Less Lethal Ammo being advertised for dogs.

cosieman

https://open-season-guns.myshopify.com/collections/ammunition-shotgun-ammo-1/products/trust-protection-12-gauge-7gr-less-lethal-rubber-0-buck-shotgun-cartridges?variant=32658534695009

Is this a good option for a farmer who wants to scare away dogs and foxes away from their live stock but does not want to kill the animal.

gctest50

What's the point in doing that though ?

They'll just come back or go to someone elses farm

useurowname

Yes, the projectile(s) is rubber, not lead. Could still do some serious damage and mortally injure the animal causing a longer slower death perhaps.
I would check thoroughly the bore and choke of your gun, and when you find it’s appropriate test the ammo for affect(range, accuracy, impact) before you use it on an animal.

gctest50

You could get a guardian dog - kangals etc will shred most stray dogs

Cass

The single "ball" is restricted ammunition, wonder if the shop knows this? They can only sell it to someone with a restricted license.

Its technically and legally a slug which under Irish law is defined as:

“slug ammunition” means ammunition containing a single projectile.

And as such its restricted as per SI21/2008

5. The following ammunition is declared to be restricted ammunition for the purposes of the Act:

(b) slug ammunition for shotguns;

As for the other round well i'd wonder at the effectiveness of such ammunition. Has it proven to be non lethal rather than less lethal? If not then its also breaking the law. Dogs worrying sheep can be shot to protect lviestock but only under strict circumstances and in some situations not unless other actions have been taken first. Then there is the animal cruelty laws which i'd imagine this stuff falls into.

Frankly this is a can of worms and nothing to do with hunting that i can see.

Car99

gctest50 wrote: »

You could get a guardian dog - kangals etc will shred most stray dogs

What would be the legality of leaving this dog free to roam with the flock with no muzzle and no effective fence to keep him in?

Vizzy

Car99 wrote: »

What would be the legality of leaving this dog free to roam with the flock with no muzzle and no effective fence to keep him in?

As long as it is licenced and didn't stray from its own "land" it would be perfectly legal. Doesn't need to be muzzled in public.
If it strayed, then it would be a stray dog, exactly the same as any other stray

Birdnuts

Car99 wrote: »

What would be the legality of leaving this dog free to roam with the flock with no muzzle and no effective fence to keep him in?

Those breeds are programmed to protect stock and follow their own herd so I don't think that would be an issue. I visited an area in Turkey a couple of years ago were farmers use them for protecting flocks from wolves etc., very impressive to watch them do their work.

Mellor

gctest50 wrote: »

What's the point in doing that though ?

They'll just come back or go to someone elses farm

Hit a feral dog or fox with rubber bullets 3 times and he becomes a vegetarian.

Cass wrote: »

The single "ball" is restricted ammunition, wonder if the shop knows this? They can only sell it to someone with a restricted license.

This. Plain and simple. It's restricted ammo. Would not touch it with a barge pole.

As for the other round well i'd wonder at the effectiveness of such ammunition. Has it proven to be non lethal rather than less lethal? If not then its also breaking the law. Dogs worrying sheep can be shot to protect lviestock but only under strict circumstances and in some situations not unless other actions have been taken first. Then there is the animal cruelty laws which i'd imagine this stuff falls into.

I think all the non-lethal stuff is technically less lethal, and in the spot, at the right range virtual any thing can kill.

Even if non-lethal, I think it falls into the cruelty bracket.
Which could be an issue even on pest species like foxes.

whisky_galore

Dogs can't read adverts.

Feisar

I would think the shop pulled the sales blurb from the manufacturers website.

Grizzly 45

You are going to run into a whole bunch of issues with this less leathl ammo.
Cruelty legal issues,that ammo will knock a human on their ass if hit with it, so consider what kinetic force is behind that and what that will do to an animal. It can cause internal bleeding so it can kill days later.If this store can get the rubber ball ammo, it can surely get the rubber buckshot? which might be a better option?

2] Running dogs like Kangals etc with your flock and having a public right of way near or on your land wouldn't be advisable either. If one of those dogs,as you need a pair minimum, decides your family or kids out for a walk are a threat...

Also,they are usually kept in very harsh conditions in those countries which are predominately Muslim,who consider dogs unclean animals,and treat and keep them in conditions that would land you in court here on animal cruelty charges. So they are alot more aggressive than their Western counterparts.

tonysopprano

Very coincidental, the timing of this thread. https://www.thejournal.ie/dog-shot-by-gardai-during-search-of-house-5354652-Feb2021/

meathstevie

I wouldn’t be a great fan of those “less lethal” options.

As Grizzly said, at their effective range it’ll put a 200lbs human in a world of pain to the point of temporary incapacitation or worse. That’s when they’re used correctly and not aimed at vital core areas or head when they can be just as lethal as a regular bullet, slug or buckshot.

It’s not a big stretch of the imagination to see that the effects on a 40lbs canine will be slightly more profound.

If the behaviour of a dog around livestock in the honestly held belief of the livestock owner necessitates shooting it to stop serious loss or damage than shoot it with proper ammo and be prepared to justify your actions. If you can’t justify shooting it with normal ammunition you had no justification for shooting at it in the first place.