# Livestock worrying



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

The Farmers Guardian newspaper are currently running a high profile campaign to try and educate dog owners about the importance of keeping their dogs on a lead or under control around livestock, especially sheep at this time of year when many hill sheep are in lamb.

The newspapers told a couple of days ago how the actress, Sue Johnson's, spaniel was shot (along with a second spaniel) for worrying and killing hens.

There has been mass outrage on the Dogs Today FB page about this, and it was quite an eye-opener for me to see just how strongly some people commenting felt that the farmer was in the wrong.

So, what are your views on the story?

Coronation Street star Sue Johnston's dog's shooter says it was running wild | Mail Online


----------



## Jazmine (Feb 1, 2009)

Moobli said:


> The Farmers Guardian newspaper are currently running a high profile campaign to try and educate dog owners about the importance of keeping their dogs on a lead or under control around livestock, especially sheep at this time of year when many hill sheep are in lamb.
> 
> The newspapers told a couple of days ago how the actress, Sue Johnson's, spaniel was shot (along with a second spaniel) for worrying and killing hens.
> 
> ...


All of this could have been prevented if the dogs were kept on a lead. We went on a walk in the Peak District yesterday, which included a fair bit of farm land. Whenever we were in a field with livestock, we clipped the leads on, and away we went. Leads attached to walking belts too so still handsfree. It's not difficult is it?

Two dogs and a hen dead, needlessly.

I am sure there are farmers out there who are a bit too trigger happy, but as far as I'm concerned, if you keep your dog on a lead, you eliminate the risk.


----------



## tabulahrasa (Nov 4, 2012)

I grew up in a farming community - so I've always known that if your dog is worrying lifestock it may be shot...most farmers try not to, but they shouldn't have to lose their animals and livelihood because a dog owner doesn't bother to control their pet.


----------



## Sparkle22 (Oct 26, 2013)

All my sympathy is with the farmer and his children to be honest.

I think its disgraceful the number of people who think it's okay to allow dogs to chase animals, the dog walker herself said the dogs were chasing rabbits. 
How people can have so much love for one species and such complete and utter disrespect for the well being of another astounds me. 

I really feel for the children, to have to witness the animals being hunted down and killed by a dog is just awful and should never have happened, surely to god the dog walker knew it was private land with livestock?!?!?!

It's common knowledge that a farmer has the right to shoot any dog worrying his livestock and I fully agree with them having that right.


----------



## PawsOnMe (Nov 1, 2012)

It's tragic but the farmer was well within his rights to protect his livestock. It could have all been avoided if the dog walker had kept the dogs on a lead. 

On a walk last week we were walking through fields with the boys, there were lambs and sheep in the field so of course we kept them on their leads as we walked through and a long line elsewhere as we weren't sure what was in the fields and in the hills. There were dozens of other people having picnics and sat with their dogs off leads, running riot, I really don't see how it's worth it. Endangering the lives of not only the sheep and lambs but also their dogs lives.


----------



## 8tansox (Jan 29, 2010)

My stomach churned when I read this story - again.

I do believe that farmers' have EVERY right to protect their livelihood, protect their livestock, but I personally blame the dog walker 100%. I'm sure they will never forget this and learn a very hard lesson indeed. 

Regardless of who's dogs they were, I feel sorry for everyone involved, owner, farmer, children, even the dog walker. 

This could so easily have been avoided, but once again the dogs have paid the ultimate price.


----------



## Jenna500 (May 27, 2012)

tabulahrasa said:


> I grew up in a farming community - so I've always known that if your dog is worrying lifestock it may be shot...most farmers try not to, but they shouldn't have to lose their animals and livelihood because a dog owner doesn't bother to control their pet.


Ditto. If my dogs ran off and were shot by a farmer for worrying livestock I would be devastated - but I would blame MYSELF for letting my dogs be out of control.


----------



## Nicki85 (Oct 6, 2010)

My views are... the dog walker should have had the dogs on lead if they were close to a farm (or livestock) full stop. This is even truer if she didn't have a good enough recall. I feel very sorry for the owner. I think it is absolutely terrible that the farmer did not admit to shooting the dogs in the first instant... (although this is a DM article so perhaps not entirely accurate...). Horrible situation for all involved  

I had my Spaniel on two leads (one attached to his harness the other is collar) when we walked through a field of sheep and young lambs the other day... and no way would I let him off in close vicinity to a field with sheep (or a farm with loose chickens). My other dog is very responsive to the point she'll watch a rabbit and then come back to me for a treat so I do not worry as much but I still clip her on in situations like this.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

I can't open the link for some reason so not quite sure what actually happened here.

Unless the farmer had his gun in his hand when the dogs arrived, the dogs must have been chasing for some time before they were shot?

Several animals come under the banner where the law is concerned re worrying....not too sure if hens are classed as livestock for this.

Some dog walkers are really inconsiderate and selfish when it comes to walking on or through other people's property and then are surprised when tragedies like a dog getting shot happens.

I know several trigger happy farmers but mostly the ones I know would only shoot a dog as a last resort. People often don't understand that a dog walking through a field of pregnant sheep is worrying for a farmer cos the sheep can abort.

Its sad to see a dead dog shot for worrying, its also sad to see ripped up sheep and lambs without mums cos somebody let their dogs roam.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Jazmine said:


> All of this could have been prevented if the dogs were kept on a lead. We went on a walk in the Peak District yesterday, which included a fair bit of farm land. Whenever we were in a field with livestock, we clipped the leads on, and away we went. Leads attached to walking belts too so still handsfree. It's not difficult is it?
> 
> Two dogs and a hen dead, needlessly.
> 
> I am sure there are farmers out there who are a bit too trigger happy, but as far as I'm concerned, if you keep your dog on a lead, you eliminate the risk.


I would want to be able to unleash my dog if there were cows about that got over protective of calves in a field...can these walking belts be unclipped quickly?


----------



## BessieDog (May 16, 2012)

Absolutely agree that dogs should be on lead around livestock. 100%

But in this case Only one thing made me think the farmer was a bit trigger happy - if the children were upset seeing a hen killed, they probably didn't appreciate seeing dogs shot in front of them, either. 

He was in his rights, but did he have to shoot both dogs? And as it was a pet hen, was it just the one hen in the yard?


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

The farmer was completely within his rights to shoot a dog worrying his stock.

What he was not right to do was deny all knowledge of having seen them when approached. I'm sure he'd expect people to be honest enough to tell him if they knew the whereabouts of any of his animals should they be missing. The attitude he took does not help with public sympathy towards the farming community. Farmers are also required to inform the police within 48hrs of shooting a dog, since reports say the police contacted him then could it be that he did not do this either?

There was another case a few years ago of a dog being shot and stuffed down a rabbit hole with nobody being informed Family's anger after pet dog 'shot and stuffed down rabbit hole' | Dundee & Tayside | News

Farmers are given a necessary privilege in being allowed to shoot out of control dogs. They have a legal and social responsibility to play by the rules or they can expect to be criticised.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

I'm going to be quite blunt and say it's all the the person who is responsible for the dogs fault.

Everyone should know the rule that they can shoot if the dog is causing havoc, tbh if I were a farmer I wouldn't want some dog destroying my livelihood just so they can have a bit of fun.

I can't believe when I see people who have no control of their dogs, especially running over crops and farmers land. I go from being both outraged to bemused at peoples pure stupidity.

The farmer said he didn't want to do it but the dogs were uncontrollable around the chickens and were attacking them and killed one, the dogs were not under control, so that's what happens.


----------



## Sparkle22 (Oct 26, 2013)

BessieDog said:


> Absolutely agree that dogs should be on lead around livestock. 100%
> 
> But in this case Only one thing made me think the farmer was a bit trigger happy - if the children were upset seeing a hen killed, they probably didn't appreciate seeing dogs shot in front of them, either.
> 
> He was in his rights, but did he have to shoot both dogs? And as it was a pet hen, was it just the one hen in the yard?


What was the farmer supposed to do? 
Allow the dogs to kill ALL his chickens? 
It's going to be a traumatic experience for the children regardless of what course of action you take frankly and in that situation, your instinct could well be to quickly shoot the dogs to stop any more carnage.

Probably, both dogs were chasing and worrying the chickens. 
And both dogs, if they caught a bird would probably kill it.

Does the number really matter?
It's private property so the dogs shouldn't be there full stop! 
Additionally, being a farm, he has to consider other livestock that will be invariably be there. 
The picture shows a gated, private farm with a private driveway so his animals aren't just plonked in a random field where people might not be expecting them.
Who's to say they wouldn't have run off when bored of chickens and caused his sheep to abort causing loss of income?


----------



## Jazmine (Feb 1, 2009)

lilythepink said:


> I would want to be able to unleash my dog if there were cows about that got over protective of calves in a field...can these walking belts be unclipped quickly?


Funny you mention that, as that is exactly what my hubby pointed out yesterday. I guess you could unclip the lead where it is attached to the dog, but that still takes longer than just being able to drop your lead.

We are a bit paranoid about unknown cows after a couple of scary incidents last year, so to be honest, if the livestock in the field happens to include a lot of cows, we tend to take a different route.


----------



## Hanwombat (Sep 5, 2013)

I always know if I go into a field with livestock and my dog is off lead that there is a chance the farmer could shoot them. I even worry if I go near a field with livestock, I always put her on a lead, those who don't are stupid and endangering their dog(s) and the farmers stock.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

Jazmine said:


> All of this could have been prevented if the dogs were kept on a lead. We went on a walk in the Peak District yesterday, which included a fair bit of farm land. Whenever we were in a field with livestock, we clipped the leads on, and away we went. *Leads attached to walking belts too so still handsfree. It's not difficult is it?*
> 
> Two dogs and a hen dead, needlessly.
> 
> I am sure there are farmers out there who are a bit too trigger happy, but as far as I'm concerned, if you keep your dog on a lead, you eliminate the risk.


This is why I bought a walking belt. My dogs are rarely on lead but when they are they give me some terrible grief with shoulder and arm pain - plus one big yank and they're loose - the belt is so much easier. I doubt they would chase to kill anything other than smaller prey animals/livestock but they'd chase for the fun of it.

It's so easy to get caught out in the Peak District. Phoolf and I did Lathkill and Bradford Dales last year and there was one field we weren't sure there were livestock in or not - until it was too late. Luckily I'd kept mine on anyway because we'd just passed a load of people.

Ninja sheep...










Although in one field I did forget to clip Jack on but thankfully he's a gentleman and I didn't even notice until he decided to trot off in front to sniff something. I thought he was onlead and just dawdling. But I would never make that mistake with the Clown's. 

Like everything - we don't know the full story. We don't know if the farmer was trigger happy or how long the dogs were actually chasing for or if any other measures had been tried before the gun was brought out. Sadly too many people lack common sense and I suspect a lot of people are only up in uproar because of who's dogs they were. Sad that the dogs had to pay the price.

I always check walks before I go on them. I purposely choose walks with little or no livestock or at least well fenced in livestock.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Jazmine said:


> Funny you mention that, as that is exactly what my hubby pointed out yesterday. I guess you could unclip the lead where it is attached to the dog, but that still takes longer than just being able to drop your lead.
> 
> We are a bit paranoid about unknown cows after a couple of scary incidents last year, so to be honest, if the livestock in the field happens to include a lot of cows, we tend to take a different route.


We have had beef cows with calves for many years. I would not walk down my own field of cows and calves with my own dog.

We have 1 cow who was hand reared by me. She was a sickly calf as a baby and had extra time of being hand fed.so she thinks she is a horse and likes being cuddled and is generally lovely...she turns into a total wench when she has a new calf and for the first week or so after she calves, we stay well away from her. Lots of cows are like this.Farmers and farm labourers get badly injured and some even killed every year dealing with a new calf on its mum.


----------



## Jazmine (Feb 1, 2009)

SLB said:


> This is why I bought a walking belt. My dogs are rarely on lead but when they are they give me some terrible grief with shoulder and arm pain - plus one big yank and they're loose - the belt is so much easier. I doubt they would chase to kill anything other than smaller prey animals/livestock but they'd chase for the fun of it.
> 
> It's so easy to get caught out in the Peak District. Phoolf and I did Lathkill and Bradford Dales last year and there was one field we weren't sure there were livestock in or not - until it was too late. Luckily I'd kept mine on anyway because we'd just passed a load of people.
> 
> ...


It was a walk we did around the middle part of Dovedale last year where we ran into a couple of fields with quite aggressive cows in. Cue much scrambling over walls and barbed wire. Scary enough to make me think twice about even entering a field with lots of cows at this time of year.

Our local cows are quite relaxed and laid back, most of them don't even lift their heads from grazing when you walk through, so those Peak District ones were a bit of a shock!


----------



## Jazmine (Feb 1, 2009)

lilythepink said:


> We have had beef cows with calves for many years. I would not walk down my own field of cows and calves with my own dog.
> 
> We have 1 cow who was hand reared by me. She was a sickly calf as a baby and had extra time of being hand fed.so she thinks she is a horse and likes being cuddled and is generally lovely...she turns into a total wench when she has a new calf and for the first week or so after she calves, we stay well away from her. Lots of cows are like this.Farmers and farm labourers get badly injured and some even killed every year dealing with a new calf on its mum.


That makes me feel better as I sometimes wonder if we are being over cautious. Lots of people seem to walk through fields of cows and take no notice but I am always very aware of their behaviour and whether they look interested in our appearance. When we do end up in fields with cows we tend to stick to the boundary and I always mentally plan my escape route.


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

I'm going to go against the grain here, I think he was trigger happy and there was probably no need to shoot the dogs at all. 
Did he try to catch the dogs like anyone of us would have done? Or, because he has the "right" to legally kill dogs on his land, did he just shoot first.

They killed one hen, hardly a rampage, so the farmer saw them running around and kill one hen and he then had time to go get his gun out of his house, from within his locked cupboard, come back out and shoot the dogs, but couldn't have tried to catch the dogs or scare them away with a couple of warning shots?

From the story it seems that the dogs were off lead in open country but saw a rabbit and ran off, probably travelling a mile or more to reach the farm. If we were to all keep our dogs on lead in case there is a farm within a mile, they'd never be allowed off lead.

I live near this area and these same farmers are the same ones who hate walkers legally crossing their land on public footpaths (I've had abuse from loads when out walking) and although they can't shoot me, I bet he felt " that'll teach them" as he waded across his yard to murder two huge vicious spaniels.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

Jazmine said:


> It was a walk we did around the middle part of Dovedale last year where we ran into a couple of fields with quite aggressive cows in. Cue much scrambling over walls and barbed wire. Scary enough to make me think twice about even entering a field with lots of cows at this time of year.
> 
> Our local cows are quite relaxed and laid back, most of them don't even lift their heads from grazing when you walk through, so those Peak District ones were a bit of a shock!


I HATE cows and will avoid fields with them in. Except that walk where we even had to walk past a brutish looking bull that had a ring in his nose.. :yikes:

We did walk through a field of young cows/bulls they were more inquisitive than aggressive - but I still marched through it like my bum was on fire.  I hate sheep too but they move out of the way and are smaller than me. I stay out of horse fields too - I'm alright riding them but unsaddled etc and loose in a field.. nope can't do it.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

We used to live in the Yorkshire Dales and rarely saw stray dogs as the farmers were inclined to shoot first and ask questions later especially if lambs were about. When we moved here one of the first people I spoke to was someone with an Irish Setter, there had been two, but one had been shot by a game keeper and buried in the woods. It sounded awful and very upsetting for the owners and I felt so sorry for them as they were distraught and had been searching for the dog for many days. However I later found out that they had regularly allowed the dogs to go hunting in the woods and hadn't been overly worried if the dogs disappeared for some time.
A man in the village owns a sort of 'village flock' of sheep. They are moved round the village to various bits of land that people own in order to keep the grass down, I do wish the owner would put up a notice if they are in a field though, to warn people the sheep are in there as it not always possible to see them. A few years ago he had a lot of problems with a dog attacking sheep and lambs and lost quite a few. It turned out to be a little Yorkshire terrier who could squeeze through the tiniest of gaps and went out on a killing spree at night when the sheep were too scared to run off. Consequently he is very touchy about seeing off lead dogs in with his sheep.
The farmers are well within their rights to shoot dogs attacking their animals and I support that. I'm trying very hard to train Isla not to be interested in other animals and she does appear to have lost interest in the sheep now, but if wouldn't trust her for a second. She has no idea what to make of the hens that live nearby and seems a bit scared of them, but then she's absolutely terrified of a neighbours cat.


----------



## Guest (Apr 30, 2014)

Oh my goodness the whole story is a clusterfluck from beginning to end.

Dog walker who lets dogs off leash without a reliable recall. Dogs end up on a farmer's land, kill one of his chickens, get shot (sadly, but understandably).

At this point I'm completely with the farmer. Until the part where he buried the dogs and denied having seen them when the dog walker asked about them. I mean, I get he was upset by the whole thing, but clearly it was someone's dog, who no matter how irresponsible, at least deserves the truth.

I'm also wondering if the dogs had any identification on them that the farmer could have contacted to let them know....


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

Hazy81 said:


> I'm going to go against the grain here, I think he was trigger happy and there was probably no need to shoot the dogs at all.
> Did he try to catch the dogs like anyone of us would have done? Or, because he has the "right" to legally kill dogs on his land, did he just shoot first.
> 
> They killed one hen, hardly a rampage, so the farmer saw them running around and kill one hen and he then had time to go get his gun out of his house, from within his locked cupboard, come back out and shoot the dogs, but couldn't have tried to catch the dogs or scare them away with a couple of warning shots?
> ...


No that's not true, you can ensure they have a reliable recall and then let them off. If they are not reliable and will give chase to animals and not return, then yes they should be kept on lead if there is any farms nearby.

Peoples property and livelihood is not there for my dogs taking. I respect their land and property and animals as I would want my own. If I had a rabbit or chicken in my garden I wouldn't want out of control dogs to come in and kill them, the same should be applied to people who live in farms.


----------



## Jazmine (Feb 1, 2009)

SLB said:


> I HATE cows and will avoid fields with them in. Except that walk where we even had to walk past a brutish looking bull that had a ring in his nose.. :yikes:
> 
> We did walk through a field of young cows/bulls they were more inquisitive than aggressive - but I still marched through it like my bum was on fire.  I hate sheep too but they move out of the way and are smaller than me. I stay out of horse fields too - I'm alright riding them but unsaddled etc and loose in a field.. nope can't do it.


I'm ok with sheep. Walk through a field of sheep with two (on lead) collies, and the sheep tend to give you a wide berth.

Which makes Scout & Mira feel super awesome because they think they made the sheep move all by themselves!


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> I'm going to go against the grain here, I think he was trigger happy and there was probably no need to shoot the dogs at all.
> Did he try to catch the dogs like anyone of us would have done? Or, because he has the "right" to legally kill dogs on his land, did he just shoot first.
> 
> They killed one hen, hardly a rampage, so the farmer saw them running around and kill one hen and he then had time to go get his gun out of his house, from within his locked cupboard, come back out and shoot the dogs, but couldn't have tried to catch the dogs or scare them away with a couple of warning shots?
> ...


Unfortunately walkers get tarred with the same brush. Our last farm had a footpath going through a field. Walkers would come in wet weather with dogs, kids in prams...and do you think they could ever stick to the path? They would walk several abreast and leave rubbish as in crisp packets etc behind. They wouldn't bother to open a gate but would climb over it. My husband has better things to do with his time than mend gates cos fat walkers climb over them at the weakest point.

If my dogs were out and some numpty walked through with a dog.....it would be chaos. My little dakkie dog was killed by a moron with a rottie off lead.one snap and that was it.dead.

We would be having a family BBQ and walkers would walk through....no thought of our privacy but were exercising their right to walk. Well, I paid a huge mortgage to live where I lived for some of the great unwashed and uneducated to walk wherever they felt like across my land and they had more rights than I did.

One thing walking through a field and not annoying anybody, another entirely walking close to a property simply cos some archaic law said they had a right to.


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

emmaviolet said:


> No that's not true, you can ensure they have a reliable recall and then let them off. If they are not reliable and will give chase to animals and not return, then yes they should be kept on lead if there is any farms nearby.
> 
> Peoples property and livelihood is not there for my dogs taking. I respect their land and property and animals as I would want my own. If I had a rabbit or chicken in my garden I wouldn't want out of control dogs to come in and kill them, the same should be applied to people who live in farms.


These were spaniels, off lead and saw a rabbit, I think most dogs would give chase and not have 100% recall. They weren't walked up to the farm and released to go kill chickens or being irresponsibly walked off lead next to the farm.

Must be lovely to live in countryside where there are no farms nearby....how far is nearby? This farm could have been several miles from where the dogs got lost, so the only fault would be the dogs not having 100% recall when they saw a rabbit........my dog and I guess many on this forum would never be let off lead again in that case.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

lilythepink said:


> Unfortunately walkers get tarred with the same brush. Our last farm had a footpath going through a field. Walkers would come in wet weather with dogs, kids in prams...and do you think they could ever stick to the path? They would walk several abreast and leave rubbish as in crisp packets etc behind. They wouldn't bother to open a gate but would climb over it. My husband has better things to do with his time than mend gates cos fat walkers climb over them at the weakest point.
> 
> If my dogs were out and some numpty walked through with a dog.....it would be chaos. My little dakkie dog was killed by a moron with a rottie off lead.one snap and that was it.dead.
> 
> ...


My god, how horrible for you. 

So sorry for your poor little dog. It's unbelievable people could treat your home and land that way.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> These were spaniels, off lead and saw a rabbit, I think most dogs would give chase and not have 100% recall. They weren't walked up to the farm and released to go kill chickens or being irresponsibly walked off lead next to the farm.
> 
> Must be lovely to live in countryside where there are no farms nearby....how far is nearby? This farm could have been several miles from where the dogs got lost, so the only fault would be the dogs not having 100% recall when they saw a rabbit........my dog and I guess many on this forum would never be let off lead again in that case.


well I suppose you could say they were off lead, saw a rabbit, chased that in to the next field and then upped it a gear and chased sheep and a couple of foals too?


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

emmaviolet said:


> My good, how horrible for you.
> 
> So sorry for your poor little dog. It's unbelievable people could treat your home and land that way.


Thank you. Most people were ok....but that was number 1 reason for selling up and moving.

You can walk anywhere in Scotland, the only private bit to the land here is what surrounds the garden. You can camp and pitch a tent too on any land.and there is no trespass.

Not once has anybody walked or tried to walk through my land here. No dogs have attacked any of my stock.


----------



## Sparkle22 (Oct 26, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> I'm going to go against the grain here, I think he was trigger happy and there was probably no need to shoot the dogs at all.
> Did he try to catch the dogs like anyone of us would have done? Or, because he has the "right" to legally kill dogs on his land, did he just shoot first.
> 
> They killed one hen, hardly a rampage, so the farmer saw them running around and kill one hen and he then had time to go get his gun out of his house, from within his locked cupboard, come back out and shoot the dogs, but couldn't have tried to catch the dogs or scare them away with a couple of warning shots?
> ...


I'm a bit  at reading this.

First of all, why should he have to try and catch the dogs?!
They are on HIS property, they are not permitted to be there and on top of that, they are chasing after and killing his livestock! 
In front of a two year old and a five year old! 
In a situation like that, you act fast to try and regain some control of the situation and if you happen to have a gun....

