that another outcome could have been achieved in this case.

To help, I will re-post the key part:

"So, back to the situation that launched this thread…

It appears the area where this happened is zoned *“residential,”* not *“rural.”* Looking at the census figures would back that up. Population density of 256.6 p/square mile. I have read unofficial accounts that the property in question was *4 acres*. The municipal ordinance is that a *minimum of 10 acres is required to own livestock*.

*In this case, I believe the shooter had more reasons to believe that these dogs were simply neighbor dogs that accidently got loose than vicious sheep-eaters that would return at a later time to take down his flock.* I believe this because:

1.	He said the dogs were not chasing or otherwise bothering the sheep when he shot them.

2.	I read an account where he states that he noticed the dogs had collars on… leading your average person to believe an owner could be found and spoken to.

3.	*The area in which he lives would suggest as much*!!!! These are not large plots. Many of the plots in the area are 1-2 acre. It is dangerous to be firing guns given the residential nature of the neighborhood."


----------



## Anitsisqua

sparra said:


> Probably......


I agree. Being flippant and quoting Forrest Gump at the same time...:thumbup:


----------



## damaya

LifeofRiley said:


> Really, for those of you that are defending this particular situation, please look at my last post and see if, perhaps, you feel that another outcome could have been achieved in this case.
> 
> To help, I will re-post the key part:
> 
> "So, back to the situation that launched this thread…
> 
> It appears the area where this happened is zoned *“residential,”* not *“rural.”* Looking at the census figures would back that up. Population density of 256.6 p/square mile. I have read unofficial accounts that the property in question was 4 acres. *The municipal ordinance is that a minimum of 10 acres is required to own livestock. *
> 
> *In this case, I believe the shooter had more reasons to believe that these dogs were simply neighbor dogs that accidently got loose than vicious sheep-eaters that would return at a later time to take down his flock.* I believe this because:
> 
> 1. He said the dogs were not chasing or otherwise bothering the sheep when he shot them.
> 
> 2. I read an account where he states that he noticed the dogs had collars on… leading your average person to believe an owner could be found and spoken to.
> 
> 3. *The area in which he lives would suggest as much*!!!! These are not large plots. Many of the plots in the area are 1-2 acre. It is dangerous to be firing guns given the residential nature of the neighborhood."


LoR your beating the same dead horse that the dog killed. :laugh:


----------



## LifeofRiley

damaya said:


> LoR your beating the same dead horse that the dog killed. :laugh:


:laugh: I suppose you are right!


----------



## Nigel

LifeofRiley said:


> Really, for those of you that are defending this particular situation, please look at my last post and see if, perhaps, you feel that another outcome could have been achieved in this case.
> 
> To help, I will re-post the key part:
> 
> "So, back to the situation that launched this thread…
> 
> It appears the area where this happened is zoned *“residential,”* not *“rural.”* Looking at the census figures would back that up. Population density of 256.6 p/square mile. I have read unofficial accounts that the property in question was *4 acres*. The municipal ordinance is that a *minimum of 10 acres is required to own livestock*.
> 
> *In this case, I believe the shooter had more reasons to believe that these dogs were simply neighbor dogs that accidently got loose than vicious sheep-eaters that would return at a later time to take down his flock.* I believe this because:
> 
> 1.	He said the dogs were not chasing or otherwise bothering the sheep when he shot them.
> 
> 2.	I read an account where he states that he noticed the dogs had collars on… leading your average person to believe an owner could be found and spoken to.
> 
> 3.	*The area in which he lives would suggest as much*!!!! These are not large plots. Many of the plots in the area are 1-2 acre. It is dangerous to be firing guns given the residential nature of the neighborhood."


On the 10 acre requirement, he may be grandfathered in. There is a neighborhood a block and a half away from me with horses, sheep, and cows. These are 2-5 acre lots. The neighborhood is county property, but surrounded by the city. If he is in violation, it will probably be brought up.


----------



## LifeofRiley

Nigel said:


> On the 10 acre requirement, he may be grandfathered in. There is a neighborhood a block and a half away from me with horses, sheep, and cows. These are 2-5 acre lots. The neighborhood is county property, but surrounded by the city. If he is in violation, it will probably be brought up.


Agree, he probably was. But, that doesn't change the fact that he should recognize the greater density in his area and behave accordingly. He should not be firing a shotgun at a moving object given the current realities of his community. It is dangerous.


----------



## LifeofRiley

Okay, this is pure speculation, but if he was grandfathered in... he probably sold some of his land to the very developers who brought in more neighbors. 

If he wasn't grandfathered in, he should never have had livestock to begin with. And, again, should behave in an appropriate way given his surroundings.


----------



## Nigel

LifeofRiley said:


> Agree, he probably was. But, that doesn't change the fact that he should recognize the greater density in his area and behave accordingly. He should not be firing a shotgun at a moving object given the current realities of his community. It is dangerous.


:thumbup:


----------



## Dainerra

pets4life said:


> slezer when they have no use for their stock anymore when it doesnt produce milk or not worth the cost of feed what you think happens to it? You think they all get to live till old age kills them as a happy pet?


I know plenty of people who name their beef cattle and, yes, they get a bit teary-eyed when it's time to go to the butchershop. They are satisfied knowing that the animal lived a good life while it was alive.

Just because you are raising an animal for food doesn't mean that you can't get attached. That would be like saying that breeders shouldn't get attached to a litter of puppies just because they are going to go to a new home soon.