Most dogs can outrun most people and he's an old man so I doubt he's super fast, in the time it would take him to try and catch the dogs they could have managed to kill more. 
Whose to say the dogs wouldn't have bitten him if he did catch them? 
They are very hyped up and focused on the chase, how do you think they are likely to react to being suddenly grabbed by a strange man? Especially considering how many dog fights occur in the midst of a very enthusiastic, hyped up game, think how often people get caught in the crossfire trying to deal with it. 
Kids are screaming, chickens are running round everywhere, excitement is at its peak, they will sense the rage of the farmer, you think catching them in this situation will end well?
because I don't.

One hen could have easily become Christ knows how many if they weren't stopped. 
Chickens are sensitive to stress also, further birds could well have died after the event down to the pure trauma of what they have been through. 
It is never okay for a dog to be on someone else's property and it's never okay for them to frighten or kill animals on that property, ESPECIALLY if the owner of the property needs those animals to make a living :incazzato:

Given how selfish so many people are,I would be nervous as well about people crossing my land if I was a farmer.
There are too many people who think they can do whatever they damn well like, littering, trampling gardens, letting dogs chase animals, bowl over kids and generally be a nuisance, trespass, vandalise, I have even had inconsiderate bastards un clip their dogs leads so they can poo on my garden then clip them back on when their finished because at that time I didn't have a fence!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is no excuse.

Reading your post, I can't help but feel that you come across rather bitter, I highly highly doubt that he shot them for fun, or that he was thinking that'll teach you.
Farmers need their animals to live, people underestimate the effect stress can have on them and the effect this has on their income when most are struggling already.
They aren't monsters!


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Sparkle22 said:


> I'm a bit  at reading this.
> 
> First of all, why should he have to try and catch the dogs?!
> They are on HIS property, they are not permitted to be there and on top of that, they are chasing after and killing his livestock!
> ...


My husband would only shoot a dog as a last resort, plenty farmers I know are the same.

Most dog walkers are fine, just the odd ones that give everybody else a bad name.


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

lilythepink said:


> Unfortunately walkers get tarred with the same brush. Our last farm had a footpath going through a field. Walkers would come in wet weather with dogs, kids in prams...and do you think they could ever stick to the path? They would walk several abreast and leave rubbish as in crisp packets etc behind. They wouldn't bother to open a gate but would climb over it. My husband has better things to do with his time than mend gates cos fat walkers climb over them at the weakest point.
> 
> If my dogs were out and some numpty walked through with a dog.....it would be chaos. My little dakkie dog was killed by a moron with a rottie off lead.one snap and that was it.dead.
> 
> ...


Sorry to be one of the "great unwashed"  (walkers) walking on land with given rights of way, that were there before you paid your huge mortgage for the property.... maybe this farmer was tarring all dogs with the same brush and they deserved to be shot because "other" dogs had been a nuisance in the past...I'm just glad there's no law allowing farmers to legally shoot ramblers, or "the great unwashed" as they'll now be known, otherwise it sounds like it'd be shoot first and ask questions later :laugh:


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> Sorry to be one of the "great unwashed"  (walkers) walking on land with given rights of way, that were there before you paid your huge mortgage for the property.... maybe this farmer was tarring all dogs with the same brush and they deserved to be shot because "other" dogs had been a nuisance in the past...I'm just glad there's no law allowing farmers to legally shoot ramblers, or "the great unwashed" as they'll now be known, otherwise it sounds like it'd be shoot first and ask questions later :laugh:


sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.

and then theres the haves and have nots...and its very easy to pick out which is which


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

Sparkle22 said:


> Reading your post, I can't help but feel that you come across rather bitter, I highly highly doubt that he shot them for fun, or that he was thinking that'll teach you.
> Farmers need their animals to live, people underestimate the effect stress can have on them and the effect this has on their income when most are struggling already.
> They aren't monsters!


Not bitter at all I've no personal involvement in this, just that the farmers story doesn't add up, your telling me that he was so horrified that they killed a chicken in front of the kids that his first reaction was to blast them apart in front of the kids, or at least where the kids could hear it happen. Then he buries them, doesn't report that he has shot them and denies he saw them when asked??


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

I don't disagree that a farmer should be able to shoot a dog that is causing very obvious distress to his livestock and the farmer is witness to the distress/attacks. Not sure how many are trigger happy, and/or would cover their shooting up with an exaggerated story of how the dog was running wild but if a dog was loose with no owner in sight and seemingly lost and just wandering through his field without causing distress I'd like to think a farmer wouldn't shoot and would try to coax the dog to him/away from his land. I would not agree with him shooting just because the dog was on his land/near his livestock and he _feared_ the worst.

I walk at a local Nature Reserve, and quite alarmingly there is a farm just outside the deer fencing and further along the path alongside the woods. I only knew about this farm after stumbling upon it and it was not signed earlier along the path. Thankfully I did manage to have time to pop the lead back on my sheep chaser! and I rarely walk that far up now. Last year I remember walking around the reserve and noticed large warning signs that a farm was just outside the reserve and that a few weeks earlier 7 sheep had been brutally attacked by a dog(s) and the farmer had posted graphic pictures of the injuries to his sheep...some of which were killed. He didn't shoot the dog and I'm guessing he wasn't witness/around during the attack, but he was asking for the owner to step forward. Not that I believe for one minute the owner would! But it sure does make you think a little differently when you see the damage done and makes me extra cautious when walking in that area. It must have been distressing for that farmer to come down and face those seriously injured sheep


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

The farmer said himself he tried to chase the dogs away using his truck but they wouldn't leave the chickens alone.

I can't stand guns and hate the thought of any animal being shot, but I also know that it happens so you have to be prepared for your dog to be shot if there is no control over them. It's just one of those things you have to be aware of and accept.


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

lilythepink said:


> sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
> 
> and then theres the haves and have nots...and its very easy to pick out which is which


I'd rather be sarcastic in the face of snobbery than look down my nose at people who can't afford a massive farm and label all recreational ramblers "the great unwashed" I found that offensive and typical of most farmers attitudes.
That attitude kind of supports the "trigger happy" theory.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

The article says the farmer says he tried to drive the dogs off. And it is far from easy to catch even a large dog who is chasing around after something, let alone two small dogs who are harder to grab. I don't think it matters how many chickens were harmed, the simple fact is the dogs were chasing livestock and the farmer was well within his rights to shoot them. And if he had time to try to chase them off/catch them then go get his gun I doubt we're talking a brief chase.

Personally just I wish signs would be put up when livestock are nearby. Last year I rounded a corner with Spen off leash only to be confronted with a field full of sheep where we haven't seen sheep before. Thankfully Spen isn't bothered and was recalled and put on his leash immediately. I warned a few friends though, knowing that if they walked that way and came across them unaware their dogs would chase.


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

emmaviolet said:


> The farmer said himself he tried to chase the dogs away using his truck but they wouldn't leave the chickens alone.
> 
> I can't stand guns and hate the thought of any animal being shot, but I also know that it happens so you have to be prepared for your dog to be shot if there is no control over them. It's just one of those things you have to be aware of and accept.


This is why I don't think his story stands up, I mean the dogs were out of control, but the farmer had time to get in a truck and chase them, get out of the truck, in to his house, get his gun, come back outside and shoot both dogs...and in all that time of running around uncontrollably....between them, they managed to kill one whole chicken?? Exactly how out of control were they.


----------



## Sparkle22 (Oct 26, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> Not bitter at all I've no personal involvement in this, just that the farmers story doesn't add up, your telling me that he was so horrified that they killed a chicken in front of the kids that his first reaction was to blast them apart in front of the kids, or at least where the kids could hear it happen. Then he buries them, doesn't report that he has shot them and denies he saw them when asked??


You don't think that claiming he was happy to shoot them, that he was thinking 'serves you right' is bitter? 
What about your response to lilythepink? 
That even despite what she said about the blatent invasion of her privacy, your response was pretty much that you could be there if you wanted to? Because the law says you can? 
That's not bitter?

In that situation you act as fast as possible to stop the damage, the fastest way? 
Kill the dog/s. 
If I was the farmer, I would have acted in the same way and shot them both.

Should he have buried them and not reported it?
Of course not.
But then he most likely panicked and/or was scared of repercussions from other dog owners.

I'm afraid, I am completely on his side.

There is NO excuse for allowing your dog to go on private property and kill other peoples animals, it's not right.

Claiming that the dogs were chasing after a rabbit and therefore couldn't be recalled, well that just doesn't sit right with me.

If your dog has unreliable recall, don't let them off lead in areas near farms or where there is an abundance of wildlife.

Not only is it dangerous for your dog incase they get shot by a farmer or run into the path of a car, it isn't fair on the wildlife either and often results in miscarriages and newborns being abandoned and starving to death due to the stress.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Hazy81 said:


> This is why I don't think his story stands up, I mean the dogs were out of control, but the farmer had time to get in a truck and chase them, get out of the truck, in to his house, get his gun, come back outside and shoot both dogs...and in all that time of running around uncontrollably....between them, they managed to kill one whole chicken?? Exactly how out of control were they.


Just because a dog chases doesn't mean it's intent on killing. Just because only one died doesn't mean the others weren't distressed or harmed.


----------



## Guest (Apr 30, 2014)

Hazy81 said:


> I'm going to go against the grain here, I think he was trigger happy and there was probably no need to shoot the dogs at all.
> Did he try to catch the dogs like anyone of us would have done? Or, because he has the "right" to legally kill dogs on his land, did he just shoot first.
> 
> They killed one hen, hardly a rampage, so the farmer saw them running around and kill one hen and he then had time to go get his gun out of his house, from within his locked cupboard, come back out and shoot the dogs, but couldn't have tried to catch the dogs or scare them away with a couple of warning shots?
> ...


What an unfair statement 
You have no idea what that farmer was thinking, why would you assume the worst of someone who's whole life is dedicated to their animals? 
It says in the link that he tried to chase the dogs away. And personally, I don't know a single farmer who would be happy to have to shoot a dog.

And yes, if you can't rely on your dog not to run off, then no, the dog should not be off leash. Letting your dog off leash is not a "right".


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

Sparkle22 said:


> You don't think that claiming he was happy to shoot them, that he was thinking 'serves you right' is bitter?
> What about your response to lilythepink?
> That even despite what she said about *the blatent invasion of her privacy*, your response was pretty much that *you could be there if you wanted to? Because the law says you can? *
> That's not bitter?


The blatant invasion of privacy you talk about is people walking on land they have a right of way to. I know its different in Scotland to UK laws, but people still have a right to walk in the countryside?? otherwise it would all be fenced off and we'd all have to walk down a fenced in path.

You say I sound bitter because my response was "that I can be there if I wanted to because the law says I can", this is the same thing you're defending the farmer for, i.e. they were on his land and he had the right to shoot them because the law says he can....can't have it both ways.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Ok after reading the article further I agree that the farmer was in the wrong for denying he had seen the dogs and covering up his shooting of them. He acted as if he'd done something wrong, and we know that the law was/is on his side, so don't know why he didn't admit to it...and has now gone to the papers :001_huh: But he does state he felt bad about killing them so perhaps he felt guilty about the whole process himself and thought keeping quiet was a better option then attempting to find/confront the dog walker.


----------



## Thorne (May 11, 2009)

I'm another one who is in support of the farmer. He was well within his rights to shoot the dogs and the situation could've been prevented had the dog walker kept the dogs (who evidently did not have reliable recall) onlead. *Hazy81*, it is possible to train dogs to recall away from animals!
My sympathy for him ends with him burying the dogs and initially denying his actions. I'm sure it was guilt/remorse-related but that's just not on.

As for those who are saying it was only one chicken, the article says that his grandsons' pet chicken was killed in front of them but doesn't state that this was the only one. I can't see 2 dogs homing in on just one chicken and killing it in a situation where they were loose and able to chase, I imagine several more were injured if not killed in the incident.

Classic Daily Mail article, all hype and no real facts to go on.


lilythepink said:


> I would want to be able to unleash my dog if there were cows about that got over protective of calves in a field...can these walking belts be unclipped quickly?


I would personally never dare take a dog into a field with cows that had calves at foot; that's when they are most dangerous and most likely to charge.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

I probably have more experience than most on this topic. I had a dog shot 13 years ago for chasing sheep. I was devastated and heartbroken and I detested that particular farmer for a long, long time. However, even through all that I knew my dog's death was MY fault and that I had failed her. I should have kept her on a lead until I knew for sure there were no sheep in the vicinity. I paid dearly for my mistake.

Here she is ...










The flipside is that I am now married to a shepherd and I have been absolutely astounded by the "don't care" attitude of some of the dog walkers I have come across. Thankfully most are responsible and control their dogs around the sheep, but there are also those who couldn't give a toss about the fact their dogs are off lead, terrorising other animals and possibly injuring or even killing them. Those people who think the majority of farmers don't care about their animals have clearly never spent any time with shepherds or farmers and have no experience on which to draw a balanced opinion. Farmers keep and raise animals for our tables and should this mean that because an animal is destined for the human food chain that it doesn't deserve to live a quiet, peaceful and unmolested life and be given a quick and humane death? Of course we all love our dogs and when any dog dies it is extremely sad and, in circumstances like this, it is even more upsetting. However, a farmer does have the right to shoot a dog who is worrying livestock and, as dog owners, we all know this. Why risk your dog's life by not keeping it under control around farm animals? One more point, most farmers also own dogs and love dogs, and shooting them is (or should be) a very last resort.


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

ouesi said:


> What an unfair statement
> You have no idea what that farmer was thinking, why would you assume the worst of someone whos whole life is dedicated to their animals? .


I don't think its unfair, just my opinion...why would people assume he had no choice but to kill the dogs? 
I think that would be a last resort but in all the time they were running out of control, they managed to kill one chicken, which there is no proof of by the way, and given the fact he tried to cover it all up just does not lead me to think he was acting out of concern for all his other live stock because if he was he would have called the police like he was supposed to and reported it straight away like anyone else who was lawfully allowed to do what he did.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

Hazy81 said:


> This is why I don't think his story stands up, I mean the dogs were out of control, but the farmer had time to get in a truck and chase them, get out of the truck, in to his house, get his gun, come back outside and shoot both dogs...and in all that time of running around uncontrollably....between them, they managed to kill one whole chicken?? Exactly how out of control were they.


He could have been in his truck when they came into his yard, as a farmer he may have his gun to hand or in the truck, did it say he went into the house to get it?

I read an article where the farmer said there were a few chickens there and his grandsons pet one which was killed and the others were being attacked.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

We know the consequences of allowing our dogs to worry livestock; sadly I think that people are so used to getting their meat all packaged in a supermarket that many have become divorced from the fact that it comes from animals that people depend upon for their livelihood and which have the same rights to remaining free from harassment as do our dogs. 

In one area of the Mournes a farmer has resorted to putting pictures of a pile of bloodied, mutilated sheep carcasses that had been mauled by two dogs up at some of the popular access paths into the mountains - along with signs detailing the law and requesting that dogs be kept on lead. I would say that the majority of dogs I see up there are offlead - granted on some walks we don't see a single sheep (but you never know when you'll come across them) and granted the dogs are not chasing in the main but it is still not uncommon to see the odd dog chasing livestock either with the owners indulgently saying that they are just "playing" and "having fun". I'd bet that exactly the same owners would be angry and upset should their dog be chased down and petrified by other dogs in the park and that is far less likely to result in injury or death. I am certain those same owners would be outraged should their dogs be shot yet, to me, they have been the orchestrators of the tragedy not the farmers.

I am not writing this as someone who doesn't have to worry as their dogs wouldn't bother; I am sad to say that they very definitely would.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Moobli said:


> I probably have more experience than most on this topic. I had a dog shot 13 years ago for chasing sheep. I was devastated and heartbroken and I detested that particular farmer for a long, long time. However, even through all that I knew my dog's death was MY fault and that I had failed her. I should have kept her on a lead until I knew for sure there were no sheep in the vicinity. I paid dearly for my mistake.
> 
> The flipside is that I am now married to a shepherd and I have been absolutely astounded by the "don't care" attitude of some of the dog walkers I have come across. Thankfully most are responsible and control their dogs around the sheep, but there are also those who couldn't give a toss about the fact their dogs are off lead, terrorising other animals and possibly injuring or even killing them. Those people who think the majority of farmers don't care about their animals have clearly never spent any time with shepherds or farmers and have no experience on which to draw a balanced opinion. Farmers keep and raise animals for our tables and should this mean that because an animal is destined for the human food chain that it doesn't deserve to live a quiet, peaceful and unmolested life and be given a quick and humane death? Of course we all love our dogs and when any dog dies it is extremely sad and, in circumstances like this, it is even more upsetting. However, a farmer does have the right to shoot a dog who is worrying livestock and, as dog owners, we all know this. Why risk your dog's life by not keeping it under control around farm animals? One more point, most farmers also own dogs and love dogs, and shooting them is (or should be) a very last resort.


Very honest and real post there Moobli.

I found out my dog was a sheep chaser when we had a heart attack moment years back when he was a youngster. I had walked in this particular area for months and had NEVER seen sheep there before, and there was NO signs whatsoever warning you that sheep might be around. We rounded the corner to enter the field we had to pass to get to the other side and BAM - we was met with a field full of sheep and before I could even react my boy had taken off! I can not tell you how scared I was...my knees were like jelly, I was screaming at him ( which I'm sure just made things worse ) and because there was tractors nearby ploughing fields I envisioned the farmer getting out and shooting my dog! Tyler didn't cause any harm and didn't touch the sheep but he sure gave chase to them and was literally on top of them! Eventually he returned, and that was the one and only time I did smack him on the bum.

Never ever have I had him off lead near livestock since! and I do my utmost to avoid fields with livestock in regardless of whether my two are on lead.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

lilythepink said:


> My husband would only shoot a dog as a last resort, plenty farmers I know are the same.
> 
> Most dog walkers are fine, just the odd ones that give everybody else a bad name.


My hubby has been a shepherd for 25 years and has never shot a dog. We recently had a case on the Estate where one of the gamekeepers saw/heard a man setting his two american bulldog type dogs on my husband's sheep  Actually encouraging them to go in and injure/kill them. He warned the man off, but not before his dog had killed two ewes. The police were informed and the man was taken to court where he had to pay compensation for the sheep. A proper course of events after the fact in my opinion.

However, when a dog is tearing around killing sheep and lambs (or hens for that matter) and there is no owner in sight, what else can be done to stop the dog? The Law states that a farmer/landowner must try to dissuade the dog by giving a warning shot or trying to drive them off if possible, and shooting is a last resort. No-one can know (other than the man involved) whether a warning shot was given, but when dogs are in prey, they can be completely oblivious to everything else around them.


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

emmaviolet said:


> He could have been in his truck when they came into his yard, as a farmer he may have his gun to hand or in the truck, did it say he went into the house to get it?
> 
> I read an article where the farmer said there were a few chickens there and his grandsons pet one which was killed and the others were being attacked.


Actually I've just re-read the article and it doesn't say he was in a truck, it says "I tried to drive them away but couldnt and in the end I got my gun, he said"


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Jazmine said:


> Funny you mention that, as that is exactly what my hubby pointed out yesterday. I guess you could unclip the lead where it is attached to the dog, but that still takes longer than just being able to drop your lead.
> 
> We are a bit paranoid about unknown cows after a couple of scary incidents last year, so to be honest, if the livestock in the field happens to include a lot of cows, we tend to take a different route.


You can get "panic" snaps - I have one for my running line Panic Snap or Quick Release Attachment


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Quite close to where I live, there is a large field where, in the Summer, there are beef cattle and their calves. There is a public footpath running through the field.

Four years ago, our local Postman was walking across the field with his dog, an elderly Cocker Spaniel. They were half way across when the cows spotted the dog and began to move quickly towards it. The Postman picked his dog up and began to run, but he hadn't reached the gate when the cows got to them. He managed to throw his dog over the gate, but the cows carried on and attacked him.

They caused him horrendous injuries. All his ribs were broken, one of his arms and one of his legs, both ankles, his skull was fractured and one cow had got her horn inside his mouth and ripped his jaw and cheek virtually apart.

Passers by spotted what was happening and managed to grab one of his legs and drag him through the barbed wire fence.

He was in the Intensive Care Unit for six weeks and in Hospital for another month. It was a miracle really he wasn't killed.

He was told that it would have been the dog they were after, but ended up attacking him.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Hazy81 said:


> The blatant invasion of privacy you talk about is people walking on land they have a right of way to. I know its different in Scotland to UK laws, but people still have a right to walk in the countryside?? otherwise it would all be fenced off and we'd all have to walk down a fenced in path.
> 
> You say I sound bitter because my response was "that I can be there if I wanted to because the law says I can", this is the same thing you're defending the farmer for, i.e. they were on his land and he had the right to shoot them because the law says he can....can't have it both ways.


A lot of land though isn't a public right of way; it has access granted by landowners to walkers provided they stick to the designated routes and the least we can do by way of thanks is not to decimate their flocks. A sheep here, a chicken there multiplied by the amount of dogs walked probably soon gets very, very wearing, expensive and emotionally draining.


----------



## Sparkle22 (Oct 26, 2013)

A right to walk right by someone's property?
A right to disturb someone trying to hold a BBQ? 
A right to climb over fences and gates thus damaging them? 
A right to completely veer off a footpath and therefore right in the middle of a farmers field or garden? 
The above is a blatent invasion of privacy is it not?

The farmer is shooting to protect his livestock, same as a parent might kill a dog that attacks their child.
What lilythepink was referring to and what you appeared to be supporting was people treating her land and privacy with zero respect because the law said they are allowed to be on the land, despite what they law says, these walkers were acting in a rude, disrespectful manner that they would not appreciate themselves.
All the farmer did was shoot an animal worrying and killing his livelihood.

I say that you sound bitter because that is how the quotes below read. 
They sound like utter hate and contempt for farmers, a defending of inconsiderate walkers and dare I say, a touch of jealousy too in the last one. 
If you think a farmer angry about walkers damaging property is a snob, I doubt you have ever experienced REAL snobbery. It's nasty, believe me.



[B said:


> [/B]Hazy81;1063662019]I live near this area and these same farmers are the same ones who hate walkers legally crossing their land on public footpaths (I've had abuse from loads when out walking) and although they can't shoot me, I bet he felt " that'll teach them" as he waded across his yard to murder two huge vicious spaniels.





Hazy81 said:


> Must be lovely to live in countryside where there are no farms nearby....how far is nearby? This farm could have been several miles from where the dogs got lost, so the only fault would be the dogs not having 100% recall when they saw a rabbit........my dog and I guess many on this forum would never be let off lead again in that case.





Hazy81 said:


> Sorry to be one of the "great unwashed"  (walkers) walking on land with given rights of way, that were there before you paid your huge mortgage for the property.... maybe this farmer was tarring all dogs with the same brush and they deserved to be shot because "other" dogs had been a nuisance in the past...I'm just glad there's no law allowing farmers to legally shoot ramblers, or "the great unwashed" as they'll now be known, otherwise it sounds like it'd be shoot first and ask questions later :laugh:





Hazy81 said:


> I'd rather be sarcastic in the face of snobbery than look down my nose at people who can't afford a massive farm and label all recreational ramblers "the great unwashed" I found that offensive and typical of most farmers attitudes.
> That attitude kind of supports the "trigger happy" theory.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> I'm going to go against the grain here, I think he was trigger happy and there was probably no need to shoot the dogs at all.
> Did he try to catch the dogs like anyone of us would have done? Or, because he has the "right" to legally kill dogs on his land, did he just shoot first.
> 
> They killed one hen, hardly a rampage, so the farmer saw them running around and kill one hen and he then had time to go get his gun out of his house, from within his locked cupboard, come back out and shoot the dogs, but couldn't have tried to catch the dogs or scare them away with a couple of warning shots?
> ...


If your dogs don't have a good recall keep them on a lead, or work with them to not be reactive around animals, why is one persons "pet" of more value than anothers?

They were not just on his land they were on his FARM, so that's a bit like someone's dog coming in to my garden and killing my cat, and me just having to stand there an do nothing. The story doesn't say how many chickens were killed just the ONE was killed right in front of his Grandchildren, there could have been many, also STRESS is a big killer for animals not just their physical injuries, the shock alone could kill.

So again we have people who can not control their dogs but think they have a RIGHT to just do as they wish. It's not like it would have been a surprise to her that the dogs chased rabbits, if you are somewhere and you know your dogs trigger then why risk it, if you KNOW you can't recall them?

What annoys me about this is again the dog pay the price for irresponsible owners, it's always someone elses fault, I don't agree with him not telling the owner, but I'm sure he did feel guilty shooting them, and I'm sure he knew his face would be all over the press when he found out who the dogs belonged to, he was very wrong to do that...

To many people ignore the law just because they can or they think it doesn't apply to them.

So lets put you in a yard and see if you could catch to Spaniels that don't want to be caught, who are stimulated to high heaven, I would bet money that you couldn't....


----------



## Lauren5159 (May 28, 2013)

In principle, I am completely on the side of the farmer. 

Skip and Dexter do not get a lot of off-leash time when we walk in the countryside because the thought of them worrying livestock absolutely terrifies me and so it bloody should. Dexter has great recall but is an ex worker so I will never take the risk and Skip is a typical terrier. I train with them around livestock (on leash) whenever the opportunity arises. To allow your dog to run at, chase or scare livestock is a BIG no no in my books. That is someones livelihood they are terrorising. 

I am completely for farmers being able to shoot dogs to protect their animals. Letting or knowing your dog is likely to Worry livestock is silly and wrong. Of ever in doubt, put your dog on a lead. End of. 

However, I do not like the fact that he lied to the dog walker when asked about the dogs. That is not on. At least have the decency and back bone to admit that you shot the dogs. It was his right, shooting the dogs does not make him a bad person. He's a farmer and it's well within his right, but to lie about it? That's not on.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Meezey said:


> So lets put you in a field and see if you could catch to Spaniels that don't want to be caught, who are stimulated to high heaven, I would bet money that you couldn't....


I second that. Having been there, like I said above, I can attest to the fact when in full prey mode you might as well not be there. The dog takes on a whole different kind of personality. So intense, so determined, and despite my screams and running around like a headless chicken after my dog, he kept diverting just out of reach and just wasn't listening.

I can definitely see how a farmer would have to resort to shooting some dogs who are causing serious distress and have ignored warning shots/shouts. Hopefully it's a last resort for most farmers, but if they are witness to their livestock being mauled to death they have limited choices really.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

It is a slight misconception that the farmer actually has a legal right to shoot a dog who is worrying stock, but more that he has a defence for doing so.

The Law in brief is :

1. A farmer commits a criminal offence in threatening to shoot a dog, and also in actually shooting a dog, unless he honestly believed his livestock was 'in immediate need of protection' and that the means of protection adopted or proposed to be adopted were or would be reasonable having regard to all the circumstances. So where shouting, throwing something or shooting over the head would be enough, then that is what should be done first to avoid committing an offence. (Criminal Damage Act 1971). 

2. The dog owner can sue the farmer for compensation, and his only defence to killing a dog is he believed and had reasonable grounds for that belief, that either 'there was no other reasonable means of ending or preventing the worrying' or if the owner is not there, that there was no practicable means of ascertaining to whom it belongs. He must also have reported the shooting to the police within 48 hours. The dog owner has 6 years in which to bring an action for compensation. Some dogs are highly valuable. (Animals Act 1971). 

3. The dog owner commits an offence if (a) their dog is in a field with livestock worrying them, Worrying means attacking livestock, or chasing livestock in such a way as may reasonably be expected to cause injury or suffering to the livestock or, in the case of females, abortion, or loss of or diminution in their produce; or (b) their dog is not under control in a field with sheep, even if he was not worrying them, but a police dog, a guide dog, trained sheep dog, a working gun dog or a pack of hounds are all excluded. (Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act 1953). 

That said, I am not sure there would be a Court in the land who would side with a dog owner when it is just their word against the farmer.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

I would protect my animals to my very last breath, why shouldn't the farmer be afforded that right? because he is a farmer, because his has land that he has to let you walk across and is unhappy with irresponsible people scaring his livestock, littering his land and disrespecting it and people begrudge them that like anyone they work bloody hard to keep what they have it is their LAND like it or not. I would protect my dogs by not letting them off the lead if I knew I could't recall them from danger........


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> I'd rather be sarcastic in the face of snobbery than look down my nose at people who can't afford a massive farm and label all recreational ramblers "the great unwashed" I found that offensive and typical of most farmers attitudes.
> That attitude kind of supports the "trigger happy" theory.


go read my posts...and if you fit the category of great unwashed thats your business.

not all recreational ramblers are the great unwashed....or when you were having a pity party for one and whining about people who do have.did you not notice?

Not getting into any more with you..very boring.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Allied to this whole topic is also the issue of having realistic expectations about our dogs - train and train absolutely but also accept that, no matter how much you want your dog to be like the majority of dogs in respect to prey drive and no matter how much you want to be a far more skilled trainer than you are…sometimes you need to be realistic and perhaps a little more inventive.

This is my pair the other day - believe it or not Kilo is showing a very high level of (for him) impulse control and the ability to stop almost 100kg of excited dog calmly from a run when we spotted a moving sheep ahead and then for them to sit to have their short leads put on and then walk past nicely has been hard won indeed, it would be very easy for them to drag me wherever they want to with the momentum we already have when running. The pictures convey a horribly keen interest - sound effects would have a few little whimpers and yips and they both had trembling muscles. Rudi is showing impulse control too but has a much lower prey drive than Kilo - but because Kilo is all fired up Roo would certainly go with him were I to let them off. For those who have never owned a dog with Kilo's focus and intensity when it comes to chasing my pictures will certainly not show anything special at all and I lose count of all the folk who tell me it's a shame mine aren't offlead more - they also don't need to worry should theirs start to air scent with more than a passing interest, should theirs disappear off for long periods of time as many folk are happy for theirs to do, should they start to alert to something that (to me) is indiscernible.

It is nice to see dogs running free, of course it is, but it is also nice to be able to return home with them both after a day out.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Dogloverlou said:


> Very honest and real post there Moobli.
> 
> I found out my dog was a sheep chaser when we had a heart attack moment years back when he was a youngster. I had walked in this particular area for months and had NEVER seen sheep there before, and there was NO signs whatsoever warning you that sheep might be around. We rounded the corner to enter the field we had to pass to get to the other side and BAM - we was met with a field full of sheep and before I could even react my boy had taken off! I can not tell you how scared I was...my knees were like jelly, I was screaming at him ( which I'm sure just made things worse ) and because there was tractors nearby ploughing fields I envisioned the farmer getting out and shooting my dog! Tyler didn't cause any harm and didn't touch the sheep but he sure gave chase to them and was literally on top of them! Eventually he returned, and that was the one and only time I did smack him on the bum.
> 
> Never ever have I had him off lead near livestock since! and I do my utmost to avoid fields with livestock in regardless of whether my two are on lead.


I don't think it would enter most farmers heads to warn re sheep. They may warn re cows etc but don't have to legally.

We need those public information films back on TV....and maybe a good idea would be to say if there was any livestock in the field. Could save plenty all round.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Meezey said:


> I would protect my animals to my very last breath, why shouldn't the farmer be afforded that right? because he is a farmer, because his has land that he has to let you walk across and is unhappy with irresponsible people scaring his livestock, littering his land and disrespecting it and people begrudge them that like anyone they work bloody hard to keep what they have it is their LAND like it or not. I would protect my dogs by not letting them off the lead if I knew I could't recall them from danger........


I wouldn't bother about people walking across my land..maybe I could sell you some lovely jam or some eggs?lol.....problems arise when the farmer can't do what he needs to do for fear of a stray walker with or without dogs comes too close.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

Farmer


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Moobli said:


> It is a slight misconception that the farmer actually has a legal right to shoot a dog who is worrying stock, but more that he has a defence for doing so.
> 
> The Law in brief is :
> 
> ...


are hens covered under "livestock"?


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Dogloverlou said:


> Ok after reading the article further I agree that the farmer was in the wrong for denying he had seen the dogs and covering up his shooting of them. He acted as if he'd done something wrong, and we know that the law was/is on his side, so don't know why he didn't admit to it...and has now gone to the papers :001_huh: But he does state he felt bad about killing them so perhaps he felt guilty about the whole process himself and thought keeping quiet was a better option then attempting to find/confront the dog walker.


Law would only be on his side if hens were covered and considered as livestock. I am not so sure they are.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

lilythepink said:


> I don't think it would enter most farmers heads to warn re sheep. They may warn re cows etc but don't have to legally.
> 
> We need those public information films back on TV....and maybe a good idea would be to say if there was any livestock in the field. Could save plenty all round.


We graze sheep over 13,000 acres of hill ground. It would be impossible to have signs up everywhere to warn people of the fact. Who would pay for the signs and for the time spent putting them all up? Also, what a blight on the countryside to have signs all over.

It just isn't realistic.

What is realistic is that dog owners be responsible and keep their dogs under control, or run the risk of being taken to court or having your dog shot. Believe me, it really isn't worth that risk.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

lilythepink said:


> I don't think it would enter most farmers heads to warn re sheep. They may warn re cows etc but don't have to legally.
> 
> We need those public information films back on TV....and maybe a good idea would be to say if there was any livestock in the field. Could save plenty all round.


That's interesting. I thought they legally had to warn of livestock in fields where public footpaths run through etc.

I agree though that it would be a very good idea if more farmers warned of livestock. As I said earlier, another walk we took we just stumbled upon a farm area with livestock and only when literally on top of the farm was there any signs stating livestock were about and to keep your dog on lead/under control. Sadly the farmer does warn of his farm/livestock earlier now...but only after suffering dreadful attacks to his sheep.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Sweety said:


> Quite close to where I live, there is a large field where, in the Summer, there are beef cattle and their calves. There is a public footpath running through the field.
> 
> Four years ago, our local Postman was walking across the field with his dog, an elderly Cocker Spaniel. They were half way across when the cows spotted the dog and began to move quickly towards it. The Postman picked his dog up and began to run, but he hadn't reached the gate when the cows got to them. He managed to throw his dog over the gate, but the cows carried on and attacked him.
> 
> ...


last spring a farmer was ear tagging a calf. This has to be done very young. 2 people doing this routine job and one was killed by the cow. Other person left severely shocked and this happens with cows all the time although not usually fatal.

Last autumn, big landowner with many cows drove into his field to check on a bull. Bull was on his own so not protecting his herd. Bull for no apparent reason turned on the very experienced farmer and attacked him. It was so bad there was hardly anything left of his body. Always always take care when walking near cows.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Dogloverlou said:


> That's interesting. I thought they legally had to warn of livestock in fields where public footpaths run through etc.
> 
> I agree though that it would be a very good idea if more farmers warned of livestock. As I said earlier, another walk we took we just stumbled upon a farm area with livestock and only when literally on top of the farm was there any signs stating livestock were about and to keep your dog on lead/under control. Sadly the farmer does warn of his farm/livestock earlier now...but only after suffering dreadful attacks to his sheep.


Not too sure on this but will check it out. My understanding was only need to warn of a bull in the field and can't put a dairy bull out in a field with a footpath running through it.

I drove past a field the other day with 6 pedigree aberdeen angus bulls in. It was down a country lane and they charged at me even though there was a fence in between and I was in a car.Aberdeen Angus are not known for being huge.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

makes common sense to put a warning up if you have cows and calves out and there is a footpath in that particular field.

I never put cows or horses in fields where there was a path....still had problems with stray walkers though.


----------



## Guest (Apr 30, 2014)

Hazy81 said:


> I don't think its unfair, just my opinion...


Just your opinion? Try again. You accused someone you've never met of deliberately killing (murder was the word you used) a pet dog to prove a point. 


Hazy81 said:


> I bet he felt " that'll teach them" as he waded across his yard to murder two huge vicious spaniels.


That's not expression an opinion. That's a vicious accusation completely unfounded in any actual facts. You can't know what the farmer was thinking.

I think the whole story is a tragedy. I feel for the dog owner who entrusted her dog to someone who let her down. I feel for the dog walker who must be devastated. I feel for the farmer who lost one of his chickens and who I'm sure found it very upsetting to have to shoot a dog 

Common courtesy, thinking of how our actions affect others, and plain old compassion cost nothing....


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

I do have mixed views on this.

I think if a farmer comes across dogs chasing/worrying his sheep with no owner is sight and no alternatives then yes he has every right to shoot them but I have heard of several cases where farmers have warned dog owners who live next to their land that they will shoot their dogs on sight if they so much as step in their fields.

I also find this mans actions in burying the dogs and then pretending he hadn't even seen them let alone killed them shocking and to me that does suggest that with hindsight he thought he had over stepped the mark and also makes me question his honesty regarding the rest of the story.

Like someone said earlier on with the right to shoot dogs worrying livestock comes great responsibility not to misuse that right. As home owners we don't have the right to shoot someone breaking into our house in the dead of night or to shoot the next door neighbour's dog if it gets in our garden and kills our pets so I do think that farmers should absolutely only use this right as a last resort.

There was also a case recently of a man killed by a bull that the farmer knew was aggressive and had chased/charged people before yet he still put it out in a field with a public footpath running through it so I think the respect does need to be a two way thing and not all in favour of farmers.


----------



## MontyMaude (Feb 23, 2012)

lilythepink said:


> I don't think it would enter most farmers heads to warn re sheep. They may warn re cows etc but don't have to legally.
> 
> We need those public information films back on TV....and maybe a good idea would be to say if there was any livestock in the field. Could save plenty all round.


I remember there being adverts on telly about the country side code but no bugger paid attention as they would regularly walk around the farm we lived on leaving gates open and rubbish about, walking through the crops and damaging them and just generally being selfish oafs.



lilythepink said:


> last spring a farmer was ear tagging a calf. This has to be done very young. 2 people doing this routine job and one was killed by the cow. Other person left severely shocked and this happens with cows all the time although not usually fatal.
> 
> Last autumn, big landowner with many cows drove into his field to check on a bull. Bull was on his own so not protecting his herd. Bull for no apparent reason turned on the very experienced farmer and attacked him. It was so bad there was hardly anything left of his body. Always always take care when walking near cows.


I grew up with dairy cattle but I would never enter any field of unknown cows especially if they had calves, the only exception to this rule is that there are cattle out to graze on the New Forest but I always give them a wide berth even though they are used to walkers and dogs.

My Dad got quite badly injured by a young bull called Jester who he had raised from a calf, Jester decided to play and rubbed him up and down a wall removing most of the skin off his back and then tossed him around like a rag doll until he managed to crawl out under gate, it was horrific but he was only playing if he had meant I am sure my Dad wouldn't be alive today


----------



## speug (Nov 1, 2011)

Luckily Angus's "collie" is stronger than his "dog" so the 2 occasions he's come in close proximity to sheep ended well. 

The 1st time we were walking near a field with sheep when he spotted one on the wrong side of the fence. He obviously wasn't paying attention when his mum taught the pups how to herd rogue sheep back to where they should be so his instant reaction was to stand on his hind legs and stare at it, then turn to me clearly wanting me to put it where it should be because sheep are supposed to be in sheep fields.

The 2nd time was a huge wake up call to me not to rely on fences as I spotted him on one walk about 15 seconds after he'd been running about in the woods, now on the other side of me, the path and the fence - on the piece of moor with all the heavily pregnant ewes, giving a couple "the eye" and walking towards them in the semi-crouch. Luckily the sheep were beginning to move away slowly and not distressed in any way and he did a really good emergency stop then recall, but I don't think I've been back to that same bit of the hills. I suspect he wasn't actually trying to get to the sheep but had been going through a phase of trying to be on the other side of every fence he came across then discovered them afterwards.

He's not interested in sheep in their fields and the only sheep he's ever had what could be classed as a dangerous reaction to is the naughty sheep that keeps not being in a sheep field where it belongs but keeps straying to the window of the carpet shop we sometimes drive past - no matter how many times Angus shouts at it and tells it to go back to its field (to be fair to Angus it is a very lifelike, life sized model advertising the pure wool carpets).


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

ouesi said:


> You can't know what the farmer was thinking.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## BessieDog (May 16, 2012)

Just a warning on this thread to be careful walking through a field of horses too. I've had a group of horses run at me once when I was walking with my then young son. No dog with us. Not good. We were okay, but I got kicked on the ankle, and had to use the shelter of bushes to make it across to the gate.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> ouesi said:
> 
> 
> > You can't know what the farmer was thinking.
> ...


----------



## Thorne (May 11, 2009)

Hazy81 said:


> If he acted within the law and was protecting his livelihood as everyone on here assumes, then he was perfectly entitled to shoot them, so why cover it up?


If he acted outside of the law, why on earth would he openly speak to the press about the incident at all?


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

BessieDog said:


> Just a warning on this thread to be careful walking through a field of horses too. I've had a group of horses run at me once when I was walking with my then young son. No dog with us. Not good. We were okay, but I got kicked on the ankle, and had to use the shelter of bushes to make it across to the gate.


Horses can be so unpredictable too when they are in herd mode....come over to check you out and then have a fly past either round you or at you and many horses hate dogs with a passion.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Moobli said:


> We graze sheep over 13,000 acres of hill ground. It would be impossible to have signs up everywhere to warn people of the fact. Who would pay for the signs and for the time spent putting them all up? Also, what a blight on the countryside to have signs all over.
> 
> It just isn't realistic.
> 
> What is realistic is that dog owners be responsible and keep their dogs under control, or run the risk of being taken to court or having your dog shot. Believe me, it really isn't worth that risk.


yes, but not all sheep are grazed on hillsides though, are they? Plenty more or smaller acreage on lower ground that walkers with dogs have access to.

And then you get the morons who would rip the signs up anyway just for the fun of it. It was just a thought......better to try with a sign if possible maybe to warn about sheep so responsible dog walkers can catch their dogs up.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

I did get totally sick of people straying where they weren't supposed to be one year and had a small sign made and put on a gate."Beware of adders." Very peaceful summer thaat year but somebody nicked the sign. Oh, we didn't have any snakes anyway.


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

Meezey said:


> Hazy81 said:
> 
> 
> > Ask him? We only know what's been reported by the press, great source of true information...
> ...


----------



## Hopeattheendofthetunnel (Jun 26, 2013)

I live adjacent to Dartmoor National Park. It is a beautiful 900+ km2 area full of forests, hills, rivers and streams....and lifestock. Sheep, wild ponies, cows. 

They are EVERYWHERE.

They have, due to the various farmers ancient grazing rights, the RIGHT to be everywhere. And they have a RIGHT to live in peace and without being harmed or worried. If you have a dog here, and many thousand of people do, you can't have a dog who chases. Or even a dog were you perpetually think " maybe he will, or maybe he won't". Lifestock is to be ignored, period. 

If they can't learn that, the dog has to spend his entire life on a leash. Whether this is a worthwhile, fulfilling life for a canidae is a separate issue and a different debate.

The overwhelming majority of dogs DO learn that a moving sheep, a grazing cow, or a galloping horse are not to be chased, they are NEVER allowed to be disturbed, and are thus completely indifferent to their presence.

Living where I live means I have ZERO tolerance for people who let their dogs chase and worry. It's not the dog's fault, unless trained, they don't know that it's wrong.

But I have even LESS tolerance for that trigger happy bloke who shot two dogs in cold blood. What he did was despicable, unlawful and immoral. 

You don't think a farmer's OWN dog makes mistakes and chases before they get trained? You don't think his OWN Border Collies ran after some lifestock or a chicken when they were young and foolish? Let me tell you clearly - they DO. So should he shoot his own dogs, too....or just those of others?

I detest reckless, ignorant, disrespectful dog owners. But for the life of me I can't get my head round the posts almost congratulating the farmer for shooting 2 pet dogs who worried a chicken! Do you think the sheep or cows herded by the sheepdogs and who run in a particular direction set by the farmer AREN'T worried? They ARE, or they would stay where they are and tell the Collie to go swivvel. A dog without drive to round them up and move them, and if necessary, nip to make them understand that they better move pronto, is of no use to a farmer.

So it isn't chasing dogs per se that are ok to be shot....just those the farmer disagrees with? 

Strange logic.

I hope he rots in hell.


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

Thorne said:


> If he acted outside of the law, why on earth would he openly speak to the press about the incident at all?


Openly speak to the press??.....he covered it up till he was found out, then because it was a famous persons dog, and only because it was a famous persons dog the press went to him for comments...hardly going to say anything to incriminate himself.

I think its all been said now and doesn't need debating any longer, at the start of this post I said I was going against the grain with my stand and I've been called "bitter" "unwashed" and a "have not"  but I stick with it, his actions speak louder than words in my book.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Hopeattheendofthetunnel said:


> I live adjacent to Dartmoor National Park. It is a beautiful 900+ km2 area full of forests, hills, rivers and streams....and lifestock. Sheep, wild ponies, cows.
> 
> They are EVERYWHERE.
> 
> ...


That isn't accurate though, is it? you can't compare the actions of his own hypothetical dogs to two ownerless loose dogs that he doesn't know from Adam killing his livestock.

We don't know anything about the situation other than what was written. However, I would hazard a guess that most farmers are not blood lusting monsters that WANT to shoot dogs. I would also imagine that the farmer would not have taken such action over a singular chicken - being on a farm, it's fairly likely many other animals were at a risk of being killed by the dogs. If the dogs could not be caught or distracted, what is he supposed to do? stand there and watch them kill all of his birds?


----------



## Sparkle22 (Oct 26, 2013)

Hopeattheendofthetunnel said:


> I live adjacent to Dartmoor National Park. It is a beautiful 900+ km2 area full of forests, hills, rivers and streams....and lifestock. Sheep, wild ponies, cows.
> 
> They are EVERYWHERE.
> 
> ...


They KILLED his livestock 
I'm pretty sure that their sheepdog in training didn't savage the sheep! 
If they had, they certainly wouldn't be kept on the farm, that you can be sure of!