----------



## Dainerra

LifeofRiley;3055850
2. I read an account where he states that he noticed the dogs had collars on… leading your average person to believe an owner could be found and spoken to.
.[/QUOTE said:


> done this until I'm blue in the face. Not ONCE has it ever made a difference in the owner keeping dogs at home. As I said in a previous post, one dog was actually back in my yard while the cops were in the neighbor's driveway telling him that it would be shot on sight if it was out again. The guy just shrugged and said "oh well"
> 
> he had no way of knowing WHICH type of owner this was. Yes, sometimes it is an accident and dogs get out. More often, it's a common occurrence and someone's dogs are always "accidentally" escaping. The highest majority are ones who say "oh my Fido would never hurt a fly" so they don't see any reason to contain their dog because they are positive that he won't get into trouble.


----------



## Dainerra

damaya said:


> Nobody has mentioned the rat shot again since I did after the "once chance" poster did. Try, just try to step out of your mindset put the facts or facts as we have been told (because I think I remember somebody blaming the reporters) of this story and tell me that at least the rat shot would not have been better in this instance.
> 
> s


I can tell you why I will NEVER be using rat shot. It's illegal. Because you are just attempting to cause pain and damage to make the dog go away. It's animal cruelty, viewed the same legally as if I gut shot the dog and left it to bleed to death.


----------



## Nigel

Dainerra said:


> I can tell you why I will NEVER be using rat shot. It's *illegal*. Because you are just attempting to cause pain and damage to make the dog go away. * It's animal cruelty*, viewed the same legally as if I gut shot the dog and left it to bleed to death.


Too bad Mr Pilotti didn't share your same respect for the law.


----------



## damaya

Dainerra said:


> I can tell you why I will NEVER be using rat shot. It's illegal. Because you are just attempting to cause pain and damage to make the dog go away. It's animal cruelty, viewed the same legally as if I gut shot the dog and left it to bleed to death.


Alright.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

depending on the type of animal, you can have 10 acres with small livestock and make some extra $$$ as my neighbor does with goats.

He did lose a lot of goats because of dog attacks. He solved the problem with the Great Pyernees....which given the chance would have killed the Bernies too.

btw - not cool calling people here sheeple. Some of the counter-points have been very valid, if you don't want to accept them as such that's fine but don't make it personal. 

You have made assumptions as well. You stated this was a 'knee jerk' reaction and you're probably correct. Knee jerk after having dealt with stray/loose dogs for many years.

One other point, most of the people on this board are here because they really care about their dogs and are responsible pet owners.

Farmers, small and large, have to deal with the irresponsible pet owners which we all know far out number the responsible (see numerous and long threads about S/N, the problem with pitties, people who don't do research before buying from a BYB and on and on).

Framing this from a limited perspective doesn't make your thoughts or opinions more valid then those of us who have had to deal with the irresponsible pet owners.

If you move out to the country make darn sure your dogs are kept safely contained because more often then not, after having endured losses and damage in the past, a lot of farmers will 'knee jerk' shoot your dog.

Just FYI.



damaya said:


> Well some of you really came in and took a dump on this thread. It turned out as bad as my "first trip to the dog park" thread where I got called a bad owner.
> You cluttered the facts of the case specific with
> "well what if..."
> "you've obviously never...."
> "you don't understand..."
> "farm people...."
> "city folks..."
> "you're wrong...."
> "I'm right...."
> "do you know what a duck costs?....."
> 
> I have been considerate enough to agree that what's yours is yours, and if you have to discharge a firearm to protect it, by all means do so.
> 
> However, some of the tunnel visioned folks refuse to see the other side of the coin for whatever reason. More of a "I'm country and I can kill it if I want to" attitude. Which is certainly telling of their overall personality. For you to condemn someone to wrong because it's not what you think is childish at best.
> 
> This man with 4 acres and some sheep has been compared to an 8500 acre "we do it for a living" situation. Wild packs of roaming dogs at large compared to 2 escaped family pets.
> 
> Nobody has mentioned the rat shot again since I did after the "once chance" poster did. Try, just try to step out of your mindset put the facts or facts as we have been told (because I think I remember somebody blaming the reporters) of this story and tell me that at least the rat shot would not have been better in this instance.
> 
> 
> 
> This, and sparra I'm not picking on you for any other reason than _ a show of hands please_ who else in this thread lives on an 8500 acre place? Right. Probably nobody. So of coarse there is a "lack of understanding". You go downhill from there on expressing any amount of usable knowledge on what is not understood. Why don't you tell me about the basic operation of a BWR type reactor? Without google.
> 
> With some people it is really hard to figure out if they just want to argue or simply don't have any conversation skills.
> 
> Now why don't we all go pet our dogs, brush our horses, fluff our ducks, and choke our chickens.
> Yeah I know you won't. Bring on 10 more pages.
> 
> these internetz bring out all kinds


----------



## Lilie

Gwenhwyfair said:


> depending on the type of animal, you can have 10 acres with small livestock and make some extra $$$ as my neighbor does with goats.
> 
> He did lose a lot of goats because of dog attacks. He solved the problem with the Great Pyernees....which given the chance would have killed the Bernies too.
> 
> btw - not cool calling people here sheeple. Some of the counter-points have been very valid, if you don't want to accept them as such that's fine but don't make it personal.
> 
> You have made assumptions as well. You stated this was a 'knee jerk' reaction and you're probably correct. Knee jerk after having dealt with stray/loose dogs for many years.
> 
> One other point, most of the people on this board are here because they really care about their dogs and are responsible pet owners.
> 
> Farmers, small and large, have to deal with the irresponsible pet owners which we all know far out number the responsible (see numerous and long threads about S/N, the problem with pitties, people who don't do research before buying from a BYB and on and on).
> 
> Framing this from a limited perspective doesn't make your thoughts or opinions more valid then those of us who have had to deal with the irresponsible pet owners.
> 
> If you move out to the country make darn sure your dogs are kept safely contained because more often then not, after having endured losses and damage in the past, a lot of farmers will 'knee jerk' shoot your dog.
> 
> Just FYI.