Shepherds are very careful when training their young dogs to keep stress on the sheep to a minimum, it isn't a free for all where they can just terrorise them all over the field until they are trained 

Whatever stress a sheep being herded may feel it's nowhere near as severe as that experienced in a true chase, you yourself must know that living near the national park. 
Herded sheep move very calmly, they don't scatter like chased sheep do.
It's rare for a sheepdog to nip also, they control with eye.
Although a nip on the nose is permitted if the sheep is exceptionally disobedient, a competent dog shouldn't need to resort to this.

I'd love to hear a sensible suggestion as to what he should have done instead.

Catching them is out seeing as an old man would never be able to catch two lively spaniels hell bent on catching a chicken. 
Frightening is out also seeing as when in that predatory state dogs tend to zone out, oblivious to absolutely everything.
You don't want him to shoot them.
What does he do?

You can't seriously suggest that he just lets them chase his birds and kill any they catch, injuring god knows how many in the process which will later probably die.

You say you have zero tolerance for chasing and worrying, but then you don't agree with the farmer taking action to stop that very behaviour.

It makes no sense??


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> I live near this area and these same farmers are the same ones who hate walkers legally crossing their land on public footpaths (I've had abuse from loads when out walking) and although they can't shoot me, I bet he felt " that'll teach them" as he waded across his yard to murder two huge vicious spaniels.


Really I'm making assumption am I, hardly an unbiased opinion you have it is?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

Also around here we have quite a lot of open heathland/forest and its become increasingly common to graze livestock on this open land. One of the areas we use a lot as it has no farmland nearby now lets a farmer put his cows out from May - September when they have young - about 50 or so cows. Trouble is you never know where they are. So I could go out in to the middle of the forest to exercise my boys off lead knowing there is no farmland nearby but then come across cows with young. My boys don't chase cows/horses but would the farmer be within his rights to shoot my dogs just because they were running close to his cows.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> Meezey said:
> 
> 
> > Now who's the one making assumptions? you don't know me to make that comment. If the report would have read "Farmer reports missing dogs as being the ones shot on his land for worrying livestock" I'd have thought he had every right to do so.
> ...


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Lets bear in mind also that he states his grandson was with him and in tears as it was his pet chicken...which would have all added to the panic stricken state the farmer was most likely in. A crying child, two dogs running riot, himself apparently trying to steer them away firstly with his truck. Agreed that he should never have covered the whole incident up and that part doesn't sit right with me, but what was he meant to do? Sit by and watch the dogs maul his livestock? Wait until they got bored and ran off? What exactly?


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

If your dogs are out of control and worrying livestock then the farmer is perfectly within their rights to shoot them. I don't understand why you would risk having a dog out of control around something as big as a cow anyway. Especially if they have calves.

Yes I know these were chickens but still. If you're around livestock keep your dogs under control it's not difficult.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Hopeattheendofthetunnel said:


> I
> 
> You don't think a farmer's OWN dog makes mistakes and chases before they get trained? You don't think his OWN Border Collies ran after some lifestock or a chicken when they were young and foolish? Let me tell you clearly - they DO. So should he shoot his own dogs, too....or just those of others?
> 
> ...


Strange logic and yours is rational? His dogs would be HIS dogs on HIS land... His dogs would be with him the owner, on HIS land with HIS livestock did you miss that fact not a field on HIS farmyard?

How do you know he even has dogs you don't even know what type of farmer he is? Pretty sure dogs don't herd crops, or have I missed when it says what he farms?

No one is congratulating I don't see anyone doing that at all, all have said that he was wrong to lie about it, and only he knows why he did that.............


----------



## planete (Jan 21, 2012)

The dog owner's excuse that the dogs were rabbit chasing and doing so ended up in the farmyard with the chickens does not tally with my experience. When a rabbit is chased it only runs as far as the nearest burrow which is never very far, and goes down the hole . End of chase and, if normal dog, return of dog. (But, if the rabbit is killed, an offence has been committed as, unless you have written permission from the landowner, it is poaching.)

I have had a young horse chased through a hedge and up a tarmac road into the village where he thankfully was directed through an open gate and secured out of harm's way. On the same farm, the whole flock of sheep was driven into a corner of a field where there was a pond and the ones that were not torn by the dog drowned. They were about to lamb.

The farmer's actions are perfectly understandable, even the concealment, considering the reactions of some 'dog lovers' to a man protecting his stock. How does he know somebody with a grudge will not try and harm his family or his animals? It should not happen but it does.


----------



## Hopeattheendofthetunnel (Jun 26, 2013)

labradrk said:


> That isn't accurate though, is it? you can't compare the actions of his own hypothetical dogs to two ownerless loose dogs that he doesn't know from Adam killing his livestock.
> 
> We don't know anything about the situation other than what was written. However, I would hazard a guess that most farmers are not blood lusting monsters that WANT to shoot dogs.  I would also imagine that the farmer would not have taken such action over a singular chicken - being on a farm, it's fairly likely many other animals were at a risk of being killed by the dogs. If the dogs could not be caught or distracted, what is he supposed to do? stand there and watch them kill all of his birds?


But many other animals WEREN'T killed.

He also didn't stand there watching them kill all his chickens. Spaniels aren't foxes who will kill the entire flock out of blood lust.

And I have yet to see a farmer who isn't capable of running off a couple of Spaniels. Come on!

Farmers are people. Some of them decent, some of them not. That one isn't.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

Nicky10 said:


> If your dogs are out of control and worrying livestock then the farmer is perfectly within their rights to shoot them. I don't understand why you would risk having a dog out of control around something as big as a cow anyway. Especially if they have calves.
> 
> Yes I know these were chickens but still. If you're around livestock keep your dogs under control it's not difficult.


 I don't think I said they were out of control. They are working to the whistle I just said if they were running in an area and came across the cows would a farmer have the right to shoot them? Its a huge area, hundreds of acres of public access land not farmland and if the cows with young are where we are walking my dogs are back on lead although plenty of times we have had to turn back and walk a long way round as the herd is so big they often block paths and gates and I'm not happy trying to push through them with or without dogs.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Hopeattheendofthetunnel said:


> He also didn't stand there watching them kill all his chickens. Spaniels aren't foxes who will kill the entire flock out of blood lust.


What? Wait are you a dog trainer and you think this is a true statement? Really?


----------



## WelshOneEmma (Apr 11, 2009)

I have pet chickens and also a terrier. Piper (terrier) loves to chase anything that moves. Just the chase, doesn't go for the kill. Once she got into the garden to chase the chickens. It was carnage. I have 5 chickens and 1 dog and I could not catch her to stop her (every time she 'caught' one, she just put her head on its back, then chased another). My chickens didn't lay for days due to the stress. one of them didn't lay for 4 weeks. I was very lucky none died from stress.

I am on the side of the farmer. Very hard to catch two young dogs chasing birds, even in an enclosed space.

People seem to think that because they are livestock (chickens do come under that) then they have less rights than pets. 

I read the dogs today post, commented a few times too (anyone else have weird people messaging them calling them a chicken lover?) and was shocked at the attitude of a lot of the people on that.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Hopeattheendofthetunnel said:


> But many other animals WEREN'T killed.
> 
> He also didn't stand there watching them kill all his chickens. Spaniels aren't foxes who will kill the entire flock out of blood lust.
> 
> ...


If they killed one then there is a fair chance they would move onto others.

Spaniels wouldn't kill an entire flock? based on what? I'm not sure how you can speak for ALL Spaniels. A Spaniel is as likely to kill as much as the next dog - you can't generalize these things.


----------



## shadowmare (Jul 7, 2013)

On one hand I understand the farmer's right to shoot the out of control dogs especially if he really did try everything else before shooting them... However, I am horrified at the fact that he shot dogs in front of the children! I am sorry, but seeing animals kill other animals is one thing...But completely different to see the person who you look up to (I assume so) get a gun and shoot two dogs. If the dogs had some form of identification, he could get the owners to pay for the killed chickens, but now it's a pretty useless loss on both sides in my opinion... 
For the record, I am a foreigner so I can definitely say that the whole set of rules of walking through farm fields etc. is a complete mystery to me. I was trying to as my OH about these things when we got Axel and he is a city boy with no clue either:laugh: So I just stay out of any fields that look like there may be farm animals there... And if we are passing fenced fields with cows or sheep Axel goes on the lead the second I see the animals in the distance. However, seeing this is a dog walker, surely she would know the rules...


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

shadowmare said:


> On one hand I understand the farmer's right to shoot the out of control dogs especially if he really did try everything else before shooting them... However, I am horrified at the fact that he shot dogs in front of the children! I am sorry, but seeing animals kill other animals is one thing...But completely different to see the person who you look up to (I assume so) get a gun and shoot two dogs. If the dogs had some form of identification, he could get the owners to pay for the killed chickens, but now it's a pretty useless loss on both sides in my opinion...
> For the record, I am a foreigner so I can definitely say that the whole set of rules of walking through farm fields etc. is a complete mystery to me. I was trying to as my OH about these things when we got Axel and he is a city boy with no clue either:laugh: So I just stay out of any fields that look like there may be farm animals there... And if we are passing fenced fields with cows or sheep Axel goes on the lead the second I see the animals in the distance. *However, seeing this is a dog walker, surely she would know the rules...*


I think the article reported that the dogs ran out of sight of the dog walker. So assumedly came across the farm later on during their "chase". I know these dogs were clearly well out of control and sight of the dog walker, but sometimes farms DO creep up on you like that without you even realising there is one there! One minute you're walking along a quiet looking track/path, the next minute you're on top of a farming area, or close to fields with livestock in. You've just got to keep your eyes open.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

lilythepink said:


> Not too sure on this but will check it out. My understanding was only need to warn of a bull in the field and can't put a dairy bull out in a field with a footpath running through it.
> 
> I drove past a field the other day with 6 pedigree aberdeen angus bulls in. It was down a country lane and they charged at me even though there was a fence in between and I was in a car.Aberdeen Angus are not known for being huge.


Section 59 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 bans the keeping of bulls in fields crossed by a right of way, except if they are:

under the age of 10 months; or
not of a recognised dairy breed, provided that they are accompanied by cows or heifers.
Recognised dairy cattle are currently defined as Ayrshire, British Friesian, British Holstein, Dairy Shorthorn, Guernsey, Jersey and Kerry.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

Dogloverlou said:


> That's interesting. I thought they legally had to warn of livestock in fields where public footpaths run through etc.


My understanding is that there is no legal requirement to have signs up warning the public of livestock (of any sort) as there are already restrictions on what type of bulls can be in fields with public access. However the National Farmers Union does advise that signs are put up warning of bulls and also cows with calves.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I do have mixed views on this.
> 
> I think if a farmer comes across dogs chasing/worrying his sheep with no owner is sight and no alternatives then yes he has every right to shoot them but I have heard of several cases where farmers have warned dog owners who live next to their land that they will shoot their dogs on sight if they so much as step in their fields.
> 
> ...


I do agree with you and I also hope that all farmers only exercise the right to shoot as a very last resort. I know that in my dog's case, the farmer concerned did give a warning shot before shooting her twice. I know because I heard it - I was in the next field screaming for her to come back.

Unfortunately, there are good and bad in all walks of life and there will no doubt be trigger happy farmers, just as there are dog owning members of the public who don't give a damn about their pet dog chasing and attacking livestock.

Regarding bulls and cows etc on public footpaths, it is a difficult task to utilise your land as required whilst also bearing in mind any impact your actions may have on the wider public. I think with the recent widely publicised deaths and injuries of walkers by cows, farmers are now much more aware of the danger they can put people in and also the risk to themselves of being sued.

grough - Court award for walker trampled by cattle

Again, there are no doubt farmers who care and farmers who don't. Human beings are a complex animal at times.


----------



## Hopeattheendofthetunnel (Jun 26, 2013)

Meezey said:


> What? Wait are you a dog trainer and you think this is a true statement? Really?


Your posts make no sense.

It is really very simple: it is not ok to kill 2 dogs for a mistake or omission of their owner.

It is not ok to kill someone elses dogs, kids, teenagers or any other people coming onto your land.

Even if they do worry your livestock.


----------



## Guest (Apr 30, 2014)

Okay, we can all agree that we don't know what the farmer was thinking yes?
We dont know what he was thinking when he shot the dog, when he buried the dog, when he denied having seen the dog. 
We dont know.
This is the point where you stop. You dont say, I dont know what he was thinking and from there conclude that he must have been acting in cold blood. That makes absolutely no sense. If you dont know what he was thinking, you dont know what he was thinking. Full stop. 

What we DO know is that the dog was not under control as the dog ended up on the farmers property without a handler. What we DO know is that the farmer had chickens on his property that were endangered by the dog, and the law allows for him to protect his livestock by shooting the dog. I hate it, I do But if you allow your dog to run off out of your control, view, earshot, etc., you cant control what happens to the dog.


----------



## Guest (Apr 30, 2014)

Hopeattheendofthetunnel said:


> Your posts make no sense.
> 
> It is really very simple: it is not ok to kill 2 dogs for a mistake or omission of their owner.
> 
> ...


How do children get lumped in with dogs? If a dog is chasing livestock, by law, it is allowed to shoot the dog is it not?


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Hopeattheendofthetunnel said:


> Your posts make no sense.
> 
> It is really very simple: it is not ok to kill 2 dogs for a mistake or omission of their owner.
> 
> ...


But the farmers land is private, so no one should be wandering around willy nilly on it. There might be footpaths running through the odd field, but very rarely do these footpaths take you in very close proximity to the farmer's property ( where I'm assuming his chickens were kept? ) Of course, a farmer can reason with people and point out they're on private land, but he can hardly do the same with dogs can he?

I agree that if apparently lost looking dogs were simply wandering through a farmers land that he shouldn't shoot and I would have an issue with any kind of farmer who should be so trigger happy . But it's a bit different when other animals/people are in danger.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Hopeattheendofthetunnel said:


> Your posts make no sense.
> 
> It is really very simple: it is not ok to kill 2 dogs for a mistake or omission of their owner.
> 
> ...


Why don't they make any sense? I asked if you were a dog trainer in the hope that you are not making sweeping untrue statements! Does that make sense?

Well then he will be dealt with in a court of law and they will decide if it's okay! What have kids got to do with it?

The dogs were in his yard? So it's okay for dogs to kill and maim but not okay for the farmer to protect his animals from that? So dogs take top honour and other animals are not worthy enough to deserve not being killed?


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

speug said:


> Luckily Angus's "collie" is stronger than his "dog" so the 2 occasions he's come in close proximity to sheep ended well.
> 
> The 1st time we were walking near a field with sheep when he spotted one on the wrong side of the fence. He obviously wasn't paying attention when his mum taught the pups how to herd rogue sheep back to where they should be so his instant reaction was to stand on his hind legs and stare at it, then turn to me clearly wanting me to put it where it should be because sheep are supposed to be in sheep fields.
> 
> ...


Don't be fooled, one of the worst breeds for sheep worrying is the border collie (not talking about Angus).


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

lilythepink said:


> yes, but not all sheep are grazed on hillsides though, are they? Plenty more or smaller acreage on lower ground that walkers with dogs have access to.
> 
> And then you get the morons who would rip the signs up anyway just for the fun of it. It was just a thought......better to try with a sign if possible maybe to warn about sheep so responsible dog walkers can catch their dogs up.


But where would the money come from to fund all these signs? Should it be up the shepherd or farmer to pay for signs when the responsibility actually lies with the general public?

I don't actually disagree with your point btw.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

lilythepink said:


> I did get totally sick of people straying where they weren't supposed to be one year and had a small sign made and put on a gate."Beware of adders." Very peaceful summer thaat year but somebody nicked the sign. Oh, we didn't have any snakes anyway.


:laugh:

Unfortunately we do


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

Meezey said:


> Really I'm making assumption am I, hardly an unbiased opinion you have it is?


Yes, you made an assumption


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

I hate these sort of articles, a few snippets of things that are *reported* by each side, and yet who knows how many times these dogs may have run riot, or others, across the land and perhaps that was the final straw. The farmer who owns the land at the back of my house, has recently put new livestock fencing up, and put up a new sign about worrying livestock being an offence and to keep all dogs under control and not to walk directly through the livestock (sheep and heifers). We still get some people who don't live along the row of houses, pull up and park, and let their dogs run off lead across the hills, amongst the livestock. A neighbour four doors down had their dog shot by the farmer a few years ago, as it was a serial offender, and yet it was only after that event, that they bothered to make sure their dogs weren't a nuisance. I don't currently walk my dogs off lead since he's put much more livestock on there, and now it's securely fenced into that area, where as before, it used to managed to roam across adjacent land, probably a few hundred acres. I don't think the farmer acted very well, but it's impossible to comment as there's only a few tiny bits of information, it's a snippet of a story out of context.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

Hopeattheendofthetunnel said:


> You don't think a farmer's OWN dog makes mistakes and chases before they get trained? You don't think his OWN Border Collies ran after some lifestock or a chicken when they were young and foolish? Let me tell you clearly - they DO. So should he shoot his own dogs, too....or just those of others?
> 
> I detest reckless, ignorant, disrespectful dog owners. But for the life of me I can't get my head round the posts almost congratulating the farmer for shooting 2 pet dogs who worried a chicken! Do you think the sheep or cows herded by the sheepdogs and who run in a particular direction set by the farmer AREN'T worried? They ARE, or they would stay where they are and tell the Collie to go swivvel. A dog without drive to round them up and move them, and if necessary, nip to make them understand that they better move pronto, is of no use to a farmer.
> 
> ...


My husband is a shepherd and trains working border collies. You are correct, as pups and untrained young dogs they may chase a hen in the farmyard or a sheep in the field ... but, these are OUR hens and OUR sheep. I would imagine if our young dogs chased someone else's hens or sheep they would be every bit as likely to be shot as anyone else's out of control dogs.

Sheep get used to dogs when they are worked by them regularly and a trained sheepdog works in a calm and controlled fashion, putting pressure on sheep to move them - not harrying and worrying them like an out of control untrained dog. The two are poles apart.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> Yes, you made an assumption


From the text I quoted I don't think so you seem to have a bit of an issue with farmers which is apparent from the post!
"I live near this area and these same farmers are the same ones who hate walkers legally crossing their land on public footpaths (I've had abuse from loads when out walking) and although they can't shoot me, I bet he felt " that'll teach them" as he waded across his yard to murder two huge vicious spaniels " You wrote it not me.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Hopeattheendofthetunnel said:


> But many other animals WEREN'T killed.
> 
> He also didn't stand there watching them kill all his chickens. Spaniels aren't foxes who will kill the entire flock out of blood lust.
> 
> ...


maybe no more were killed cos he shot the dogs?


----------



## Guest (Apr 30, 2014)

Moobli said:


> My husband is a shepherd and trains working border collies. You are correct, as pups and untrained young dogs they may chase a hen in the farmyard or a sheep in the field ... but, these are OUR hens and OUR sheep. I would imagine if our young dogs chased someone else's hens or sheep they would be every bit as likely to be shot as anyone else's out of control dogs.
> 
> Sheep get used to dogs when they are worked by them regularly and a trained sheepdog works in a calm and controlled fashion, putting pressure on sheep to move them - not harrying and worrying them like an out of control untrained dog. *The two are poles apart*.


I was going to say, there is a reason it's called *worrying* livestock, not *herding* livestock when an untrained dog does it.

As for shooting their own dogs, some farmers still do if they can't cure the chasing - around here at least. Karen Pryor wasn't being inflammatory when she titled her book "Don't Shoot the Dog".


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Moobli said:


> Section 59 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 bans the keeping of bulls in fields crossed by a right of way, except if they are:
> 
> under the age of 10 months; or
> not of a recognised dairy breed, provided that they are accompanied by cows or heifers.
> Recognised dairy cattle are currently defined as Ayrshire, British Friesian, British Holstein, Dairy Shorthorn, Guernsey, Jersey and Kerry.


thank you....was just going to check.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Hopeattheendofthetunnel said:


> Your posts make no sense.
> 
> It is really very simple: it is not ok to kill 2 dogs for a mistake or omission of their owner.
> 
> ...


what are you supposed to do then? stand and watch? That gives every bloodthirsty moron in the country a chance to take their dogs for a nice walk and lose their dogs and let them do whatever damage they like?

and then the free roaming dogs move on to the next target....what are farmers supposed to do? wait for the police to come, find the owner? what?


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

ouesi said:


> I was going to say, there is a reason it's called *worrying* livestock, not *herding* livestock when an untrained dog does it.
> 
> As for shooting their own dogs, some farmers still do if they can't cure the chasing - around here at least. Karen Pryor wasn't being inflammatory when she titled her book "Don't Shoot the Dog".


Unfortunately some farmers, shepherds, gamekeepers and others who keep dogs for work do shoot dogs that don't make the grade  I would hope these are in the minority though.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Jazmine said:


> Funny you mention that, as that is exactly what my hubby pointed out yesterday. I guess you could unclip the lead where it is attached to the dog, but that still takes longer than just being able to drop your lead.
> 
> We are a bit paranoid about unknown cows after a couple of scary incidents last year, so to be honest, if the livestock in the field happens to include a lot of cows, we tend to take a different route.


Very sensible.



lilythepink said:


> We have had beef cows with calves for many years. I would not walk down my own field of cows and calves with my own dog.
> 
> We have 1 cow who was hand reared by me. She was a sickly calf as a baby and had extra time of being hand fed.so she thinks she is a horse and likes being cuddled and is generally lovely...she turns into a total wench when she has a new calf and for the first week or so after she calves, we stay well away from her. Lots of cows are like this.Farmers and farm labourers get badly injured and some even killed every year dealing with a new calf on its mum.


Exactly. I would be livid if anyone walked through my cows and calves with a dog, it would be total stupidity. I would never take my dogs in a field of cattle, I value their lives and my own life too much. I used to take my collies out with me for a run when I checked cows but would drop them and leave them outside the field, they were not allowed in.

We had a heifer the other week that turned into a raging lunatic after she calved. We were trying to move her and she attacked my husband. It was just luck there was a bit of pipe near me and I was able to beat her off before she got him.



lilythepink said:


> Thank you. Most people were ok....but that was number 1 reason for selling up and moving.
> 
> You can walk anywhere in Scotland, the only private bit to the land here is what surrounds the garden. You can camp and pitch a tent too on any land.and there is no trespass.
> 
> Not once has anybody walked or tried to walk through my land here. No dogs have attacked any of my stock.


I think that is not quite right. There is no right to roam near any farm buildings as far as I know.



Sarah1983 said:


> Personally just I wish signs would be put up when livestock are nearby. Last year I rounded a corner with Spen off leash only to be confronted with a field full of sheep where we haven't seen sheep before. Thankfully Spen isn't bothered and was recalled and put on his leash immediately. I warned a few friends though, knowing that if they walked that way and came across them unaware their dogs would chase.


Why on earth should a farmer put up signs to show what he is using his own land for - never heard anything like that 

I live in a very busy farming area, you cannot walk in fields at all really as there are cattle or sheep everywhere that is not crop - but sheep worrying is relatively rare thank goodness. We had 2 dogs in our sheep once and it is not a pretty sight. It was dark and we had to somehow get the dogs out - no question of shooting them as we could not see them and did not have a gun! In the end I had to release my collie and she put sheep in a corner, one of the stray dogs ran away and the other kept going at the sheep so I caught it and called the police. Ripped up sheep are a very sad thing to see.


----------



## speug (Nov 1, 2011)

Moobli said:


> Don't be fooled, one of the worst breeds for sheep worrying is the border collie (not talking about Angus).


I know - but luckily his 1st instinct is to crouch and eye them before trying to herd or chase which gives me a chance to intervene and get him back on lead before it escalates to them running and him chasing. Not that I would rely on that if I can possibly avoid it but it came in handy when he got in with the ewes - I had visions of him chasing and causing serious damage but all he did was stalk slowly till I shouted then he came back on command and ate a whole pocketful of treats.

I'm under no illusions that if I hadn't spotted him within seconds of him ending up there it could/would have easily escalated into carnage.

As a general rule, if I so much as suspect there might be sheep or deer about then Angus is on his flexi. Cows and he's hiding behind my knees in case they look at him and breathe at him. I didn't know any farmers well enough when he was younger to properly train him to be completely reliable round livestock and while he's generally good at not chasing I don't trust him not to get too excited to listen


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Blitz said:


> Very sensible.
> 
> Exactly. I would be livid if anyone walked through my cows and calves with a dog, it would be total stupidity. I would never take my dogs in a field of cattle, I value their lives and my own life too much. I used to take my collies out with me for a run when I checked cows but would drop them and leave them outside the field, they were not allowed in.
> 
> ...


The farm we used to own before we moved here 10 years ago had a pathway that linked up 2 farms for farmworkers. It was a pathway too for the bottom farmer to walk his cows up to the moor for common grazing rights. Somebody put this path on a map and gave the path a name. The path went right past my kitchen window, down through my shippon and some stables, through a field and down to a minor road. Nothing we did could convince the council and especially ramblers that this was never a recognised path because it had been used as such for more than 10 years.

It wasn't right to roam.

We moved. I couldn't leave my dogs out, couldn't have any privacy. The people who bought the place were going to live in paradise forever...and they moved 3 years later. I asked my old neighbour why they moved. He said, "Bloody Ramblers, what else?"


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

Bottom line - rightly or wrongly _the dogs have lost their lives because they weren't under control_.

No matter which opinion you are of. The fact they weren't under control cannot be disputed.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

I know these are about sheep primarily but livestock is livestock. There are some gruesome images so please be warned.










In 2009, two Rotties got loose from the property they lived on and did this:










These are some quotes:



> Their owner fears many more would have been mauled had the dogs not been shot as they rampaged through a field





> The farming industry fears such incidents are on the rise, in the wake of right-to-roam legislation which improved public access





> Conwy Valley farmer Aled Roberts, who owned the sheep, said 14 ewes were killed on the field, and another was so badly injured she was put down. Four more were treated by a vet.





> He said: "My ewes' suffered unnecessarily. It could have been prevented if dog owners were more responsible."





> Mr Edwards said: "They were very clinical. They were going through the field ripping into sheep one by one. I shot one that was savaging a ewe, the other dog came for me, and I shot it too."





> Last autumn Holywell farmer David Roberts lost 11 sheep in a series of dog attacks at Ty Draw Farm, Llanasa. He estimated the cost to his livelihood at £2,000.


I won't post the actual article as it calls them "Devil Dogs" and I don't agree that Rotties are that, but these two individuals weren't pleasant as the evidence shows.

Poultry comes under livestock btw. Imagine £2k of your wages just being ripped up by a dog..


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

Meezey said:


> From the text I quoted I don't think so you seem to have a bit of an issue with farmers which is apparent from the post!
> "I live near this area and these same farmers are the same ones who hate walkers legally crossing their land on public footpaths (I've had abuse from loads when out walking) and although they can't shoot me, I bet he felt " that'll teach them" as he waded across his yard to murder two huge vicious spaniels " You wrote it not me.


You still made an assumption....on the other hand you seem biased in the other direction, I.e. Farmers can do no wrong and they are all stand up guys.

farmers are the same as everyone, there are always some good and some bad, this one is a bad'un or he wouldn't have covered it up. Probably made up the "it killed my chicken" to try to adhere to the worrying live stock rule once he was found out to be lying. Also if it was a pet chicken, wouldn't it be a pet and not livestock?


----------



## Lilylass (Sep 13, 2012)

Poor dogs and stupid owners  but absolutely with the farmer

Often it's not just the initial livestock lost in the attack but it can be very stressful for other animals and can cause them to abort if they're pregnant


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

Hazy81 said:


> You still made an assumption....on the other hand you seem biased in the other direction, I.e. Farmers can do no wrong and they are all stand up guys.
> 
> farmers are the same as everyone, there are always some good and some bad, this one is a bad'un or he wouldn't have covered it up. Probably made up the "it killed my chicken" to try to adhere to the worrying live stock rule once he was found out to be lying. Also if it was a pet chicken, wouldn't it be a pet and not livestock?


Poultry comes under livestock, pet or not.

I can own a Goat - but I'd still need DEFRA approval because they're classed as livestock - even though it would be a pet.


----------



## Guest (Apr 30, 2014)

Hazy81 said:


> You still made an assumption....on the other hand you seem biased in the other direction, I.e. Farmers can do no wrong and they are all stand up guys.
> 
> farmers are the same as everyone, there are always some good and some bad, this one is a bad'un or he wouldn't have covered it up. *Probably made up the "it killed my chicken" to try to adhere to the worrying live stock rule once he was found out to be lying.* Also if it was a pet chicken, wouldn't it be a pet and not livestock?


Youre doing it again.
You cant make an argument from ignorance. IOW, you dont know what the farmer was thinking, you cant say from I dont know that I bet he made it up. If you dont know, you dont KNOW!

He said he was embarrassed. That could mean he thought he was in the wrong, OR it could mean that he really didnt like having to shoot the dog and didnt want to talk about it. Or it could mean something else entirely. Doesnt make him a bad person. Just human.

FWIW, those loose dogs could have ended up on a busy roadway instead of a farm and be just as dead. The person in charge of the dogs bears the responsibility to keep those dogs safe.


----------



## tabulahrasa (Nov 4, 2012)

Hazy81 said:


> You still made an assumption....on the other hand you seem biased in the other direction, I.e. Farmers can do no wrong and they are all stand up guys.
> 
> farmers are the same as everyone, there are always some good and some bad, this one is a bad'un or he wouldn't have covered it up. Probably made up the "it killed my chicken" to try to adhere to the worrying live stock rule once he was found out to be lying. Also if it was a pet chicken, wouldn't it be a pet and not livestock?


Chickens are livestock, no matter if they're pets as well or not.

It's not about whether farmers happen to be nice people or not...the law is that if your dog is running loose in a field of livestock (because worrying doesn't have to be an actual attack) the farmer is legally within their rights to kill it.

So you keep your dog under control.

Just like you keep them out of the road and off railway tracks because not doing so results in a dead dog.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> You still made an assumption....on the other hand you seem biased in the other direction, I.e. Farmers can do no wrong and they are all stand up guys.
> 
> farmers are the same as everyone, there are always some good and some bad, this one is a bad'un or he wouldn't have covered it up. Probably made up the "it killed my chicken" to try to adhere to the worrying live stock rule once he was found out to be lying. Also if it was a pet chicken, wouldn't it be a pet and not livestock?


Unlike yourself I am not judging all on the actions of one, you seem blinded by the fact the big bad angry farmer told you off, your the only one talking about all farmers in relation to the news story, you seem to forget in your eagerness to blame the farmer that the person who caused this is the one who got left with two leads and no dogs!!! You have no idea why he didn't speak up, you again are making accusations based on no facts what so ever! Pet or not still livestock.


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

ouesi said:


> Youre doing it again.
> You cant make an argument from ignorance. IOW, you dont know what the farmer was thinking, you cant say from I dont know that I bet he made it up. If you dont know, you dont KNOW!
> 
> He said he was embarrassed. That could mean he thought he was in the wrong, OR it could mean that he really didnt like having to shoot the dog and didnt want to talk about it. Or it could mean something else entirely. Doesnt make him a bad person. Just human.
> ...


I can do what I like, it's an open thread to talk about what we think / feel about the topic in question. Really pee's me off that if you don't agree with the majority, then you're in the wrong and open to abuse.
This thread is littered with "probablies" and "he may have" that's what we're all doing, hypothesising on what we all think may have occurred. The law is the law and what he did was within his rights....doesn't make it right though. If I have no idea what he did or was thinking, and you have no idea what he did or was thinking, why are you so adamant that it's me that's wrong 

I have an opinion on what I think happened, based on the little info available, but to argue that "maybe he didn't like shooting the dogs so didn't want to talk about it" is a poor defence and still no excuse not to report it to the police and try to cover it up. 
Try arguing that "I didn't like shooting the intruder in my house" so I buried him in the back garden and because I didn't want to talk about it I didn't tell the police.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Hazy81 said:


> I can do what I like, it's an open thread to talk about what we think / feel about the topic in question. Really pee's me off that if you don't agree with the majority, then you're in the wrong and open to abuse.
> This thread is littered with "probablies" and "he may have" that's what we're all doing, hypothesising on what we all think may have occurred. The law is the law and what he did was within his rights....doesn't make it right though. If I have no idea what he did or was thinking, and you have no idea what he did or was thinking, why are you so adamant that it's me that's wrong
> 
> I have an opinion on what I think happened, based on the little info available, but to argue that "maybe he didn't like shooting the dogs so didn't want to talk about it" is a poor defence and still no excuse not to report it to the police and try to cover it up.
> Try arguing that "I didn't like shooting the intruder in my house" so I buried him in the back garden and because I didn't want to talk about it I didn't tell the police.


I do not agree with him burying the dogs and not telling anyone but unfortunately a lot of people do not like unpleasantness and so will go to any lengths to avoid it. It is not something that sits well with me but I do not see anything sinister about it, just not a trait I like in many humans.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

Hazy81 said:


> I can do what I like, it's an open thread to talk about what we think / feel about the topic in question. Really pee's me off that if you don't agree with the majority, then you're in the wrong and open to abuse.
> This thread is littered with "probablies" and "he may have" that's what we're all doing, hypothesising on what we all think may have occurred. The law is the law and what he did was within his rights....doesn't make it right though. If I have no idea what he did or was thinking, and you have no idea what he did or was thinking, why are you so adamant that it's me that's wrong
> 
> I have an opinion on what I think happened, based on the little info available, but to argue that "maybe he didn't like shooting the dogs so didn't want to talk about it" is a poor defence and still no excuse not to report it to the police and try to cover it up.
> Try arguing that "I didn't like shooting the intruder in my house" so I buried him in the back garden and because I didn't want to talk about it I didn't tell the police.


Ok so in your opinion - were the dogs under adequate control - from the story?

In your opinion, Did it matter that 1 chicken that may bring you £2 a week (laying eggs) £104 a year, died?

What if the dogs killed more than 1 chicken.. In your opinion would you still have left them be if they were killing your flock of 20, 30, 40, 50?

Does it also matter that it was a chicken not a sheep - In your opinion?

As for the intruder thing - Manslaughter is illegal unless it was in self defence of which has to be proven in a court of law. Shooting a dog worrying livestock isn't.

I agree what happened after the shooting is strange. But we're not talking about those actions - we're talking about the worrying of livestock.

In MY opinion - you're just skirting over the relevant questions and not seeing the bigger picture - which on page 13 I have added for yours and others benefits.

A dog that has the thrill of the chase and taste of blood can be trained but it's not always successful.

What is successful is knowing where you are, whats around you and having a lead on the dog.

I have said before I plan my walks around livestock. I try to avoid where possible - if I do not know where they are - my dogs are on lead. My dogs are from working lines - there are certain areas on certain walks where they are put back on lead because a fence isn't going to stop them getting to that scent they've just caught a whiff of.

Again.

Bottom line - rightly or wrongly the *dogs lost their lives because they were not under control.*

Whatever your opinion - the above cannot be disputed.


----------



## Pupcakes (Jun 20, 2011)

If there's livestock around I keep my dogs on lead unless animals are far away and the distance is safe.

I seen some cute little lambs (nearly cried!) on Saturday and leaded up my 2 to go close to the fence to have a peak at them, the dogs just being quiet and looking, as soon as they saw us they looked scared so I left. 

Lambs are just like little puppies! So damn cute! 

Its all about respect when out and about. Respect for other dogs, adults, children, other animals, peoples property, cyclists, joggers and so on.

We all have the right to be and about and left in peace.


----------



## Guest (Apr 30, 2014)

Hazy81 said:


> I can do what I like, it's an open thread to talk about what we think / feel about the topic in question. Really pee's me off that if you don't agree with the majority, then you're in the wrong and open to abuse.
> This thread is littered with "probablies" and "he may have" that's what we're all doing, hypothesising on what we all think may have occurred. The law is the law and what he did was within his rights....doesn't make it right though. If I have no idea what he did or was thinking, and you have no idea what he did or was thinking, why are you so adamant that it's me that's wrong
> 
> I have an opinion on what I think happened, based on the little info available, but to argue that "maybe he didn't like shooting the dogs so didn't want to talk about it" is a poor defence and still no excuse not to report it to the police and try to cover it up.
> Try arguing that "I didn't like shooting the intruder in my house" so I buried him in the back garden and because I didn't want to talk about it I didn't tell the police.


Oh good grief. Where did I subject you to abuse? Thats rich coming from someone accusing a perfect stranger of the sinister, sadistic motives you are.

If you read my first post on this thread, I explicitly say I dont agree with the farmer burying the dogs and not admitting to having seen them. But nor do I agree that we can see in to the mans thoughts and why he did what he did.

Oh, and as to doing what you like, yep... you can. That doesnt mean actions dont have consequences though. For example, Im free to let my dogs roam as they please, and I should be prepared to face the consequences of them ending up on someone elses property and getting shot.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> I can do what I like, it's an open thread to talk about what we think / feel about the topic in question. Really pee's me off that if you don't agree with the majority, then you're in the wrong and open to abuse.
> This thread is littered with "probablies" and "he may have" that's what we're all doing, hypothesising on what we all think may have occurred. The law is the law and what he did was within his rights....doesn't make it right though. If I have no idea what he did or was thinking, and you have no idea what he did or was thinking, why are you so adamant that it's me that's wrong
> 
> I have an opinion on what I think happened, based on the little info available, but to argue that "maybe he didn't like shooting the dogs so didn't want to talk about it" is a poor defence and still no excuse not to report it to the police and try to cover it up.
> Try arguing that "I didn't like shooting the intruder in my house" so I buried him in the back garden and because I didn't want to talk about it I didn't tell the police.


Wow call in the drama lama, where on earth were you adused? Your right you can say what you want and guess what people have those same rights to disagree with you.

Not once have you addressed the real issue the owner! If she had control of her dogs this wouldn't be being talk about!

Again no one has said they agreed with what he did about the dogs far from it but unless you were there, or you are a mind reader you like the rest of us haven't a clue why he buried them! Yet we aren't the ones accusing people of sinister motives!

I really wish people would stop bringing shooting people in to this you can not compair the two......


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

SLB said:


> Ok so in your opinion - were the dogs under adequate control - from the story?
> 
> In your opinion, Did it matter that 1 chicken that may bring you £2 a week (laying eggs) £104 a year, died?
> 
> ...


Were the dogs under control? Ask the farmer, he's the only one to really know, but as he's a proven lier who tried to cover up the whole incident....

The amount of times on this forum that I've seen people defending dogs who have bitten people and saying...it's all the owners fault, and the dogs shouldn't be PTS because they weren't trained etc. well it's the same here, dogs got loose and chased a chicken, they don't know better but because of this ruling they don't get to have more recall training or proper training.

If he hadn't of shot them, but caught them and the police put the to sleep after the fact, it would cause outrage. But the farmer becomes judge, jury and executioner in these matters.

Should a dog reactive dog be put to sleep because whilst off lead and alone another off lead dog ran up and was attacked and killed. People would say, it's never done this before, the other dog came over uninvited it wasn't the reactive dogs fault, but we'll muzzle it and keep it on lead in future. The two dogs in question were shot on the spot and don't get another chance to learn correct behaviour.


----------



## Nataliee (Jul 25, 2011)

The field at the back of our house has sheep in it, there is a huge sign on the gate politely asking people to keep their dogs on the leads....which gets ignored. Thankfully there is never incidents of dogs chasing sheep there, and lots of people walk through there daily. Mine would not chase sheep (although Heidi does get a bit excited when the lambs are playing & thinks she can join in) but I keep them on the lead because I feel more comfortable having complete control of my dogs in a situation where they could potentially be shot, maybe it's just me?
The worst things I have seen in that field had nothing to do with dogs-
-A cyclist decided to cycle round the entire field several times causing the sheep to run around in panic, it isn't a very large field.
-Children throwing things at the sheep?
- Someone playing golf right in the middle of this small field, the sheep ended up huddled in a corner 
There was an incident where a fairly new rescue dog had managed to escape from a garden and ended up in the sheep field, thankfully the farmer was not around at the time. 
There was also an incident where 2 dogs managed to escaped from boarding kennels and got into a sheep field, the dogs did chase the sheep and sadly were shot. 
Can you imagine coming back from your holiday to find that out  
A neighbour was threatened by a game keeper that he would shoot her dog if he chased the pheasants, I don't even know if that would be legal? The dog was not even doing anything


----------



## Hazy81 (Dec 11, 2013)

Meezey said:


> Wow call in the drama lama, were on earth were you adused? Your right you can say what you want and guess what people have those same rights to disagree with you.
> 
> Not once have you addressed the real issue the owner! If she had control of her dogs this wouldn't be being talk about!
> 
> ...


Read back and you'll see that because people don't agree with MY opinion, it's okay to call names. 
Look, we're never going to agree, but here you go, you're right and I'm wrong, hope that makes everything okay and we can put this to bed, I bet everyone else is bored with the whole issue by now.

P.S. I am actually a mind reader.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> Were the dogs under control? Ask the farmer, he's the only one to really know, but as he's a proven lier who tried to cover up the whole incident....
> 
> The amount of times on this forum that I've seen people defending dogs who have bitten people and saying...it's all the owners fault, and the dogs shouldn't be PTS because they weren't trained etc. well it's the same here, dogs got loose and chased a chicken, they don't know better but because of this ruling they don't get to have more recall training or proper training.
> 
> ...


So tell me how you would have caught them? Umm they weren't with an owner they were out of control even if they hadn't of killed anything?


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> Read back and you'll see that because people don't agree with MY opinion, it's okay to call names.
> Look, we're never going to agree, but here you go, you're right and I'm wrong, hope that makes everything okay and we can put this to bed, I bet everyone else is bored with the whole issue by now.
> 
> P.S. I am actually a mind reader.


Must have missed it where were you called names?

You are utterly missing the point....


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Hazy81 said:


> Were the dogs under control? Ask the farmer, he's the only one to really know, but as he's a proven lier who tried to cover up the whole incident....
> 
> The amount of times on this forum that I've seen people defending dogs who have bitten people and saying...it's all the owners fault, and the dogs shouldn't be PTS because they weren't trained etc. well it's the same here, dogs got loose and chased a chicken, they don't know better but because of this ruling they don't get to have more recall training or proper training.
> 
> ...


Like I said before though, farmers have very little choice sometimes. I mean, sure he could have ran around for however long it took to capture both dogs. By which time they could have caused even more deaths/injuries to his chickens. But as has been pointed out already just try catching not just one, but TWO, fully prey driven dogs who are darting every which way, fully pumped up, incredibly intense and possibly aggressive if physically stopped. So what alternatives is he left with other then to just wait the dogs out and hope they get bored before killing who knows how many of his chickens?


----------



## Guest (Apr 30, 2014)

Hazy81 said:


> Were the dogs under control? Ask the farmer, he's the only one to really know, but as he's a proven lier who tried to cover up the whole incident....


I think we're talking about the legal definition of "under control." If there was no owner/handler in the vicinity, then yes, a loose dog is not under control no matter what the dog is doing.
In the US it's called an "animal at large" which in the case of a dog would be any dog off his own property, not leashed or under verbal control of a handler.



Hazy81 said:


> The amount of times on this forum that I've seen people defending dogs who have bitten people and saying...it's all the owners fault, and the dogs shouldn't be PTS because they weren't trained etc. well it's the same here, dogs got loose and chased a chicken, they don't know better but because of this ruling they don't get to have more recall training or proper training.


No one is saying the handler isn't at fault? If the dog walker had kept the dogs under control, none of this would have happened.

I think you're misunderstanding here. By saying that the farmer was within his rights to shoot the dogs, I'm not at all saying that's a great and fabulous thing the farmer did. I'm just saying this is one of the things that can and obviously does happen to dogs who are not kept under control.



Hazy81 said:


> If he hadn't of shot them, but caught them and the police put the to sleep after the fact, it would cause outrage. But the farmer becomes judge, jury and executioner in these matters.


Have you ever tried to catch a dog who doesn't know you and is hyped up on adrenaline in the middle of a chase/kill? Go ahead and put hands on a dog you don't know that has just caught something to kill it and let me know how that works out for ya 



Hazy81 said:


> Should a dog reactive dog be put to sleep because whilst off lead and alone another off lead dog ran up and was attacked and killed. People would say, it's never done this before, the other dog came over uninvited it wasn't the reactive dogs fault, but we'll muzzle it and keep it on lead in future. The two dogs in question were shot on the spot and don't get another chance to learn correct behaviour.


WTH is a dog reactive dog doing off leash and alone? If you leave ANY dog off leash, alone, unsupervised, a whole host of things may happen to that dog including being attacked and possibly killed by another dog or predator, including being hit and possibly killed by a car, including being shot and possibly killed by a farmer protecting his livestock.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Ya know, what really makes me chuckle, the vast majority of those against the farmer shooting these dogs, buy their meat from guess where. 

Oooooooooohhhhh, how ethical is that, so the farmer is crap, but yep, you got your two for a fiver chickens, and tesco club card points. Well done, hope you feel very superior for your points, I mean, where else could you shop.


----------



## Guest (Apr 30, 2014)

Um... I think the point is that we should keep our dogs under control?

Not that the farmers grandsons mauled pet chicken being a sign of all that is wrong with the meat industry wouldnt make for an entertaining thread, just that it might be a bit much on top of everything else going on in this thread


----------



## tabulahrasa (Nov 4, 2012)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Ya know, what really makes me chuckle, the vast majority of those against the farmer shooting these dogs, buy their meat from guess where.
> 
> Oooooooooohhhhh, how ethical is that, so the farmer is crap, but yep, you got your two for a fiver chickens, and tesco club card points. Well done, hope you feel very superior for your points, I mean, where else could you shop.


Any chicken on sale for two for a fiver's been nowhere near anywhere a dog could get to to be fair... Or even what most people would think of as a farm, lol.


----------



## Katherna (Feb 20, 2008)

SLB I remember that being on the front page of the paper when it happened.



> "One estimate, using NFU Mutual data, puts the annual casualty figure at 20,000-30,000 sheep, costing the industry more than £2m-a-year." (2009)





> "In 2006 NFU Mutual reported the number of attacks by dogs rose 15% on the previous year. At the same time cases of Hydatid disease in Welsh sheep began rising - unwormed dogs are the main carrier of this parasite."(2009)





> "NFU Cymru deputy president Ed Bailey said thousands of sheep - and even some cattle - die as a result of injuries caused by dogs every year.
> Some years ago he lost 14 ewes in a single attack, leaving 28 orphan lambs. This season six have been killed." (2009)


This was in 2009, those 28 orphaned lambs may have needed hand rearing - that takes time out of the farmers day to do, time that he may need to be spending elsewhere.