 
:thumbup::thumbup: Great post!


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

More by google newsing his name:
https://www.google.com/search?q=Gab...79,d.dmQ&fp=671aec20f64b7c63&biw=1787&bih=867


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

per one of the links:

http://www.animallaw.info/statutes/stuspa3ps459_502.htm#s704


> According to state law, "any person may kill any dog which he sees in the act of pursuing or wounding or killing any domestic animal," including livestock and poultry


Man Charged in Dog Shooting [Update] - Malvern, PA Patch, With two dogs dead in Chester County, many are questioning a state law

Generally, Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground laws allow humans to be shot if a person feels 'threatened' and in some states you can defend personal property with lethal force.

How to sort out the cognitive dissonance that the same legal parameters cannot be applied to dogs. wow.



JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> More by google newsing his name:
> https://www.google.com/search?q=Gab...79,d.dmQ&fp=671aec20f64b7c63&biw=1787&bih=867


----------



## damaya

Gwenhwyfair said:


> _I'll only bother quoting what I want to address_
> 
> btw - not cool calling people here sheeple. Some of the counter-points have been very valid, if you don't want to accept them as such that's fine but don't make it personal.
> 
> _I'm not here to be cool. And if you have read this whole thing you should have seen the couple times I said "I understand". It's the "farmer" side that is unwilling to accept anything other than kill it._
> 
> Knee jerk after having dealt with stray/loose dogs for many years.
> 
> _If you have a link where the man in this case has dealt with this for "many years" provide it. If not you're making an assumption._
> 
> Framing this from a limited perspective doesn't make your thoughts or opinions more valid then those of us who have had to deal with the irresponsible pet owners.
> 
> _Once again, I have said I understand the other side and agree to an extent. I have only based my opinion on what was presented in the article. _
> 
> Just FYI.
> _Thanks anyway._


Let's try this. 
Before he died last year my neighbor- Lester- had a bulldog that was his best friend. It was nothing to look down in MY field and see Booger taking a dump. That was fine with me. Booger loved his family, but was not that friendly with anyone else. I came out of the basement one day to see Booger standing at my door.

Option A was to yell at Lester's boy and tell him to call the dog

Option B was to kick / throw rocks and yell at Booger to leave

Option C was to grab the shotgun in the basement and shoot him in the face

I went with option A

This happened also
Icon and I were in the field at the pond. Nick and Jenny's Great Dane saw us and came running over. I don't know this dog very well, and though younger he is bigger than Icon, and could possibly hurt us both.

Option A was to yell at Nick who was washing his car and let him know his dog was at my place.

Option B was to turn Icon on him and let them fight it out while I escaped to safety.

Option C was to pull my sidearm and shoot him in the face

Again went with option A

Ms Crass has a little mix yipper. Anytime the dog is outside it is yipping. Could certainly be classified as a nuisance. His pen backs up to the side of my property so when he is out I hear him. Rusty is about the size of our smallest cat, but is a little whirlwind. He escaped once, and headed for our place. I think any of our cats could take him, but here were the options.

Option A was to throw caution into the wind and grab him. Carry him through the woods back to his pen, and let Ms Crass know he had gotten out.

Option B was to merely kick him like a football back into the woods and assume he would stay home after that.

Option C was to grab my gun out of the truck, or laundry room and shoot him in the face.

Any guess? Yeah option A again.


----------



## damaya

Gwenhwyfair said:


> Generally, Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground laws allow humans to be shot if a person feels 'threatened' and in some states you can defend personal property with lethal force.


For the sake of more stimulating discussion please defined "threatened" to the point the lethal force is justified. Not live stock but humans.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

Quote:
Originally Posted by *Gwenhwyfair*  
_Generally, Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground laws allow humans to be shot if a person feels 'threatened' and in some states you can defend personal property with lethal force._

_For the sake of more stimulating discussion please defined "threatened" to the point the lethal force is justified. Not live stock but humans. _
------------------------------

I think if you are talking humans, that's a post for a new thread, in chat, and not in current dog affairs. I would appreciate it if this post could continue to stay (vaguely) on topic. 

Jean
Admin


----------



## Anitsisqua

damaya said:


> Let's try this.
> Before he died last year my neighbor- Lester- had a bulldog that was his best friend. It was nothing to look down in MY field and see Booger taking a dump. That was fine with me. Booger loved his family, but was not that friendly with anyone else. I came out of the basement one day to see Booger standing at my door.
> 
> Option A was to yell at Lester's boy and tell him to call the dog
> 
> Option B was to kick / throw rocks and yell at Booger to leave
> 
> Option C was to grab the shotgun in the basement and shoot him in the face
> 
> I went with option A
> 
> This happened also
> Icon and I were in the field at the pond. Nick and Jenny's Great Dane saw us and came running over. I don't know this dog very well, and though younger he is bigger than Icon, and could possibly hurt us both.
> 
> Option A was to yell at Nick who was washing his car and let him know his dog was at my place.
> 
> Option B was to turn Icon on him and let them fight it out while I escaped to safety.
> 
> Option C was to pull my sidearm and shoot him in the face
> 
> Again went with option A
> 
> Ms Crass has a little mix yipper. Anytime the dog is outside it is yipping. Could certainly be classified as a nuisance. His pen backs up to the side of my property so when he is out I hear him. Rusty is about the size of our smallest cat, but is a little whirlwind. He escaped once, and headed for our place. I think any of our cats could take him, but here were the options.
> 
> Option A was to throw caution into the wind and grab him. Carry him through the woods back to his pen, and let Ms Crass know he had gotten out.
> 
> Option B was to merely kick him like a football back into the woods and assume he would stay home after that.
> 
> Option C was to grab my gun out of the truck, or laundry room and shoot him in the face.
> 
> Any guess? Yeah option A again.



And how many sheep were in your yard at this time? How many of your sheep had been killed by dogs in recent memory before this?


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

There in lies the rub, 'threatened'. What is threatening to one person may not be to another. The SYG laws have loosened the definition up somewhat. I remember, many many years ago in college law class (not my major) that one needed to basically be backed into a corner with no other means of escape before 'the threat' (which of course is generally defined as self defense from physical harm). justified the use of force (including lethal) to protect oneself.

As can be evidenced by some recent cases what I learned all those years ago has changed. At the end of the day it's subjective and if charges are brought it's up the courts/legal system to sort it out.


*More particular to topic and the case at hand, to what lengths can a person defend property?*:

Some states have taken it a step further with the castle doctrine and personal property. (see TX case where robber was shot in the back while running away from scene, died, shooter was not charged and it was his neighbor who was being robbed.)

I don't want to delve into it too far because these convos tend to get too political which is against the rules of this forum.

If they change the law(s) about protecting livestock from dogs (livestock which is also 'personal property') and give more protection to dogs, well, that just ain't right.......





damaya said:


> For the sake of more stimulating discussion please defined "threatened" to the point the lethal force is justified. Not live stock but humans.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Agreed, I tried to answer and then swing back to the personal property/livestock/dog aspect, I hope that's o.k. 




JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Gwenhwyfair*
> _Generally, Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground laws allow humans to be shot if a person feels 'threatened' and in some states you can defend personal property with lethal force._
> 
> _For the sake of more stimulating discussion please defined "threatened" to the point the lethal force is justified. Not live stock but humans. _
> ------------------------------
> 
> I think if you are talking humans, that's a post for a new thread, in chat, and not in current dog affairs. I would appreciate it if this post could continue to stay (vaguely) on topic.
> 
> Jean
> Admin


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

You cannot make assumptions while denying similiar conjecture on the part of others regarding this man and the hows and whys that the sad event happened.

You are imputing the worst motives to the shooter, without knowing all the nitty gritty facts, to make your points which is as much a logical fallacy as that you accuse others of. That's my primary problem here. He may be an angry old man, who knows?


Below: non sequitur. Your ancedotal stories you were directly involved and the circumstances weren't the same.

I could write up volumes about dogs that did attack and kill livestock and how the dog owners didn't care. One was just last year and the dog owner wanted me to get involved on her behalf, she went to court over it. No way....

I hope this old man gets a good lawyer and that he's not bankrupted by this......



damaya said:


> Let's try this.
> Before he died last year my neighbor- Lester- had a bulldog that was his best friend. It was nothing to look down in MY field and see Booger taking a dump. That was fine with me. Booger loved his family, but was not that friendly with anyone else. I came out of the basement one day to see Booger standing at my door.
> 
> Option A was to yell at Lester's boy and tell him to call the dog
> 
> Option B was to kick / throw rocks and yell at Booger to leave
> 
> Option C was to grab the shotgun in the basement and shoot him in the face
> 
> I went with option A
> 
> This happened also
> Icon and I were in the field at the pond. Nick and Jenny's Great Dane saw us and came running over. I don't know this dog very well, and though younger he is bigger than Icon, and could possibly hurt us both.
> 
> Option A was to yell at Nick who was washing his car and let him know his dog was at my place.
> 
> Option B was to turn Icon on him and let them fight it out while I escaped to safety.
> 
> Option C was to pull my sidearm and shoot him in the face
> 
> Again went with option A
> 
> Ms Crass has a little mix yipper. Anytime the dog is outside it is yipping. Could certainly be classified as a nuisance. His pen backs up to the side of my property so when he is out I hear him. Rusty is about the size of our smallest cat, but is a little whirlwind. He escaped once, and headed for our place. I think any of our cats could take him, but here were the options.
> 
> Option A was to throw caution into the wind and grab him. Carry him through the woods back to his pen, and let Ms Crass know he had gotten out.
> 
> Option B was to merely kick him like a football back into the woods and assume he would stay home after that.
> 
> Option C was to grab my gun out of the truck, or laundry room and shoot him in the face.
> 
> Any guess? Yeah option A again.


----------



## selzer

damaya, 

The fact is, you will have varying opinions on this subject depending on where you come from and what the norms are in your area. 