It still happens around here, there's lots of hill farmers








That was posted yesterday, it's not that far away from where I live.

I come from a farming family and have lived for many years either in rural or semi-rural locations and I'm afraid that I'm with Moobli and the others who are on the farmers side. I'm even going to the lengths with my dog of taking it to our vets and taking them up on the offer of going to the vet nurses farm to train Timmy to recall with sheep, although he will *never* be let off lead where I know there maybe livestock, it's a 'just incase' as sheep can jump out of the field and be walking down the pavement.


----------



## ozrex (Aug 30, 2011)

All I can add is that I hope the owner of the dog reimbursed the farmer for the cost of the dead chicken and apologised.

The dogs should have been under control and should not have been on his property - never mind attacking his chooks - simple as that. If you have dogs they shouldn't attack other peoples' pets/livestock. If that means they have to be on-lead then keep them on a lead.

I feel really sorry for the farmer. The only thing that he's done wrong was to deny shooting the dogs initially.


----------



## Pupcakes (Jun 20, 2011)

That poor sheep 

Its not fair, we all have the right to enjoy the outside peacefully. Accidents happen, leads break, clips come off (I know that one!) sh*t happens. But when we can avoid things like this happening, we must do our best to ensure everyone is safe.

In regards to chasing the dogs (haven't read the article) from my own experience, there isnt a hope in hell of me catching Charlie when he's chasing a scent/caught a glimpse of a rabbit, in *full on* prey mode, not just highly interested in a scent mode.

I recall the time he was on a long line down the field, caught a fox scent and boom. He was gone.

He was fast forward mode x 1000000. I only caught him as he zipped past and stepped on his long line. Lesson learnt.


----------



## Pupcakes (Jun 20, 2011)

ouesi said:


> Um... I think the point is that we should keep our dogs under control?
> 
> *Not that the farmers grandsons mauled pet chicken being a sign of all that is wrong with the meat industry wouldnt make for an entertaining thread, just that it might be a bit much on top of everything else going on in this thread*


Agreed!

Maybe we could raise the issue of hedgehogs and fences whilst we are discussing dogs and other animals...? *puts big spoon back away*


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

So you didn't answer a single one of my questions.. What a surprise.. 



Hazy81 said:


> Were the dogs under control? Ask the farmer, he's the only one to really know, but as he's a proven lier who tried to cover up the whole incident....


So you're saying that in your opinion 2 dogs without a handler present, on someone elses property, chasing chickens is under control... WOW I hope I never come across you and your dogs. I already said I didn't agree with what the farmer did afterwards and thats the only bit you're hell bent on. NO ONE on here has said him covering it up was fab and good. But you're not reading the rest of the story.



Hazy81 said:


> The amount of times on this forum that I've seen people defending dogs who have bitten people and saying...it's all the owners fault, and the dogs shouldn't be PTS because they weren't trained etc. well it's the same here, dogs got loose and chased a chicken, they don't know better but because of this ruling they don't get to have more recall training or proper training.


There's a difference between dogs that bite people and livestock worriers. Livestock worriers often get loose or cannot be stopped from doing damage. dogs that bite people can - muzzles. And to be honest - it was the owners fault here - she left her dog in the care of a dog walker who wasn't in adequate control of the dogs she was walking.

My dogs chase rabbits, but once it's gone down a hole they don't run off to a farm to chase chickens. Mine'll flush birds and sometimes chase them whilst they're in flight (bad gundogs!  ) but if I pip their recall whistle they come back. Whats that called.. erm... oh yeah it's trained recall and trained impulse control. Which means I have enough control over them. If they choose to ignore me I go to where they are and put them on the lead... whats that called now... oh yeah - control. Oh and I choose where we walk so I know where it's safe for them to chase rabbits or if they flush a bird. I make sure I know where farms, livestock, roads and anything else that can get them in trouble is... Thats called being in control.

My dogs are my responsibility. Even when they are not with me and they are with my OH or family - they are still my responsibility. I lay down the rules and if they are ignored there are consequences; Louie stayed with my parents when Pen was in season. I wrote a list of what he was allergic to as my brother likes to feed them and said if he was fed anything on the list then the person who fed him that would be paying the vet bills.

Sadly in this case the dogs consequences were death because the walker wasn't responsible enough s/he did not have sufficient control.



Hazy81 said:


> If he hadn't of shot them, but caught them and the police put the to sleep after the fact, it would cause outrage. But the farmer becomes judge, jury and executioner in these matters.


Going round in circles here....:mad2:

Have you tried to catch two spaniels chasing something... No I didn't think so.. you'd not make a naive statement like the above had you ever tried.

You would wait until the dog had killed you 20-30 chickens. Of which as I said in my previous post could bring you the income of £104 a year/per chicken so that is £2080 - £3120 a year. Then you'd catch them and have them PTS by the police... oh guess what - police can shoot dogs that kill livestock - they don't always take them to the vet.. Oh.. So had he called the police - they'd have shot them anyway..

In the eyes of the law a dog is seen as property. As is livestock I would hazard a guess at. If something is threatening your property you are allowed to act as you see fit. So let me put this question to you - which you won't answer because you didn't answer my last lot of questions which were all set up IN your opinion so I couldn't argue with you.. I could just say I disagreed and gave my reasons why - which is what all this post is too.

*But* if another dog was killing your dog.. would you defend your dog.. would you become judge and jury.. then you'd ask for that dog who killed your dog to be PTS.. would you not.. So how is that any different from dogs killing someones livelihood? Would you let your chickens (if you owned them) your possible income of £3k a year be torn apart by dogs because you didn't want to be judge jury and executioner?

Read on page 14. I have put up an article of 2 Rotties that got loose - had the farmer NOT shot them they would've killed all his livestock.. when he shot one - the other one went for him. So had he not got his gun and tried to stop them otherwise - he would've most likely been mauled in the process.



Hazy81 said:


> Should a dog reactive dog be put to sleep because whilst off lead and alone another off lead dog ran up and was attacked and killed. People would say, it's never done this before, the other dog came over uninvited it wasn't the reactive dogs fault, but we'll muzzle it and keep it on lead in future. The two dogs in question were shot on the spot and don't get another chance to learn correct behaviour.


Again - people don't always keep to their words. The walker could say that she'd keep them on lead in future. But again - had he waited until they had finished - he'd have lost £3k (if he had upto 30 chickens) of profit. I don't know about you. But I'd rather loose £1.50 in bullets than loose £3k so some soap stars dog can learn not to chase chickens. Oh and teaching a dog not to chase is NOT easy. I've had it with my two.

Do you know what the traditional methods of teaching dogs not to chase livestock/wildlife is?

One traditional method of stopping livestock worrying is to put them in with a raging Ram in a small space. The dog goes to chase/attack the Ram. The Ram then attacks the dog. The dog THEN either learns that sheep will fight back - which will EITHER trigger "Best not do that again" or "This is fun this one gives me a bit of excitement" So the dog is either cured or made worse.

The traditional method of stopped dogs chasing rabbits/sitting to a flush is to have the dog in a rabbit pen. Basically it's a big run with rabbit's in. People either push the rabbits out of their holes (or wait) - if the dog goes to chase it is whipped and the stop whistle is blown.

I didn't do either of these but it has taken me a bloody long time to get what I have achieved through positive reinforcement and setting my dogs up to succeed.

Please answer all my questions. I would be interested to know in your opinion the answers to them. They are on page 14 - in fact you did quote them.

Also do have a look at my previous post with the Rotties on.


----------



## Guest (May 1, 2014)

Regarding catching the dogs, in addition to the obvious difficulty of doing this that has already been pointed out, the farmer in question is 80 years old. I know he could absolutely be hale and healthy, but not too many 80 year olds move as well as they did in their 30s. Seriously, he didnt have much of a chance of catching those dogs....


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

ouesi said:


> Regarding catching the dogs, in addition to the obvious difficulty of doing this that has already been pointed out, the farmer in question is 80 years old. I know he could absolutely be hale and healthy, but not too many 80 year olds move as well as they did in their 30's. Seriously, he didn't have much of a chance of catching those dogs....


No he was supposed to let them kill all his chickens and ring the police of whom probably have a lot more to deal with in terms of importance and possibly would've asked him what he had tried, had he got a gun and told him to report the shooting after the event. But had the police gone we'll come up by the time they got there; the dogs would've either moved on to the next thing or ran back to the walker and she'd be non the wiser. Jeez Ouesi.. are you not getting this.. 

*snigger*


----------



## Guest (May 1, 2014)

SLB said:


> No he was supposed to let them kill all his chickens and ring the police of whom probably have a lot more to deal with in terms of importance and possibly would've asked him what he had tried, had he got a gun and told him to report the shooting after the event. But had the police gone we'll come up by the time they got there; the dogs would've either moved on to the next thing or ran back to the walker and she'd be non the wiser. Jeez Ouesi.. are you not getting this..
> 
> *snigger*


Well, he did try to chase them off initially, and had they run off back to the dog walker, she might not have been any wiser to what they were doing. 
I know some folks around here will try to scare loose dogs away with pellet guns - hurts like hell but usually doesnt kill the dog. Its only after the same dog visits the same farm multiple times that theyll move on to a more deadly weapon.

So to be fair, there ARE options other than killing the dogs.

However, we dont know which of those options, if any, were available to that farmer at that moment when his chickens were under attack. I dont fault him for shooting the dogs, I fault him for not reporting it within the 48 hours required by law. But I fault the handler MORE for allowing the dogs to run at large to begin with.


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

ozrex said:


> All I can add is that I hope the *owner* of the dog reimbursed the farmer for the cost of the dead chicken and apologised.
> 
> The dogs should have been under control and should not have been on his property - never mind attacking his chooks - simple as that. If you have dogs they shouldn't attack other peoples' pets/livestock. If that means they have to be on-lead then keep them on a lead.
> 
> I feel really sorry for the farmer. The only thing that he's done wrong was to deny shooting the dogs initially.


The owner? I'd blame the dog walker.

I'm with the farmer in this instance. But how about this case, happened a couple of years ago to a friend - I didn't post about it near the time because I found it too upsetting; still do really. She went to visit her son who lives next door to a sheep farm. Maintaining the fences was the farmer's responsibility and he had let the boundary fence get into poor condition. She let her 2 dogs out into the garden, not knowing that the sheep had broken through the fence and were in a paddock belonging to her son, and had dislodged the gate dividing it from the garden. The dogs chased the sheep back through the hole in the fence and into the field where the GSD killed 4. The border terrier followed on but didn't kill any. The farmer came and caught her, and killed her - not by shooting but by stamping on her head and ribs. Friend's son found him soon after and he admitted what he'd done. The dog was technically alive at that point and they got her to a vet who diagnosed severe brain damage as well as multiple injuries to her internal organs and put her to sleep. Friend who caught the GSD took him to the vet next day and had him PTS as well. She felt it was the only responsible thing to do as she lives surrounded by sheep too and she would never be able to trust him again. Rehoming wasn't a realistic option - he wasn't an easy dog but had done well at showing and agility.

The vet was so appalled at the border terrier's injuries that she called in the RSPCA who couldn't proceed with a prosecution (didn't try very hard) on the grounds that the only witness to the farmer's admission was a relative of the dog's owner, so not considered impartial.

Dogs' owner I met through the training club, where she's a Good Citizen examiner, volunteer trainer, involved with the PAT dog scheme (though her PAT dog has now retired). Not someone who lets their dogs run wild.


----------



## Jenna500 (May 27, 2012)

I have direct experience of this. I used to have a flock of about 20 ex-battery hens. They were in a fenced plot of about an acre in the corner of my horses' field. There was a footpath that ran alongside this field - not in it, but the other side of the fence. 

One day I had a phone call from a lady whose house overlooked the field, telling me there was a dog in with my chickens. I raced down there. By the time I got there the dog was gone, and all my chickens were either dead or dying. It was utter carnage. I was heartbroken.

If I had got there earlier, would I have done anything to stop that dog, including killing it if necessary, to stop it ripping my chickens apart? Yes, absolutely!


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

ouesi said:


> Well, he did try to chase them off initially, and had they run off back to the dog walker, she might not have been any wiser to what they were doing.
> I know some folks around here will try to scare loose dogs away with pellet guns - hurts like hell but usually doesnt kill the dog. Its only after the same dog visits the same farm multiple times that theyll move on to a more deadly weapon.
> 
> So to be fair, there ARE options other than killing the dogs.
> ...


I'm completely with you. I totally agree, he was within his rights but I don't agree with his actions afterwards.


----------



## Emmastace (Feb 11, 2011)

I despair when it comes to some dog owners and some attitudes about dogs in general. Our whole society revolves around rights and responsibilities. It is what all our social structures including laws are based on. Too many people concentrate on what they see as their rights concerning dogs i.e freedom to exercise them, freedom to enjoy their idyllic walks, freedom to earn their living from them etc and forget the responsibilities that go with those rights. Every dog owner or person with a dog in their care has a responsibility to keep them under control. They may believe they have a solid recall, they may think being on lead is enough, they may trust their dog not to run off into the road, or up to another dog, or not to chase livestock. The problem is that as soon as an incident concerning a dog has occurred, by default, at least one dog is NOT under control. It's all too late once something has happened and your responsibility is to ensure you are fully in control BEFORE any event. Bleating, whining, whinging and pointing out someone else's failings does not take anything away from the fact that the owner of the dog that was not under full control did not do the right thing in the first placewas ultimately at fault.
Yes the farmer in this Sue Johnson case behaved appallingly but he would never have been an issue if the dog/s were under control.

(The post regarding the broken fence is an entirely different matter although I do think you have a responsibility to check your fencing, gates etc before letting your dogs out if there is any chance they would take advantage of an escape opportunity and could cause a problem if they were out however unfair that seems if it's someone else's fence)


----------



## hells85 (Feb 10, 2014)

Im with the farmer for his actions on shooting the dogs but not for his actions after, the burying the dogs and not informing anyone is wrong.lying about it to the dog walker is also wrong. Surely they would have had collars on? I don't think my dogs would ever get into such an issue because they are only walked by me and my partner and are on lead where there are livestock, but if it somehow happened to us I would hope that the farmer would call us using the info on their tags, 1 so I can reimburse them for the costs of any animals killed and 2 so I can collect their remains and not be worried sick for weeks thinking they are lost. I would also be furious at the dog walker if I was the owner of those dogs.

Regarding the use of footpaths I don't see why there should be a problem, everyone needs to learn to respect each other more and share. If your on a footpath that goes through farmers land then stick to the path unless the farmer has put a diversion route round crops (a local farmer does this) and keep your dogs on a leash. Even if its not through farm land no one should be littering anyway, you brought it with you you can take it away, why anyone would climb over a gate instead of opening it I don't understand, but then I don't understand why you would have a family bbq right next to a public footpath and then get arsey with walkers using it. If its on your land surely you can have your BBQ away from the footpath if you want complete privacy, sorry if I got the wrong end of the stick on this one and it was stray walkers elsewhere on your land. Theres a footpath that goes through a field that sometimes has sheep in one of my dog walking, running, hiking areas that I would quite like to explore, I haven't yet because although there is an arrow and a sign stating it is part of a walk there is no clearly defined path and I don't want to end up randomly walking across someones property. I haven't seen anyone around to ask and to be honest I am a little worried about asking the farmer if I see them in case they respond in a hostile manner.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

I'm another who blames the dog walker for this tragedy. I have witnessed a farmer shoot a dog for chasing his sheep before. My parents house backs onto open farmland & when I was young I watched the whole thing through the window. The only blessing for me was it was in the distance, because that was distressing enough. The farmer first tried to send his own dogs after the dog (a collie as it happens), when that didn't work and the dog continued running amok, he shot it. That farmer didn't take the decision to shoot lightly, hes since died but he was a big dog lover, it must have really upset him to have to pull the trigger. We knew the owner of the dog, she had worked with my Mum, she was really upset but the poor dog was always getting out, she was a totally irresponsible owner, especially so living in a farming village.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Burrowzig said:


> The owner? I'd blame the dog walker.
> 
> I'm with the farmer in this instance. But how about this case, happened a couple of years ago to a friend - I didn't post about it near the time because I found it too upsetting; still do really. She went to visit her son who lives next door to a sheep farm. Maintaining the fences was the farmer's responsibility and he had let the boundary fence get into poor condition. She let her 2 dogs out into the garden, not knowing that the sheep had broken through the fence and were in a paddock belonging to her son, and had dislodged the gate dividing it from the garden. The dogs chased the sheep back through the hole in the fence and into the field where the GSD killed 4. The border terrier followed on but didn't kill any. The farmer came and caught her, and killed her - not by shooting but by stamping on her head and ribs. Friend's son found him soon after and he admitted what he'd done. The dog was technically alive at that point and they got her to a vet who diagnosed severe brain damage as well as multiple injuries to her internal organs and put her to sleep. Friend who caught the GSD took him to the vet next day and had him PTS as well. She felt it was the only responsible thing to do as she lives surrounded by sheep too and she would never be able to trust him again. Rehoming wasn't a realistic option - he wasn't an easy dog but had done well at showing and agility.
> 
> ...


That's horrific! 

I'm a little nervous because a holiday we're taking later this year has openly admitted on it's website that *sometimes*, an escaping sheep from the farm down the lane might enter your garden! :scared: That's the one drawback to the holiday for me, because that means thoroughly checking the garden(s) everytime we are about to let the dogs out.


----------



## samuelsmiles (Dec 29, 2010)

This kind of story makes me realise how important training really is. Not only is it great fun but, if you can control your dog in these situations, they can be of huge (lifesaving) value in the outside world. Little bit proud of my boy.

[youtube_browser]UyOg2rm6WBI[/youtube_browser]


----------



## Jellypi3 (Jan 3, 2014)

When I first read that article I was horrified at what the farmer had done, my first thought was "poor dogs!"...

However, being a "city dweller" I have no idea about these laws regarding livestock worriers etc. and reading all these posts have completely spun around my opinion of the story. I actually feel sorry for the farmer, he was under pressure with his grandsons there seeing a horrific incident and acted (within the law), and he's getting persecuted by the public for it  

The ultimate losses are the dogs and chicken's lives. RIP to them all.

And to the forum member who said the farmer should rot in hell, please be careful what you wish on others, the poor man certainly doesn't deserve your callousness.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

Burrowzig said:


> The owner? I'd blame the dog walker.
> 
> I'm with the farmer in this instance. But how about this case, happened a couple of years ago to a friend - I didn't post about it near the time because I found it too upsetting; still do really. She went to visit her son who lives next door to a sheep farm. Maintaining the fences was the farmer's responsibility and he had let the boundary fence get into poor condition. She let her 2 dogs out into the garden, not knowing that the sheep had broken through the fence and were in a paddock belonging to her son, and had dislodged the gate dividing it from the garden. The dogs chased the sheep back through the hole in the fence and into the field where the GSD killed 4. The border terrier followed on but didn't kill any. The farmer came and caught her, and killed her - not by shooting but by stamping on her head and ribs. Friend's son found him soon after and he admitted what he'd done. The dog was technically alive at that point and they got her to a vet who diagnosed severe brain damage as well as multiple injuries to her internal organs and put her to sleep. Friend who caught the GSD took him to the vet next day and had him PTS as well. She felt it was the only responsible thing to do as she lives surrounded by sheep too and she would never be able to trust him again. Rehoming wasn't a realistic option - he wasn't an easy dog but had done well at showing and agility.
> 
> ...


That is dreadful  Is that a local farm Burrowzig (PM me if you prefer). The owner should have definitely sued that farmer, with the admission he made and also with a vet report. What a shame she had her GSD PTS too. Very sad story.


----------



## Wildmoor (Oct 31, 2011)

I havent read everyones replies but when this link was posted elsewhere I was appalled by the attitude of some dog owners, blaming the farmer when the dog owner is in the wrong, my dogs are kept on lead when ever lifestock is around even if there are several fields separating where I am walking to the livestock, the only time one isnt is in the morning when I pass the pony sanctuary my GSD is off lead as he ignores horses/ponies unless they are aggressive and there is a river and steep banking, although the sheepdogs stay onlead even though they would ignore the horses there are often wild moorhens, ducks etc in the field and they would chase them


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

samuelsmiles said:


> This kind of story makes me realise how important training really is. Not only is it great fun but, if you can control your dog in these situations, they can be of huge (lifesaving) value in the outside world. Little bit proud of my boy.
> 
> [youtube_browser]UyOg2rm6WBI[/youtube_browser]


I found with my first sheepdog that he was like a loaded gun when part trained (as he was so keen to work and obsessed by sheep) and only became completely reliable out in the countryside when he was fully trained.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

I think it would be a great idea if all dog training clubs incorporated training around livestock and wildlife into their puppy or intermediate training classes. I know it would take some organisation as well as goodwill of farmers/landowners etc, but it might make a real difference to the problem that people have with their pet dogs around livestock.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

How do people feel about a dog being ordered to be destroyed AFTER an incident has happened?

There have been sheep worrying incidents regularly reported over the past few months and I have seen many comments from angry farmers and their supporters to say that once a dog has been found to have worried livestock then it should be put down.

Personally I don't agree with that view at all. A farmer should have the right to protect his livestock whilst an attack is taking place and to prevent any more injury or death, but I don't think he, the police, or a court should have the right to order a dog to be put down once the incident is over (assuming the dog wasn't shot in the process of worrying!). There should however be stricter penalties for the owner - paying compensation for lost animals, and perhaps attending some sort of good dog ownership course to be taught just why it is important to keep your dog under control etc that they should have to pay for - a bit like the course offered to drivers who have broken the speed limit.


----------



## Guest (May 2, 2014)

Moobli said:


> I think it would be a great idea if all dog training clubs incorporated training around livestock and wildlife into their puppy or intermediate training classes. I know it would take some organisation as well as goodwill of farmers/landowners etc, but it might make a real difference to the problem that people have with their pet dogs around livestock.


I think thats a really good idea especially in rural areas with higher populations of livestock. Here in the US many dogs (and their owners) will live their whole life without ever seeing livestock, so its a bit more case by case basis. Plus farmers dont have allow passage through their fields.



Moobli said:


> How do people feel about a dog being ordered to be destroyed AFTER an incident has happened?
> 
> There have been sheep worrying incidents regularly reported over the past few months and I have seen many comments from angry farmers and their supporters to say that once a dog has been found to have worried livestock then it should be put down.
> 
> Personally I don't agree with that view at all. A farmer should have the right to protect his livestock whilst an attack is taking place and to prevent any more injury or death, but I don't think he, the police, or a court should have the right to order a dog to be put down once the incident is over (assuming the dog wasn't shot in the process of worrying!). There should however be stricter penalties for the owner - paying compensation for lost animals, and perhaps attending some sort of good dog ownership course to be taught just why it is important to keep your dog under control etc that they should have to pay for - a bit like the course offered to drivers who have broken the speed limit.


I think the dog owner should pay for compensation for lost livestock always! But no, I dont think the dog should be PTS necessarily. But I do think the penalty for the owners should be harsher, might serve as motivation to control their dogs better. (But then if the possibility of your dog getting shot doesnt motivate you to keep the dog under control....)