The fact is, you can begin a topic, but you cannot control it so that only people who agree with your opinion reply to it, thank heavens. I cannot think of a more boring scenario.

The fact is, new members are sometimes greeted, inadvertently, with very little traffic in their threads, you should feel happy your thread sparked so much interest -- good publicity, bad publicity -- both good, the only bad is no publicity. 

Welcome to the board. It is obvious you and I will never agree on this subject, but so what? That doesn't mean I dislike you or think you are stupid. It just means that we come from different viewpoints, and different areas. In your area, the sheriff probably wouldn't tell you to shoot the dog. In my area, they will tell you, "If the dog is coming after you (wink, wink) shoot it."


----------



## pets4life

sparra i am sorry but i think you lack understanding on how to use guard animals 

1. you do not use more than 1 donkey ever otherwise they will ignore the sheep when they are being killed. There is a certain way to go about this you dont just throw a bunch of animals together and think its going to work. 

2. Donkey can and will attack and take on much more than one dog very easy. Not all donkey are suited for this only some. Yours clearly aren't Or you just have to many like you said donkeys.

3. alpaca are dog prey and just as easy to kill as sheep. They are much smaller and more fragile than lamas even. Lamas are sometimes used as guards alpaca cannot guard if the threat is real and bigger than a fox. 

Also i never in my life said it was okay for dogs to touch or prey on livestock I was just comparing a farmers mentality to someone who is a caring dog owner. NEVER do i think it is okay for a dog to kill any animal for fun. I don't even agree dogs should be allowed to be used in hunting.


----------



## pets4life

If you still feel a donkey is not enough get a pair of CO or CAS since your sheep are like your children.


----------



## damaya

selzer - agreed. 
People that put to much emotion into message boards really shouldn't hang out on message boards.


----------



## selzer

Hmmmm. Dogs are bred to hunt. Kind of like we breed dogs for protection work or to herd sheep. There are different kinds of hunting. I mean using pit bulls on wild hogs is kind of brutal I would thing, as is hounds after rabbits or fox. But that is not all hunting. There are dogs that flush game, and dogs that set, holding the bird with their eyes. There are dogs that point. There are dogs whose big thing is retrieving game on water or land. These bird dogs are not trained to rip and tear into the game the way a terrier or hound does. In fact they generally have a soft mouth, meaning they can pick up an injured or dead bird and not do any further injury. 

I think that if we disallow dogs to be used for hunting, those breeds will lose the purpose that they were originally bred for, and the main part of their temperament and structure and instinct will no longer be valid. I think that would be a terrible loss to those breeds.

There is something special about watching a well-bred dog do the work that was its original intent, and that includes hunting dogs.


----------



## selzer

damaya said:


> selzer - agreed.
> People that put to much emotion into message boards really shouldn't hang out on message boards.


Oh, I have passion for some topics. People letting dogs roam is one of them. I think this board would be lame without passion. But you can be passionate about a subject and still be respectful, I mean not attacking people, calling them names or suggesting they are inferior or defective. 

I think this thread has been very instructive. Some people may never agree with the idea that people should shoot a dog. But maybe someone reading this thread will be just a little more careful with their dog. Maybe someone will not think it is funny when their dog chases the horses next door. Maybe someone when faced with the devastation that their dog caused will not make a cold heartless statement about paying/replacing the animals, while still taking ownership and being responsible for the damages.

Also, just because we understand why the man would do what he did, does not mean that we would do the same. My neighbor finally moved out with her dogs intact, even when the sheriff told me to shoot it. I caught several dogs and called their owners. And I caught the pit bull and called the dog warden to come and get it. I have puppies, and having stray dogs coming through could be very dangerous, I have a gun and will use it, but it is not generally my first thought.


----------



## pets4life

slezer yeah its the pitbull on boar wearing those vests that disgusts me and the fox hunting 

the pointing and stuff didnt bother me just some of the stuff is just too much like they are trying to let 2 animals fight

badger baiting or whatever, saw some padderdales? with the most ripped up faces ever. Also feel for the wild animal. I like all wild animals. 

Not into dogs being used to run down coyote either.

Protection dogs are not torturing other animals they get to work and have fun without harming wildlife and making sadistic pictures and videos. They actually serve a purpose they save lives. There is no purpose to serve when a dog sticks its face in a badgers burrow and face fights it. Its just stupid.


----------



## sparra

pets4life said:


> sparra i am sorry but i think you lack understanding on how to use guard animals
> 
> 1. you do not use more than 1 donkey ever otherwise they will ignore the sheep when they are being killed. There is a certain way to go about this you dont just throw a bunch of animals together and think its going to work.
> 
> 2. Donkey can and will attack and take on much more than one dog very easy. Not all donkey are suited for this only some. Yours clearly aren't Or you just have to many like you said donkeys.
> 
> 3. alpaca are dog prey and just as easy to kill as sheep. They are much smaller and more fragile than lamas even. Lamas are sometimes used as guards alpaca cannot guard if the threat is real and bigger than a fox.
> 
> Also i never in my life said it was okay for dogs to touch or prey on livestock I was just comparing a farmers mentality to someone who is a caring dog owner. NEVER do i think it is okay for a dog to kill any animal for fun. I don't even agree dogs should be allowed to be used in hunting.


I don't recall saying we run more than one donkey with each mob of sheep did I?? Just to educate you as it seems i have come under fire for not explaining the ins and out of farming......sigh......we 2500 ewes You do not lamb that many ewes in one big mob.....we have MANY mobs. The mobs that are close to our scrub where we have *wild dogs* have 1 donkey and they do very well protecting from *WILD* dogs who are much more cautious than domestic dogs.....the mobs that are away from the scrub and only have to deal with *FOXES* have alapcas which do a fine job with that and some mobs have nothing as they are in places where predation is low. I hope that is all OK with you as you seem to be an expert in all this.
As for your last comment.....just a backhanded comment which does nothing for the discussion.


----------



## sparra

selzer said:


> Oh, I have passion for some topics. People letting dogs roam is one of them. I think this board would be lame without passion. But you can be passionate about a subject and still be respectful, I mean not attacking people, calling them names or suggesting they are inferior or defective.
> 
> I think this thread has been very instructive. Some people may never agree with the idea that people should shoot a dog. But maybe someone reading this thread will be just a little more careful with their dog. Maybe someone will not think it is funny when their dog chases the horses next door. Maybe someone when faced with the devastation that their dog caused will not make a cold heartless statement about paying/replacing the animals, while still taking ownership and being responsible for the damages.
> 
> Also, just because we understand why the man would do what he did, does not mean that we would do the same. My neighbor finally moved out with her dogs intact, even when the sheriff told me to shoot it. I caught several dogs and called their owners. And I caught the pit bull and called the dog warden to come and get it. I have puppies, and having stray dogs coming through could be very dangerous, I have a gun and will use it, but it is not generally my first thought.


Agreed.

I know it would be nice for the discussion to just stay on the OP which I can understand damaya was trying to do but sometimes it just goes away as comments like "I don't understand why ANYONE would shoot first" that then kind of opens it up as the ANYONES try to explain why.


----------



## pets4life

selzer wouldnt the mother of ur pups kill the strays that came through anyway? lol


----------



## wyominggrandma

In Wyoming if you have livestock(horses, cows, sheep, chicken,turkeys,etc) and a dog comes ON your property, you have the legal right to shoot it on the spot. It doesn't have to be chasing your livestock, it only has to be on your property.
With that said, we have shot and killed our neighbors dogs for coming onto our property with the horses. One time the dog was left where we shot it, the neighbor would not claim the dog, and we got stuck with vet bills when the frightened horses went through the fence because he said"I gave it away and can't help it came back to my house". 
Dogs can also be shot on the spot for chasing wild game. .
I am not a farmer, I don't have alot of acres at all, but feel if you can't keep your dogs at home, then they will be shot. Vet bills are expensive. Horses can be killed by running dog, or even running when dogs come into the field. My dogs do not go into my horses area. The horses are not used to dogs coming into the field and usually run.
We did have one horse that injured a dog when it came into the field. We did not pay for the vet for the dog like the owner wanted, the dog was on our property.
I don't know the whole story about this man that shot the dogs. However, if you have ever seen what dogs do to sheep, it is horrible. How did this guy not know the dogs would not hurt the sheep or come back later one.
The only way to prevent someone from shooting your dog is keeping it at home, especially in states that allow shooting on sight when on someones property, no matter how much property, if there is livestock present.
Sorry, I don't care


----------



## selzer

pets4life said:


> slezer yeah its the pitbull on boar wearing those vests that disgusts me and the fox hunting
> 
> the pointing and stuff didnt bother me just some of the stuff is just too much like they are trying to let 2 animals fight
> 
> badger baiting or whatever, saw some padderdales? with the most ripped up faces ever. Also feel for the wild animal. I like all wild animals.
> 
> Not into dogs being used to run down coyote either.
> 
> Protection dogs are not torturing other animals they get to work and have fun without harming wildlife and making sadistic pictures and videos. They actually serve a purpose they save lives. There is no purpose to serve when a dog sticks its face in a badgers burrow and face fights it. Its just stupid.


I don't know much about badger-baiting. I do understand that dogs are sometimes used against groundhogs. Groundhogs can be awful to farmers -- again their livelihood is dependent on their crops, and having a good dog that can manage the ground-hog population makes sense. It is not pretty, but it is nature. 

Wildlife is nice but sometimes it does infringe on us. And to eek out a living, we sometimes have to take out some of the wild-life. Nature isn't pretty either when it kills. 

I don't like blood sport. Pitting and animal against another animal so we can take bets on critters ripping into each other is disgusting. But using dogs to guard livestock or crops from varmints, human or animals just makes sense to me. 

As for hunting, I think that hunting, when done within the law, is a great way to preserve wildlife and its habitat, to exercise, to participate in a good tradition, and to put meat on the table.


----------



## selzer

pets4life said:


> selzer wouldnt the mother of ur pups kill the strays that came through anyway? lol


The bitch is in the house with the pups, but she has a doggy door to a fenced kennel that has a concrete base -- no lid though. Might she try to jump a six foot fence if a dog got into Far Field? I don't know, but she could be injured trying, she could also be injured by the stray after falling from the top of the fence if she climbed it. Then maybe I have orphans. 

A stray dog might have any number of diseases or worms or parasites. Diseases that can be contracted by my dogs and run through all of them. Or worse yet, can be carried to the puppies. One hopes the dam's immunity is strong enough, but if it isn't? 