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Moobli said:


> How do people feel about a dog being ordered to be destroyed AFTER an incident has happened?
> 
> There have been sheep worrying incidents regularly reported over the past few months and I have seen many comments from angry farmers and their supporters to say that *once a dog has been found to have worried livestock then it should be put down.*
> 
> Personally I don't agree with that view at all. A farmer should have the right to protect his livestock whilst an attack is taking place and to prevent any more injury or death, but I don't think he, the police, or a court should have the right to order a dog to be put down once the incident is over (assuming the dog wasn't shot in the process of worrying!). There should however be stricter penalties for the owner - paying compensation for lost animals, and perhaps attending some sort of good dog ownership course to be taught just why it is important to keep your dog under control etc that they should have to pay for - a bit like the course offered to drivers who have broken the speed limit.


I don't agree with that at all. I would imagine that there are far more dogs who would worry or kill livestock than not - it's classic predator vs prey. Most just haven't had the opportunity to do it. On the basis of potential for worrying or killing livestock, we would have to put most dogs down.


----------



## BryM (May 2, 2014)

Moobli said:


> The Farmers Guardian newspaper are currently running a high profile campaign to try and educate dog owners about the importance of keeping their dogs on a lead or under control around livestock, especially sheep at this time of year when many hill sheep are in lamb.
> 
> The newspapers told a couple of days ago how the actress, Sue Johnson's, spaniel was shot (along with a second spaniel) for worrying and killing hens.
> 
> ...


I think that all is perhaps not as it may at first seem and watch this space in the coming days


----------



## samuelsmiles (Dec 29, 2010)

Moobli said:


> I found with my first sheepdog that he was like a loaded gun when part trained (as he was so keen to work and obsessed by sheep) and only became completely reliable out in the countryside when he was fully trained.


It's interesting; I feel I have the most control over him and Maggie when 'driving' the sheep with them in front of me. They seem to be in such an intense state of mind that any command, 'down' or 'stand' is pretty much instantly responded to. They can both be 'called off' with ease too.

Percy does seem to have quite a high 'drive' but neither he nor Maggie are from 'working lines' so maybe easier to work with than sheepdogs bred for the job?

I have seen working line sheepdogs at our training sessions, and they are different animals; the intensity is stunning.


----------



## BryM (May 2, 2014)

Jazmine said:


> All of this could have been prevented if the dogs were kept on a lead. We went on a walk in the Peak District yesterday, which included a fair bit of farm land. Whenever we were in a field with livestock, we clipped the leads on, and away we went. Leads attached to walking belts too so still handsfree. It's not difficult is it?
> 
> Two dogs and a hen dead, needlessly.
> 
> I am sure there are farmers out there who are a bit too trigger happy, but as far as I'm concerned, if you keep your dog on a lead, you eliminate the risk.


I have been involved in this and would suggest that people refrain from making comments they may regret later as all may not be quite as it seems in this case. And they dont know the circumstances under which the dogs where not on a lead. More is to come from this and certain people may not be as inoccent as they may seem in this story as no children where actually there. WATCH THIS SPACE


----------



## Guest (May 2, 2014)

BryM said:


> I think that all is perhaps not as it may at first seem and watch this space in the coming days





BryM said:


> I have been involved in this and would suggest that people refrain from making comments they may regret later as all may not be quite as it seems in this case. And they dont know the circumstances under which the dogs where not on a lead. More is to come from this and certain people may not be as inoccent as they may seem in this story as no children where actually there. WATCH THIS SPACE


Oh geez... 
I would suggest that people refrain from posting cryptic lead-ins that go nowhere.

If you were involved, say what you know. If you can't talk about it, don't talk about it.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

BryM said:


> I think that all is perhaps not as it may at first seem and watch this space in the coming days


Can you elaborate?


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

samuelsmiles said:


> It's interesting; I feel I have the most control over him and Maggie when 'driving' the sheep with them in front of me. They seem to be in such an intense state of mind that any command, 'down' or 'stand' is pretty much instantly responded to. They can both be 'called off' with ease too.
> 
> Percy does seem to have quite a high 'drive' but neither he nor Maggie are from 'working lines' so maybe easier to work with than sheepdogs bred for the job?
> 
> I have seen working line sheepdogs at our training sessions, and they are different animals; the intensity is stunning.


It is all down to the individual, but I would imagine the dogs bred from generations of workers will have the stronger drives and intensity. I have found some young dogs dislike driving the sheep away, as they have such a strong inherent instinct to hold the flock to you. Really interesting to watch.

Some young dogs take commands quickly and will recall off the sheep immediately, but the more intense dogs just want to keep on working. Even this isn't always a case of responsive dog = less good worker and intense/obsessive dog = good worker.

Definitely working with a sheepdog's inherent instinct is the ideal way to gain overall control eventually, but obviously this isn't possible for everyone.


----------



## tabulahrasa (Nov 4, 2012)

Moobli said:


> It is all down to the individual, but I would imagine the dogs bred from generations of workers will have the stronger drives and intensity. I have found some young dogs dislike driving the sheep away, as they have such a strong inherent instinct to hold the flock to you. Really interesting to watch.
> 
> Some young dogs take commands quickly and will recall off the sheep immediately, but the more intense dogs just want to keep on working. Even this isn't always a case of responsive dog = less good worker and intense/obsessive dog = good worker.
> 
> Definitely working with a sheepdog's inherent instinct is the ideal way to gain overall control eventually, but obviously this isn't possible for everyone.


I think it's very much an individual thing - most working sheepdogs I've known aren't collies anyway - they're mostly collie, but a load of other stuff in there too and people breed two fantastic sheepdogs and only one or two in the litter are actually any good.

Genetics help - but like always it's much more than just that.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

Radio 2 Jeremy Vine show now talking about whether dogs should be on leads in the countryside.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

tabulahrasa said:


> I think it's very much an individual thing - most working sheepdogs I've known aren't collies anyway - they're mostly collie, but a load of other stuff in there too and people breed two fantastic sheepdogs and only one or two in the litter are actually any good.
> 
> Genetics help - but like always it's much more than just that.


Almost all the working sheepdogs I know are border collies (my husband's choice of working dog), but there are also kelpie, working beardie, huntaway. I have seen a strange array of crossbreeds used in some of the Lakeland hill farms, but where I live the working sheepdog of choice is the border collie.

As you rightly say, genetics do help but it is rather hit and miss as to whether many of a litter will make good workers. I am pleased to say that from the two litters we have bred in the past five years, all sixteen pups went to working and trialling homes.


----------



## Muze (Nov 30, 2011)

I'm a bit torn on this one, had the farmer immediately reported the incident then I would have sided with him. 

But, one wonders, if the owner of one dog hadn't been a celebrity and the campaign got so big, would he ever have owned up or just let the owners wonder forever what happened to those dogs. 
I wonder how many of those dogs lost are secreted away on private land where they've been brutally shot, then discarded, whilst arrogant farmers don't report it. 

I steer way clear of farmland, I've had farmers be incredibly abusive 9even without a dog), just because I've got a bit lost or had to stray off a path so overgrown, you can't get near it. 

I respect the rights of farmers, so long as they abide by the law and the respect is mutual.


----------



## Guest (May 2, 2014)

Muze said:


> I'm a bit torn on this one, had the farmer immediately reported the incident then I would have sided with him.
> 
> But, one wonders, if the owner of one dog hadn't been a celebrity and the campaign got so big, would he ever have owned up or just let the owners wonder forever what happened to those dogs.
> *I wonder how many of those dogs lost are secreted away on private land where they've been brutally shot, then discarded, whilst arrogant farmers don't report it.*
> ...


While I agree that it is horrible to shoot a dog and not at least attempt to let the owners know what happened to the dog, it STILL falls on the owners to be responsible for their dogs. 
If an owner allows their dog to wander out of their sight/hearing that owner forfeits knowing what is happening to the dog while out of their sight/hearing. The dog could be shot, stolen, hit by a vehicle, killed by a predator... Any number of things can happen to a loose, ownerless dog. Keep control of your dog and you don't have to worry about any of that.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

NO dog could ever be shot without if owner/walker knowing if the current country code was adhered to by all. We may have the rights but as dog owners we must shoulder our responsibilities.

Natural England - Keep dogs under effective control

"Keep dogs under effective control
When you take your dog into the outdoors, always ensure it does not disturb wildlife, farm animals, horses or other people by keeping it under effective control. This means that you:

keep your dog on a lead, or
keep it in sight at all times, be aware of what it's doing and be confident it will return to you promptly on command
ensure it does not stray off the path or area where you have a right of access 
Special dog rules may apply in particular situations, so always look out for local signs - for example:

Dogs may be banned from certain areas that people use, or there may be restrictions, byelaws or control orders limiting where they can go.
The access rights that normally apply to open country and registered common land (known as 'Open Access' land) require dogs to be kept on a short lead between 1 March and 31 July, to help protect ground nesting birds, and all year round near farm animals.
At the coast, there may also be some local restrictions to require dogs to be kept on a short lead during the bird breeding season, and to prevent disturbance to flocks of resting and feeding birds during other times of year. 
It's always good practice (and a legal requirement on 'Open Access' land) to keep your dog on a lead around farm animals and horses, for your own safety and for the welfare of the animals. A farmer may shoot a dog which is attacking or chasing farm animals without being liable to compensate the dog's owner. Further information. 
However, if cattle or horses chase you and your dog, it is safer to let your dog off the lead - don't risk getting hurt by trying to protect it. Your dog will be much safer if you let it run away from a farm animal in these circumstances and so will you.
Everyone knows how unpleasant dog mess is and it can cause infections, so always clean up after your dog and get rid of the mess responsibly - 'bag it and bin it'. Make sure your dog is wormed regularly to protect it, other animals and people."


----------



## Dingle (Aug 29, 2008)

I will always sympathise with the Farmers.


----------



## Hopeattheendofthetunnel (Jun 26, 2013)

It is interesting how a particular topic is interpreted by different people.

What is particularly fascininating on this one is how many have a fanatical "things are either black or white" stance. Lifestock worrying is bad equals dogs should be shot. End of discussion.

But the issue at hand wasn't a hypothetical discussion.

It wasn't whether a farmer is EVER justified in shooting dogs to save his livestock given certain circumstances.

IMO, yes they are. To be sure, I have often been amazed by some farmers level-headedness, kindness and benevolence when faced, all to frequently, by peoples profound ignorance, disrespect and boundless stupidity in regards to their fields or their livestock.

But THIS particular topic wasn't about that.

The sole issue here was whether THAT farmer was justified in shooting THESE dogs given THOSE circumstances.

The level of hypocrisy which was then extolled by some was jawdropping. The SAME people who go nuts when reading that a dog got reprimaded by their owner, the same "stalwarth defender and lovers of dogs" had no issue that 2 Spaniels were killed because the person letting them off the leash shouldn't have done that.

No one said that the farmer didn't have every right to prosecute the owner. No one said that he shouldn't be compensated far in excess of the financial damage occured. No one said that the owner, or rather, walker of said dogs didn't have a fatal error of judgment. No, it became a spurious "lets support our farmers rights" crusade.

I hope - and I mean this sincerely and without sarcasm or cynisism - that all of you justifying and sanctioning THAT particular farmers's action NEVER make a mistake. May your leash never slip and your dog take off. May you never get ill or busy and entrust your walking to someone else who might ignore your instructions. May you never make a mistake which could cost your dog's life.

And if you do.. I hope you meet someone kinder and more compassionate that that farmer...or yourselves. I stand behind what I said - I hope he rots in hell. I hope the owner keeps him in court forever. THAT was not ok.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Hopeattheendofthetunnel said:


> I hope - and I mean this sincerely and without sarcasm or cynisism - that all of you justifying and sanctioning THAT particular farmers's action NEVER make a mistake. May your leash never slip and your dog take off. May you never get ill or busy and entrust your walking to someone else who might ignore your instructions. May you never make a mistake which could cost your dog's life.
> 
> And if you do.. I hope you meet someone kinder and more compassionate that that farmer...or yourselves. I stand behind what I said - I hope he rots in hell. I hope the owner keeps him in court forever. THAT was not ok.


If god forbid it did happen, and something I did cost my dog his life then I would never forgive myself, if it cost some else's dog it's life then that would be 100% worse, I just couldn't forgive myself ever, I have a responbility to keep my dog safe, that what responsible dog owners are meant to do, keep dogs safe, and people and other animals also have the right to be safe, if it's your business to look after other people's dogs then you have a larger responsibility for those dogs in your care and the people around you to feel safe! Mistakes do happen, but always the dogs pay the price!


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

Dingle said:


> I will always sympathise with the Farmers.


Except in cases where they shoot dogs that are actually not worrying stock? Also, in the case mentioned by Burrowzig, I don't sympathise completely with that farmer. His actions were abhorrent.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

I fully accept that a farmer is well within his rights to shoot a dog if that dog is worrying his livestock. I live near to a farm and, even though my dogs are trained to "leave" and "stay", I would never ever walk them off lead in the vicinity. They are herding dogs and I don't think it would take much for them to be merrily off, doing exactly what their instincts are telling them to do, and having a great time running around whatever livestock it was and herding them up (in a fashion of course because none of them have had any herding training). If I let them off the lead, if they did that, if the farmer shot them, then devastating as it might be to admit it, it would be my fault entirely.

However, unless the Daily Wail is doing its usual trick of adding 2 and 2 together and making 22, there are aspects of this case that are worrying me. From the reporting, I'm not convinced that the farmer did enough to deter the dogs before he shot them, and I wonder if that is why he buried the bodies rather than report the shooting as he should have done?

If he had done all he could before he shot them, then unfortunately it is yet another case of dogs being le down by humans - in this case the human who was walking them. But if he could have stopped them another way and shot them merely as retribution for killing his grandson's pet hen, then my sympathies are with the owner.


----------



## staffgirl (May 1, 2013)

Do the same rules apply for a gamekeeper who has a dog catch and kill pheasants on the land that he game keeps (is that the right verb?!)? Is he legally entitled to shoot a dog if he catches one doing that?


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> I fully accept that a farmer is well within his rights to shoot a dog if that dog is worrying his livestock. I live near to a farm and, even though my dogs are trained to "leave" and "stay", I would never ever walk them off lead in the vicinity. They are herding dogs and I don't think it would take much for them to be merrily off, doing exactly what their instincts are telling them to do, and having a great time running around whatever livestock it was and herding them up (in a fashion of course because none of them have had any herding training). If I let them off the lead, if they did that, if the farmer shot them, then devastating as it might be to admit it, it would be my fault entirely.
> 
> However, unless the Daily Wail is doing its usual trick of adding 2 and 2 together and making 22, there are aspects of this case that are worrying me. From the reporting, I'm not convinced that the farmer did enough to deter the dogs before he shot them, and I wonder if that is why he buried the bodies rather than report the shooting as he should have done?
> 
> If he had done all he could before he shot them, then unfortunately it is yet another case of dogs being le down by humans - in this case the human who was walking them. But if he could have stopped them another way and shot them merely as retribution for killing his grandson's pet hen, then my sympathies are with the owner.


I agree up to a point but even if he did not do enough to deter them not everyone is dog savvy and if he had chased them off what other mischief would they have got into.
He was totally right to shoot them imo but totally wrong to bury them.


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Spellweaver said:


> I fully accept that a farmer is well within his rights to shoot a dog if that dog is worrying his livestock. I live near to a farm and, even though my dogs are trained to "leave" and "stay", I would never ever walk them off lead in the vicinity. They are herding dogs and I don't think it would take much for them to be merrily off, doing exactly what their instincts are telling them to do, and having a great time running around whatever livestock it was and herding them up (in a fashion of course because none of them have had any herding training). If I let them off the lead, if they did that, if the farmer shot them, then devastating as it might be to admit it, it would be my fault entirely.
> 
> However, unless the Daily Wail is doing its usual trick of adding 2 and 2 together and making 22, there are aspects of this case that are worrying me. From the reporting, I'm not convinced that the farmer did enough to deter the dogs before he shot them, and I wonder if that is why he buried the bodies rather than report the shooting as he should have done?
> 
> If he had done all he could before he shot them, then unfortunately it is yet another case of dogs being le down by humans - in this case the human who was walking them. But if he could have stopped them another way and shot them merely as retribution for killing his grandson's pet hen, then my sympathies are with the owner.


I rarely believe anything the press print hence I don't read papers, and if he does turn out to have been unlawful or underhand then he deserves to be shot himself, but until all the fact are out only the people involved really know what happened!


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

staffgirl said:


> Do the same rules apply for a gamekeeper who has a dog catch and kill pheasants on the land that he game keeps (is that the right verb?!)? Is he legally entitled to shoot a dog if he catches one doing that?


I believe they can when the pheasant are in a pen, but not once out and about

However the law isn't clear when it comes to the landowner. If it's destroying his livelihood.................


----------



## staffgirl (May 1, 2013)

Thanks Rona.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

ozrex said:


> All I can add is that I hope the owner of the dog reimbursed the farmer for the cost of the dead chicken and apologised.
> 
> The dogs should have been under control and should not have been on his property - never mind attacking his chooks - simple as that. If you have dogs they shouldn't attack other peoples' pets/livestock. If that means they have to be on-lead then keep them on a lead.
> 
> I feel really sorry for the farmer. The only thing that he's done wrong was to deny shooting the dogs initially.


I liked this post for the saying he did wrong denying it initially.

I think having 2 dogs shot was enough to pay for the dogs worrying this chicken.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Jenna500 said:


> I have direct experience of this. I used to have a flock of about 20 ex-battery hens. They were in a fenced plot of about an acre in the corner of my horses' field. There was a footpath that ran alongside this field - not in it, but the other side of the fence.
> 
> One day I had a phone call from a lady whose house overlooked the field, telling me there was a dog in with my chickens. I raced down there. By the time I got there the dog was gone, and all my chickens were either dead or dying. It was utter carnage. I was heartbroken.
> 
> If I had got there earlier, would I have done anything to stop that dog, including killing it if necessary, to stop it ripping my chickens apart? Yes, absolutely!


I liked this not because I thought it was amusing, on the contrary, been there with some ex battery hens we once had. Our own terrier got in with them and killed them, we found them dead and dying and crying in a barn, heartbreaking. The battery hens have had a hard enough life anyway, they are lucky enough to go to a good home and then this happens.

I like hens, always got something to argue with each other about.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

hells85 said:


> Im with the farmer for his actions on shooting the dogs but not for his actions after, the burying the dogs and not informing anyone is wrong.lying about it to the dog walker is also wrong. Surely they would have had collars on? I don't think my dogs would ever get into such an issue because they are only walked by me and my partner and are on lead where there are livestock, but if it somehow happened to us I would hope that the farmer would call us using the info on their tags, 1 so I can reimburse them for the costs of any animals killed and 2 so I can collect their remains and not be worried sick for weeks thinking they are lost. I would also be furious at the dog walker if I was the owner of those dogs.
> 
> Regarding the use of footpaths I don't see why there should be a problem, everyone needs to learn to respect each other more and share. If your on a footpath that goes through farmers land then stick to the path unless the farmer has put a diversion route round crops (a local farmer does this) and keep your dogs on a leash. Even if its not through farm land no one should be littering anyway, you brought it with you you can take it away, why anyone would climb over a gate instead of opening it I don't understand, but then I don't understand why you would have a family bbq right next to a public footpath and then get arsey with walkers using it. If its on your land surely you can have your BBQ away from the footpath if you want complete privacy, sorry if I got the wrong end of the stick on this one and it was stray walkers elsewhere on your land. Theres a footpath that goes through a field that sometimes has sheep in one of my dog walking, running, hiking areas that I would quite like to explore, I haven't yet because although there is an arrow and a sign stating it is part of a walk there is no clearly defined path and I don't want to end up randomly walking across someones property. I haven't seen anyone around to ask and to be honest I am a little worried about asking the farmer if I see them in case they respond in a hostile manner.


It was my family that had a path going right through our farm. The path had never been intended to be a path or public right of way. Our farm track ran between the wall of my house and the garden just on the other side. The walkers who wanted to walk through my field were actually trespassing but because the path had been used over several years and then some walking group gave it a name, we could only go to court over it.whats the point? Then, the walkers feel the need to say Hi....I don't want to speak to complete strangers anyway. The walkers have the rights...and nothing and nobody is going to stop them...I don't have to be happy about it.I ignored them if they spoke to me and became increasingly frustrated when not only could they not follow a map properly but they would even end up walking into my stable yard......way off track.

If they had walked where I couldn't see them and they didn;t affect my lifestyle, I wouldn't have been half as bothered.apart from when they climbed gates and left litter.

If I regularly came and parked my car outside your front door and read a book, caused you annoyance cos you couldn't park outside your own door, dropped crisp packets and chocolate wrappers on the floor there too, how would you like it?My car is taxed, insured and MOTd....not doing anything illegal...I can take my car on any public road and as long as no parking restrictions, can park.would I do that and annoy somebody simply because I have a right to park there?

You are right, with a bit of forward planning and a bit of consideration, everybody could be happy. I think a lot of farmers would be a lot happier if walkers had their own insurance and weren't so claim happy should they fall down a rabbit hole.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

and as for sticking a diversion sign..... one winter we had had lots of very heavy rain. Our front fields were waterlogged and a group of approx 30 walkers were coming down the lane..another place they had no right to be, never ever any paths on the lane cos we built the lane several years ago from grassland.

They stood looking at the waterlogged field. I went out, told them the land was so wet that even we were not using it but if they walked up a farm track...my property that we built and def no rights of way....they would end up 200 yards further on from where they would have ended up. They thanked me for helping them and then reported me to the council for stopping them on their legal walk....

I got a snotty letter from the council threatening me with legal action for doing this....next time the walkers came down they have a sick grin on their faces and want to pass the time of day?


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Moobli said:


> How do people feel about a dog being ordered to be destroyed AFTER an incident has happened?
> 
> There have been sheep worrying incidents regularly reported over the past few months and I have seen many comments from angry farmers and their supporters to say that once a dog has been found to have worried livestock then it should be put down.
> 
> Personally I don't agree with that view at all. A farmer should have the right to protect his livestock whilst an attack is taking place and to prevent any more injury or death, but I don't think he, the police, or a court should have the right to order a dog to be put down once the incident is over (assuming the dog wasn't shot in the process of worrying!). There should however be stricter penalties for the owner - paying compensation for lost animals, and perhaps attending some sort of good dog ownership course to be taught just why it is important to keep your dog under control etc that they should have to pay for - a bit like the course offered to drivers who have broken the speed limit.


I think once a dog starts chasing sheep etc its very hard to stop.if its at all possible, don't really know.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Blitz said:


> I agree up to a point but even if he did not do enough to deter them not everyone is dog savvy and if he had chased them off what other mischief would they have got into.
> He was totally right to shoot them imo but totally wrong to bury them.


I agree with all of this.