The bitch is always with the pups when I am not there, usually until those pups are six months or more. I got this stupid idea that if a snake or a rat or something did get into the kennel the dam would go balistic on it, and that includes stray dogs. I figure it will be safer than leaving the puppies alone before they can ward off an attack. So far I haven't had to deal with it though. 

But while I am there, sometimes I leave the dam inside while I have the pups in a puppy yard out front. This gives the pups time to run and play with toys, and I can watch them develop and gage who's who in the litter. If I go inside for a minute, a stray dog could do damage to 5-8 week old puppies, pretty easy. I just don't want them there. My front yard is not fenced, so there is nothing but an x-pen between the pups and a stray dog. An x-pen and me. And normally, I do not leave them out front without being right out there with them -- afraid someone might stop by and help themselves. But I do have to get them in and out, and I can't carry seven or ten puppies in one go.


----------



## pets4life

selzer oh ic alone in the front yard yes someone will take them for sure not a dog a person will, free gsd puppy.

But if your bitch is with them in the backyard no animal or person (if shes a protective civil bitch) will dare. GSD bitches with pups are scary. Nothing is that suicidal.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

selzer said:


> Oh, I have passion for some topics. People letting dogs roam is one of them. I think this board would be lame without passion. But you can be passionate about a subject and still be respectful, I mean not attacking people, calling them names or suggesting they are inferior or defective.
> 
> I think this thread has been very instructive. Some people may never agree with the idea that people should shoot a dog. But maybe someone reading this thread will be just a little more careful with their dog. Maybe someone will not think it is funny when their dog chases the horses next door. Maybe someone when faced with the devastation that their dog caused will not make a cold heartless statement about paying/replacing the animals, while still taking ownership and being responsible for the damages.
> 
> Also, just because we understand why the man would do what he did, does not mean that we would do the same. My neighbor finally moved out with her dogs intact, even when the sheriff told me to shoot it. I caught several dogs and called their owners. And I caught the pit bull and called the dog warden to come and get it. I have puppies, and having stray dogs coming through could be very dangerous, I have a gun and will use it, but it is not generally my first thought.


:thumbup: Very Good post.


----------



## selzer

pets4life said:


> selzer oh ic alone in the front yard yes someone will take them for sure not a dog a person will, free gsd puppy.
> 
> But if your bitch is with them in the backyard no animal or person (if shes a protective civil bitch) will dare. GSD bitches with pups are scary. Nothing is that suicidal.


Not all bitches are alike. Jenna is an awesome bitch. But she has let my contractor into her Kennel when I didn't even know she was there. She did not have pups at the time, but still. I have had visitors in the house with puppies, and Jenna is really ok with them, even when her pups are very young. I think she would EAT Babs or Hepzibah if they went near the current 4 week olds. But I have my father come over and give the puppies food on Sundays, and then pull the dish back out. And she doesn't see my dad all that often. 

I think she will protect them from a critter, a raccoon or a snake. I think her mother-instincts are that good. I worry about hawks and Eagles though. Usually at about 4 weeks old the puppies start going in and out the doggy door. So far I haven't had any problems. But I don't pretend that Jenna could manage even 1 stray dog of any variety. If there are more than one, then I wouldn't expect it. It is up to me to protect her. 

On the other hand, when I leave I tell her to take care of the babies. I tell Babs to bite anyone who comes in. Between the two of them, I am not really worried about my little castle being violated.


----------



## pets4life

slezer one thing i noticed is stray dogs often will leave if their leader and run off if their leader is beaten or does not win the fight 

I saw a stay dog attack a gsd and quickly lose the other 2 ran away because the leader got beaten up so quick they had no interest then


they werent willing to stick their necks out against a dog more powerful and dominant than their pack leader


These were livestock killing strays


----------



## Anitsisqua

I mentioned this story to my father tonight, and he said these words: "Shoot, Shovel, and Shut Up."


----------



## wyominggrandma

yep, that is exactly what is being done with the wolves in wyoming/idaho/montana also. S S S
Or as fish and game call them, very very big coyotes.


----------



## Nigel

selzer said:


> Hmmmm. Dogs are bred to hunt. Kind of like we breed dogs for protection work or to herd sheep. There are different kinds of hunting. I mean using pit bulls on wild hogs is kind of brutal I would thing, as is hounds after rabbits or fox. But that is not all hunting. There are dogs that flush game, and dogs that set, holding the bird with their eyes. There are dogs that point. There are dogs whose big thing is retrieving game on water or land. These bird dogs are not trained to rip and tear into the game the way a terrier or hound does. In fact they generally have a soft mouth, meaning they can pick up an injured or dead bird and not do any further injury.
> 
> I think that if we disallow dogs to be used for hunting, those breeds will lose the purpose that they were originally bred for, and the main part of their temperament and structure and instinct will no longer be valid. I think that would be a terrible loss to those breeds.
> 
> There is something special about watching a well-bred dog do the work that was its original intent, and that includes hunting dogs.


I agree, most hunting with dogs is fine. Hound hunting cougar and bear were banned here years ago and I was glad to see it go. Driving through the national forest in your pickup with your best hound tied on top of the other 6-8 kenneled dogs, waiting for it to pick up a scent. Once they pick up a scent, they are released to track and tree the cougar/bear, once treed, the owner shoots it. Not very sporting if you ask me.


----------



## Nigel

wyominggrandma said:


> yep, that is exactly what is being done with the wolves in wyoming/idaho/montana also. S S S
> Or as fish and game call them, very very big coyotes.


That's all fine and dandy until you pop one with a radio collar.


----------



## LifeofRiley

selzer said:


> I think this thread has been very instructive. Some people may never agree with the idea that people should shoot a dog. But maybe someone reading this thread will be just a little more careful with their dog. Maybe someone will not think it is funny when their dog chases the horses next door. Maybe someone when faced with the devastation that their dog caused will not make a cold heartless statement about paying/replacing the animals, while still taking ownership and being responsible for the damages.


I like your post selzer. But, I feel that there are additional lessons to be learned from this thread for any future readers.

The shooter in this case is facing criminal charges. So, I would think that the first lesson anyone should take away from this thread is to understand the community you live in and the current laws that govern it.

I am sure the man’s life will be **** no matter what the legal outcome. For right, or wrong, that is the situation. And, it is not because of the legal breach, it is because his neighbors think he was wrong! It is an outcome that any future shooters should take into consideration just as much as the dog owner who “thinks its cute” for the pup to chase the horse.

My take-away is to continue to have great relationships with my neighbors. I know that if my dog ever accidently got loose, they would do whatever was possible to help him find his way home!


----------



## selzer

See my take on it, is if I feel I must shoot a dog, I am just going to bury it, and some family with their five children are going to wait for it to come home, and they are going to hope it will come home, and they will look for it, and they will call the vet and call the shelter, and they will wonder whether it is freezing, or missing them, or injured, or sick, or dead in a ditch or trap somewhere. But they will never know. They will never get any closure. They will get over it, but they will not know what became of their dog. 

And when they let their next dog run loose and it goes the same way as the first, it will be all because the system is not working in favor of dogs, but in favor of irresponsible owners.


----------



## damaya

selzer said:


> I have a gun and will use it, but it is not generally my first thought.


I'll be darned. That's what I said 18 pages ago.

On the passion and emotion thing - I feel like it's tough to express that through a key board. You can try, but you know how often sarcasm has to be identified, a remark meant to be witty comes off wrong or is taken wrong. Emotion and passion are best delivered face to face or at least when voices can be heard. I'm guessing everybody here has a passion for German Shepherds, but when we get into discussions like we have had over the last couple days to me that passion and emotion is harder to convey.

I can honestly say I have NOT gotten mad throughout this thread. Not like I did in the "dog park" thread when I was called a 
bad owner". I did take offense to that, and kind of went after the offender. 
I may have shook my head at a few answers and wondered if people had actually read anything or just immediately started pecking the keyboard for all they were worth. But, once again this is the interwebz and it's what we do. 
I certainly don't think I'm always right, and most definitely don't think everyone should share my opinion, you'd be better off if you did though. (see that was a bit of sarcasm) I guess because of my background I tend to want to play Devil's Advocate sometimes.

For the record. Just because I think the shooter could have handled himself differently does not mean I want any harm to come to him, his family or his property. I hope it doesn't cost a fortune for him to put this behind him. It would be nice to think he and his neighbor could somehow "mend fences" so to speak (starting with the one the dogs got out of).:smirk: Life is too short to spend it pissed off whether it's a domestic, legal, or message board dispute. 

While I think this thread has drawn more posters than the "funny pics" thread I started the other has more views. I'll have to check the "dog park" thread to see how it stacks up. Now let me go see what I can find for "next" 
You guys have a good rest of the evening.


----------



## selzer

damaya said:


> I'll be darned. That's what I said 18 pages ago.
> 
> On the passion and emotion thing - I feel like it's tough to express that through a key board. You can try, but you know how often sarcasm has to be identified, a remark meant to be witty comes off wrong or is taken wrong. Emotion and passion are best delivered face to face or at least when voices can be heard. I'm guessing everybody here has a passion for German Shepherds, but when we get into discussions like we have had over the last couple days to me that passion and emotion is harder to convey.
> 
> I can honestly say I have NOT gotten mad throughout this thread. Not like I did in the "dog park" thread when I was called a
> bad owner". I did take offense to that, and kind of went after the offender.
> I may have shook my head at a few answers and wondered if people had actually read anything or just immediately started pecking the keyboard for all they were worth. But, once again this is the interwebz and it's what we do.
> I certainly don't think I'm always right, and most definitely don't think everyone should share my opinion, you'd be better off if you did though. (see that was a bit of sarcasm) I guess because of my background I tend to want to play Devil's Advocate sometimes.
> 
> For the record. Just because I think the shooter could have handled himself differently does not mean I want any harm to come to him, his family or his property. I hope it doesn't cost a fortune for him to put this behind him. It would be nice to think he and his neighbor could somehow "mend fences" so to speak (starting with the one the dogs got out of).:smirk: Life is too short to spend it pissed off whether it's a domestic, legal, or message board dispute.
> 
> While I think this thread has drawn more posters than the "funny pics" thread I started the other has more views. I'll have to check the "dog park" thread to see how it stacks up. Now let me go see what I can find for "next"
> You guys have a good rest of the evening.


It is not MY first thought because:
1. I am not nearly 30 years older.

2. I am accustomed to large formidable bitches and dogs, and am not afraid of them and have pulled them apart when they were trying to kill each other, and I have been bitten and have lived through it. 

3. I don't currently own livestock.

4. I am a dog-person. 

This guy is coming from a different place than I am.


----------