----------



## Jazmine (Feb 1, 2009)

lilythepink said:


> and as for sticking a diversion sign..... one winter we had had lots of very heavy rain. Our front fields were waterlogged and a group of approx 30 walkers were coming down the lane..another place they had no right to be, never ever any paths on the lane cos we built the lane several years ago from grassland.
> 
> They stood looking at the waterlogged field. I went out, told them the land was so wet that even we were not using it but if they walked up a farm track...my property that we built and def no rights of way....they would end up 200 yards further on from where they would have ended up. They thanked me for helping them and then reported me to the council for stopping them on their legal walk....
> 
> I got a snotty letter from the council threatening me with legal action for doing this....next time the walkers came down they have a sick grin on their faces and want to pass the time of day?


I can completely understand your frustration, it is not nice for walkers to abuse rights of way and litter etc.

However, I have been on the other side of this. More than once I have been following a right of way through a farm, only for the signs to go completely cold. On a couple of occasions not even my map could help me as the land I was trying to cross was so overgrown you couldn't follow it.

On one occasion I inadvertently ended up right amongst the farm buildings. There, Scout and I were set upon by a very aggressive Labrador, who was being backed up by a Jack Russell. Luckily the JR was all mouth and wouldn't come near us. The lab however, came flying at Scout teeth first. Scout being Scout dived straight behind my legs and I'm afraid I used my feet and booted the lab several times to get him to leave my pup alone.

I felt very frustrated by this event. I had no desire to be anywhere near the farm itself, but thanks to the farmer not maintaining his rights of way, and the signposts, I ended up in a dangerous situation. I am sure if the farmer had come out he would have taken exception to me kicking his dog but really, what choice did I have?

I have also heard of instances where farmers deliberately put aggressive livestock in their fields with rights of way going through, purely to deter walkers. How true this is, I don't know.

We do our very best to respect rights of way when out walking, but very often it is abundantly clear that the landowner does not want us there and is doing everything possible to make the walkers lives difficult.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

rona said:


> I believe they can when the pheasant are in a pen, but not once out and about
> 
> However the law isn't clear when it comes to the landowner. If it's destroying his livelihood.................


I believe the above to be correct - ie game birds are livestock when they are kept in a pen but are not when they have been released.

However, I certainly wouldn't put it past the odd gamekeeper or ten to shoot a dog that was chasing pheasants/partridge/grouse :frown2:


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

lilythepink said:


> I liked this not because I thought it was amusing, on the contrary, been there with some ex battery hens we once had. Our own terrier got in with them and killed them, we found them dead and dying and crying in a barn, heartbreaking. The battery hens have had a hard enough life anyway, they are lucky enough to go to a good home and then this happens.
> 
> I like hens, always got something to argue with each other about.


One of our sheepdogs got out of her kennel once when we were out and killed a number of my free range hens. They were such friendly, sociable girls too - and I was pretty upset. However, I wouldn't have shot her for doing so - or a stranger's dog either for that matter, but then I don't keep hens for a living, more a hobby.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

lilythepink said:


> I think once a dog starts chasing sheep etc its very hard to stop.if its at all possible, don't really know.


Once a prey driven dog has experienced the thrill of the chase - especially if they do manage to catch and bite a sheep (or worse) then it can be a long, hard road to train the dog that chasing is completely unacceptable. There are dog trainers who specialise in such cases, and they range from re-training using an electric collar through to working with the dog's prey drive but redirecting it onto a more suitable "prey".


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Jazmine said:


> I can completely understand your frustration, it is not nice for walkers to abuse rights of way and litter etc.
> 
> However, I have been on the other side of this. More than once I have been following a right of way through a farm, only for the signs to go completely cold. On a couple of occasions not even my map could help me as the land I was trying to cross was so overgrown you couldn't follow it.
> 
> ...


It's actually the duty of the local authority to provide signposting for rights of way not the landowner's. So it's them you need to contact in cases where the route is unclear because of a lacking of signage.

Natural England - Duties of local authorities


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Moobli said:


> I believe the above to be correct - ie game birds are livestock when they are kept in a pen but are not when they have been released.
> 
> However, I certainly wouldn't put it past the odd gamekeeper or ten to shoot a dog that was chasing pheasants/partridge/grouse :frown2:


Never heard of one doing so around here. Cats however


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

As a keen walker myself, as well as living on a hill farm, I can see both sides to the story.

I have had the odd unpleasant incident when losing my way on a particular footpath and have inadvertently ended closer to farm buildings than I intended and have had some grumpy farmer telling me I shouldn't be there, even when I was polite, friendly and had my dog on a lead and under control. I have also been on footpaths that do go through farmyards and had the odd hairy incident with an aggressive farm dog that was loose.

Then you get the gamekeepers who feel no-one should be walking on their "patch" and aggressively try to dissuade people - especially dog walkers from exercising their rights.

We have the right to roam in Scotland and there are also marked footpaths over the hills where I live, one of which goes near my cottage/garden. We sometimes get walkers who have lost their way and who come walking around the yard looking for the right way to go. I am always friendly and point them in the right direction. You do also get the jobsworth type walkers who "know their rights" and want to walk wherever and whenever they wish, with dogs off lead, running riot. Many of our sheep graze freely on the hills and so while it might appear there are no sheep, there in fact are (just out of sight) and we have had to tell a few people with dogs that are roaming up and down the hill away from their owners that they may soon come upon sheep. By far the most annoying though are the people in 4x4s and on motorbikes and we have even had some racing quads coming down the hill track behind our house and past the cottage - often driving too fast and with absolutely no right to be there.

There has to be give and take in life, and I think this very much applies to the countryside. The people who work the land need to appreciate that everyone wants to enjoy the countryside and should leave the responsible walkers unmolested. Walkers, ramblers, mountain bikers and others who use the countryside for recreational purposes need to understand that the countryside is not only there for pleasure but is also a work place and be respectful of that.


----------



## Hopeattheendofthetunnel (Jun 26, 2013)

lilythepink said:


> I liked this not because I thought it was amusing, on the contrary, been there with some ex battery hens we once had. Our own terrier got in with them and killed them, we found them dead and dying and crying in a barn, heartbreaking.


And since you, throughout, were very much in support of the Spaniel killing farmer...one must presume you immediatly shot your own terrier in the head thereby dispatching of him promptly as a result if his crime.

That is the only morally viable conclusion since anything else would indicate a staggering double-standard


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

rona said:


> Never heard of one doing so around here. Cats however


No, you wouldn't hear about it ....

However, here are some cases that I found from a quick google

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...y-gamekeeper-cleared-of-shooting-pet-dog.html

https://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518113

http://www.animalaiduk.com/h/n/NEWS/news_shooting/ALL/2225//

http://news.stv.tv/tayside/281453-f...ved-collie-shot-and-stuffed-down-rabbit-hole/

http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/lo...-to-shoot-pet-dog-for-worrying-cattle-1.33605


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Moobli said:


> No, you wouldn't hear about it ....


Most of those are up North and were cleared of any wrong doing. I think us down South must be a bit softer


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Jenna500 said:


> Ditto. If my dogs ran off and were shot by a farmer for worrying livestock I would be devastated - but I would blame MYSELF for letting my dogs be out of control.


Exactly this, and we had a lucky escape a while back. Bear disappeared and we found him in the sheep field, chasing, being chased by the farmer in his 4x4. He'd gone over a four foot stock fence, never encountered sheep before so we had no idea he was a chaser.  The farmer drove up to us and went crazy, which we totally accepted because we were in the wrong.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Moobli said:


> One of our sheepdogs got out of her kennel once when we were out and killed a number of my free range hens. They were such friendly, sociable girls too - and I was pretty upset. However, I wouldn't have shot her for doing so - or a stranger's dog either for that matter, but then I don't keep hens for a living, more a hobby.


Our terrier was a great little ratter but never touched anything else then one day she managed to get out of her kennel and into a barn and killed them. I didn't have her shot 
but gave her to my friend who lived in the middle of a city but went camping a lot. Dog lived to a ripe old age and never got chance to kill anything else.


----------



## lymorelynn (Oct 4, 2008)

Closing for a read through


----------



## lymorelynn (Oct 4, 2008)

An emotive subject which has been debated in a level headed fashion apart for a couple of comments. Could I ask that you remain civil and not resort to throwing insulting remarks at others who don't happen to agree with your point of view please.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Jazmine said:


> I can completely understand your frustration, it is not nice for walkers to abuse rights of way and litter etc.
> 
> However, I have been on the other side of this. More than once I have been following a right of way through a farm, only for the signs to go completely cold. On a couple of occasions not even my map could help me as the land I was trying to cross was so overgrown you couldn't follow it.
> 
> ...


Every one can have bad days and there is nothing more pleasant than going for a walk through peaceful country areas, sadly, too many people just think about themselves and don't give tuppence about anything and everything else.

I would not have anything aggressive in my fields but 1 of my horses hates dogs with a passion. I can choose to keep her where there is no public right of way but there will always be 1 person who goes into that field just because. Should my mare attack a person in trying to attack a dog, I am liable...even if the walker is trespassing.

We had a style in a field that we did maintain. There was 1 man who had 2 dogs, collie and a staffy. He used to walk his dogs every day in that field and use the style. The collie was very aggressive towards people and once ran at my daughter who was then about 10.As his dogs got older, the staffy got too fat to jump over the style so he cut the fencing so his dog could walk freely on my land. We had sheep in that field and lambs went through where the fence had been cut. You can't just repair a small piece of fencing, you have to take down more on either side of the break.

We had other times when fencing was damaged cos people couldn't be bothered to walk to the style.

Also had problems with people wanting to feed polo mints to my horses. Thats so dangerous, makes the horses nippy when they see people in the field cos they think they will get fed and can also cause fights between horses where the people are going to get injured.

Worst thing I ever came across was someone walking through my field with horses in and they were carrying a bucket. This caused a massive free for all. I asked what was going on.and was told they wanted to feed the horses and my old mare was nasty and I should get rid of her.

I don't make walkers lives difficult but sometimes they came far too close to buildings and houses and then want to pass the time of day.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

lymorelynn said:


> An emotive subject which has been debated in a level headed fashion apart for a couple of comments. Could I ask that you remain civil and not resort to throwing insulting remarks at others who don't happen to agree with your point of view please.


Oh my I wish this could be the case forum wide


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

rona said:


> Oh my I wish this could be the case forum wide


Yes, so do I. When people start attacking other people it spoils the debate - and it shows they have no answer. I thought I'd seen every kind of attack on this forum from people who didn't agree with somone's point of view - but getting partners to red rep people who have a different point of view from yourself is an entirely new one on me.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Spellweaver said:


> Yes, so do I. When people start attacking other people it spoils the debate - and it shows they have no answer. I thought I'd seen every kind of attack on this forum from people who didn't agree with somone's point of view - but getting partners to red rep people who have a different point of view from yourself is an entirely new one on me.


and me.

......


----------



## Guest (May 2, 2014)

Curious if there are any updates on the initial story?

I googled news stories and found this one. 
Coronation Sue Johnston shot dog: Farmer says he shot dog belonging to soap star to protect his chickens - Manchester Evening News
Different age of the farmer, no mention of burying the dogs or denying having seen them, and has the farmer saying he didnt know what else to do.

Call me a cynic, but I dont think we can rely on the media to inform us of what really happened.

All I do know is that the dogs were not under the supervision of the owner or dog walker when they were shot.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> and me.
> 
> ......


Seems like there's a lot of it about!


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

ouesi said:


> Curious if there are any updates on the initial story?
> 
> I googled news stories and found this one.
> Coronation Sue Johnston shot dog: Farmer says he shot dog belonging to soap star to protect his chickens - Manchester Evening News
> ...


This is the trouble with the media - and especially with sensationalist-seeking rags like the Daily Wail. I think it would be safest to assume that the truth is somewhere in the middle - but one thing is for sure, if the dogs had been on leads they would still be alive today.


----------



## Guest (May 2, 2014)

Spellweaver said:


> This is the trouble with the media - and especially with sensationalist-seeking rags like the Daily Wail. I think it would be safest to assume that the truth is somewhere in the middle - but one thing is for sure, *if the dogs had been on leads they would still be alive today*.


On leads or under verbal control, yes. Thats the bottom line isnt it?

Many moons ago we had 2 dogs shot. I had gotten in the habit of working the horses in a fallow field a bit away from the barn because there was more shade there than in the riding paddock. The dogs would come out to the field with me, see that I was working the horse and not going on a trail ride, and head back to the cool of the barn and wait for me there. They would take the shortcut through the woods.

As to what happened next, my best guess is that on this trip back to the barn they surprised a turkey hunter who was either deliberately trespassing or who had veered far on to our property by accident. He claimed the dogs threatened him, and he shot them. He killed one, the other survived.

The dogs were on our property, they were doing what theyre supposed to do - bark and alert. This man was totally in the wrong, illegally on our property (hunting no less) but since I was not there to witness any of it, there was not a thing we could do about it.

This is what I mean when I say that if you allow your dogs out of your sight or hearing, you forfeit having control over what happens to them.

Its not about whether the farmer in the OP was right or wrong to shoot the dogs, its that if you dont want your dogs shot, do your darnedest to keep them out of any situation where that may happen.


----------



## canuckjill (Jun 25, 2008)

Moobli said:


> The Farmers Guardian newspaper are currently running a high profile campaign to try and educate dog owners about the importance of keeping their dogs on a lead or under control around livestock, especially sheep at this time of year when many hill sheep are in lamb.
> 
> The newspapers told a couple of days ago how the actress, Sue Johnson's, spaniel was shot (along with a second spaniel) for worrying and killing hens.
> 
> ...


I live in cattle country and if your pet is on their property chasing , worrying, attacking their livestock then they have the law on their side. I totally understand this...Just last week two dogs attacked and broke the jaw of a donkey, the donkey's job is an important one when you have sheep. The farmers weren't home at the time thankfully the cop called in a vet for the donkey and the owners of the dogs were charged. What happens with the dogs will depend on several factors including aggressive history. It was awful to witness the aftermath glad I wasn't around during..


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Spellweaver said:


> This is the trouble with the media - and especially with sensationalist-seeking rags like the Daily Wail. I think it would be safest to assume that the truth is somewhere in the middle - *but one thing is for sure, if the dogs had been on leads they would still be alive today*.


I have no idea if it is a rural myth but years ago there was supposedly a dog being walked on a flexi lead. The owner and dog were walking along a path behind a barn and the dog appeared first, by the time the owner appeared the dog was shot dead.


----------



## Guest (May 3, 2014)

canuckjill said:


> I live in cattle country and if your pet is on their property chasing , worrying, attacking their livestock then they have the law on their side. I totally understand this...Just last week two dogs attacked and broke the jaw of a donkey, the donkey's job is an important one when you have sheep. The farmers weren't home at the time thankfully the cop called in a vet for the donkey and the owners of the dogs were charged. What happens with the dogs will depend on several factors including aggressive history. It was awful to witness the aftermath glad I wasn't around during..


I dont like the content of your post, just agreeing with you that the law protects the farmers, and the damage one or two dogs can do is not to be underestimated, and farmers know this.

In the story in the OP I think its easy for someone to say come on, whats one chicken? Is one injured chicken really worth shooting two dogs dead? But for all we know that farmer has dealt with a lot of nasty dog damage over the years.

As horrible as it is to come home to a dead dog, imagine coming home to a yard full of dead chickens, to a dead foal and torn up mare, to a field full of dead, torn up sheep....


----------



## Dober (Jan 2, 2012)

One of my dogs once got out of his harness and chased sheep a long time ago. Lucky for him/me it was very early in the morning and there was nobody around to see, and I managed to get him back very quickly with very little stress to the sheep. If the circumstances had been different and god forbid he had been shot or hurt a sheep, I would have been absolutely devastated, but would be angry and upset with myself, not the farmer.

I have one dog now who I would only walk near sheep on a dead-linked chain if absolutely necessary, because I would not risk him slipping a harness or a collar breaking. 

Whether the dog killed 1 chicken or 30 sheep is irrelevant in my opinion, it is his property, his livelihood and he is within his rights to do what he wants/needs to do. Very sad for everyone concerned, IMO. Very easy to say 'it was the stupid dog walkers fault' but everyone makes mistakes at one point or another, and she has to live with that and i'm sure it will have an affect on her business.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

lilythepink said:


> I think once a dog starts chasing sheep etc its very hard to stop.if its at all possible, don't really know.


No, it's not easy to stop as in train it out (if that's even possible) but it's not that hard to manage using a leash or long line. Rupert found himself in the shelter for sheep worrying. I owned him 8 years and never once had an incident with sheep, horses, chickens or any other livestock. Or deer for that matter. I'd have hated to have to have him put to sleep because of his history. But it all depends on the dog having a responsible owner I suppose. I know a hell of a lot of people who seem to think it fine for their dogs to chase horses, I imagine the same goes for other livestock too.


----------



## Cay (Jun 22, 2009)

When I was looking at Cocker puppies on Pets4homes I saw a picture on a commercial breeder's website of her holding a working Cocker and I thought what idiot would sell a working Cocker puppy to someone who works so much .


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

Blitz said:


> I have no idea if it is a rural myth but years ago there was supposedly a dog being walked on a flexi lead. The owner and dog were walking along a path behind a barn and the dog appeared first, by the time the owner appeared the dog was shot dead.


It sounds highly unlikely to me.


----------



## Jazmine (Feb 1, 2009)

moonviolet said:


> It's actually the duty of the local authority to provide signposting for rights of way not the landowner's. So it's them you need to contact in cases where the route is unclear because of a lacking of signage.
> 
> Natural England - Duties of local authorities


I think that may vary locally, when I have contacted our local authority about rights of way previously I have been told that it is up to the landowner to make sure they don't get obscured or overgrown.

My point is, surely if as a land owner you want people to stick to the rights of way, it's in your interests to make it as clear as possible to avoid straying.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Jazmine said:


> I think that may vary locally, when I have contacted our local authority about rights of way previously I have been told that it is up to the landowner to make sure they don't get obscured or overgrown.
> 
> My point is, surely if as a land owner you want people to stick to the rights of way, it's in your interests to make it as clear as possible to avoid straying.


That would be a logical way of thinking though....maybe the landowners where you walk just don't want anybody there so do make it hard and then moan at you straying from the correct path?

I was told it was down to the local authority too. Styles were meant to be maintained by the landowner and they got paid a small fee for doing this.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Moobli said:


> Except in cases where they shoot dogs that are actually not worrying stock? Also, in the case mentioned by Burrowzig, I don't sympathise completely with that farmer. His actions were abhorrent.


everybody knows which farmers are reasonable and which are trigger happy and thats not just in the farming community.


----------



## M00nspaniel (Mar 23, 2014)

Cay said:


> When I was looking at Cocker puppies on Pets4homes I saw a picture on commercial breeder's website of her holding a working Cocker and I thought what idiot would sell a working Cocker puppy to someone who works so much .


Erm maybe she lives with someone else who co owns the dog or has friend and family nearby who would help. Its an awfully big assumption that the breeder was an idiot.


----------



## Jazmine (Feb 1, 2009)

lilythepink said:


> That would be a logical way of thinking though....maybe the landowners where you walk just don't want anybody there so do make it hard and then moan at you straying from the correct path?
> 
> I was told it was down to the local authority too. Styles were meant to be maintained by the landowner and they got paid a small fee for doing this.


I know my local walks quite well now so I'm quite good at staying out of the way where I know the farmer is irritable!

We do have some lovely, helpful farmers here too, so it all balances out. I guess we'll never make everyone happy. In an ideal world landowners and walkers alike would all be a bit more thoughtful and tolerant but that's not the world we live in unfortunately.


----------



## Cay (Jun 22, 2009)

M00nspaniel said:


> Erm maybe she lives with someone else who co owns the dog or has friend and family nearby who would help. Its an awfully big assumption that the breeder was an idiot.


They were selling various breeds and crossbreeds with no mention of health tests so they are not coming across as reputable.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Jazmine said:


> I think that may vary locally, when I have contacted our local authority about rights of way previously I have been told that it is up to the landowner to make sure they don't get obscured or overgrown.
> 
> My point is, surely if as a land owner you want people to stick to the rights of way, it's in your interests to make it as clear as possible to avoid straying.


If there weren't sufficient physical signs that is a local authority issue. If the signs were present but obscured that is the landowners responsibility. I'm pretty sure is the case England wide.

As for straying indeed, many farmers have applied for planning permission to fence footpaths only to have their applications denied on the grounds it would " ruin the countryside experience".


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

moonviolet said:


> If there weren't sufficient physical signs that is a local authority issue. If the signs were present but obscured that is the landowners responsibility. I'm pretty sure is the case England wide.
> 
> As for straying indeed, many farmers have applied for planning permission to fence footpaths only to have their applications denied on the grounds it would " ruin the countryside experience".


What! A farmer does not need planning permission to put fencing in their fields.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Blitz said:


> What! A farmer does not need planning permission to put fencing in their fields.


 My understanding was there would have been a very small movement of the footpath but this was the reason given for the permission being denied.


----------



## Jazmine (Feb 1, 2009)

moonviolet said:


> If there weren't sufficient physical signs that is a local authority issue. If the signs were present but obscured that is the landowners responsibility. I'm pretty sure is the case England wide.
> 
> As for straying indeed, many farmers have applied for planning permission to fence footpaths only to have their applications denied on the grounds it would " ruin the countryside experience".


The incident that I originally mentioned, the problem was not a lack of signposts themselves, but the fact that right the way across the farm they had been obscured. The first field where I missed the turn off the track was completely overgrown with brambles. Further on, a signpost and style were blocked off by a huge pile of rusty farm equipment. After the Labrador incident I gave up looking for the others and used the nearest gate to get onto the road.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Jazmine said:


> The incident that I originally mentioned, the problem was not a lack of signposts themselves, but the fact that right the way across the farm they had been obscured. The first field where I missed the turn off the track was completely overgrown with brambles. Further on, a signpost and style were blocked off by a huge pile of rusty farm equipment. After the Labrador incident I gave up looking for the others and used the nearest gate to get onto the road.


well then absolutely it was the landowners responsibility.It's often not intentional , I know my grandfather would never cut a hedge until the birds had finished breeding and would probably have parked old equipment where it was convenient with the intention of coming back to fix it when he had time and not even realised he had obscured the sign. Sometimes we need fresh eyes to point these things out, I'm not saying some landowners dont' do these things with intent but more probably by accident.

With the increase in leisure time and people travelling to unfamiliar areas we absolutely do need to ensure the rights of way are properly signposted and maintained maybe we need to find a less piecemeal approach, things like canals seem to manage to get plenty of funding and help from volunteers.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

moonviolet said:


> My understanding was there would have been a very small movement of the footpath but this was the reason given for the permission being denied.


A footpath cant be moved but I can assure you farmers can put fences wherever they like unless they are blocking a footpath.

There is a lovely track near us that we drive the ponies across and a few people walk dogs on. It links up with other walks. It was developed on a scheme so the farmer does get paid for it but he makes no effort to keep it easily accessible. A midden drains on to one part of it and there often sheep on the track and gates that are almost impossible to open. We are still grateful for it though!

Another track which is an old right of way is blocked with cattle grids so that horses cannot get across. It has historically been used for moving cattle from one side of the village to the other so that has stopped that use. The bloke also threatens walkers who walk by. The police have been involved and the council have written to him. He will not play ball and the council will not waste money going to court so a lovely walk or ride/drive is ruined. One person has even been attacked by their dog when riding by and quite badly injured but the police were not interested.


----------

