Do you know where your DOG is? [WARNING: CONTAINS GRAPHIC IMAGES]

_Brian · 12-11-2014 05:55PM

DBB wrote: »

I knew you'd pick me up wrong on this point.
There is a huge difference, behaviourally and psychologically, between a dog that kills sheep, and a dog who chases them without attempting to kill them.
I know the story with abortions and damage after the fact, that's not the point I'm trying to make. The point I'm trying to make is that dogs who only chase sheep are a far safer and more rehomable prospect, to the right home, than one who kills.
And just to get things straight, if a farmer catches a dog chasing his sheep, no matter what the dog's behavioural motivation is, of course the farmer has to do what he has to do to protect his stock. What I'm talking about, and it keeps coming up here, are dogs who leave the scene and the owners are approached later, after the fact. In any case, at this point, it is illegal for a farmer to attempt to kill the dog. But the owners are often presented with an ultimatum... get rid of the dog or the farmer will take it further. It's these owners who might approach someone like me to take their dog from them to rehome them. then my rules kick in, as per above.

But where is the deterrent to the dog owner not to get another dog and let it loose too.. Where is the message to the wider dog owning community..

I'm sorry but I'm seeing an ongoing downward spiral in responsible dog ownership, between allowing them run wild in public, to serious dog fouling problems to chasing sheep. On this one issue I see only one real life solution. Personally I'd probably apply the same solution over the previous two problems I mentioned.

kowtow · 12-11-2014 05:56PM

Genghis Cant wrote: »

If he didn't save even one of his own stock, he surely saved his neighbours. If he had the misfortune to miss the dog, that dog would surely kill more unfortunate livestock.

The farmer done what was morally, ethically and legally correct. That was the easy part. Now he has to pick up the pieces.

It is not the farmers right, or role, to kill dogs in order to prevent future damage to his own or to neighbours stock. He has only a defence against shooting a dog in the act of worrying his own livestock, and that is exactly as it should be and what appears to have happened here.

To suggest otherwise is to suggest that it is acceptable for every local neighbourhood busybody to impound every - in their opinion - dangerous tractor, trailer or piece of machinery on the public road in order to prevent future accidents or to seize every wondering calf or bullock which has broken a fence and destroy it - to prevent it escaping in the future and causing damage to a neighbour. Where appropriate that is a job for the authorities, and that is why the law rests as it does.

The dog in the photo was wearing a distinctive collar. I assume his owner can be traced, the correct action for the farmer concerned - for whom I have complete sympathy - is having shot the dog in the act, to sue the owner comprehensively for damages, including future abortion e.t.c. and to seek maximum publicity when he does so.

This shouldn't be about sending messages or teaching lessons.

DBB · 12-11-2014 05:58PM

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

I don't see rehoming as a good option either. In theory it would work but in practice it wont.

- The dog will most likely be sold to the new owner with no information offered as regards his killing of animals - a regular occurrence.

- He will be brought to the country for walks.

- He will be bred with all of his offspring picking up his habits. Most likely sold to country areas.

Pets aren't supposed to chase livestock. The ones that do should never be bred from and never get near animals it can chase (it isn't just farm animals they can attack, cats are another target and there are plenty of them in urban areas too). Realistically, it is practically impossible to guarantee all these things over the course of the dogs lifetime. for the good of it's breed It should be put down. People need to lose this attitude of not looking beyond trying to find ways to keep a dog alive.

As per my previous post.
If the dog is handed to a good rescue, and there are plenty of us about:
1. He will not be sold. And the owners are most certainly told. Not to do so makes the rescue liable.
2. He may, but responsible owners to whom rescues take enormous trouble to vet properly, will make sure the dog is kept on-lead.
3. No rescue should rehome a dog unless it's neutered. End of.

Again, I state, that whilst some dogs are a true liability in that they will kill stock, dogs that do not kill stock are being seriously unfairly tarnished by them. Dogs that only chase, or don't chase at all, are so entirely differently wired than dogs who kill, and in many cases simply don't deserve to die. Take them out of the environment, but don't kill them.
I can assure you, really seriously assure you that when you do it right, it works just fine in theory and in practise.

OldNotWIse · 12-11-2014 05:58PM

DBB wrote: »

I knew you'd pick me up wrong on this point.
There is a huge difference, behaviourally and psychologically, between a dog that kills sheep, and a dog who chases them without attempting to kill them.
I know the story with abortions and damage after the fact, that's not the point I'm trying to make. The point I'm trying to make is that dogs who only chase sheep are a far safer and more rehomable prospect, to the right home, than one who kills.
And just to get things straight, if a farmer catches a dog chasing his sheep, no matter what the dog's behavioural motivation is, of course the farmer has to do what he has to do to protect his stock. What I'm talking about, and it keeps coming up here, are dogs who leave the scene and the owners are approached later, after the fact. In any case, at this point, it is illegal for a farmer to attempt to kill the dog. But the owners are often presented with an ultimatum... get rid of the dog or the farmer will take it further. It's these owners who might approach someone like me to take their dog from them to rehome them. then my rules kick in, as per above.

I pity the fool who approaches me with that ultimatum.

DBB · 12-11-2014 06:05PM

_Brian wrote: »

But where is the deterrent to the dog owner not to get another dog and let it loose too.. Where is the message to the wider dog owning community..

I'm sorry but I'm seeing an ongoing downward spiral in responsible dog ownership, between allowing them run wild in public, to serious dog fouling problems to chasing sheep. On this one issue I see only one real life solution. Personally I'd probably apply the same solution over the previous two problems I mentioned.

Killing the dog is not necessarily a deterrent in terms of people getting another dog either. If people are going to take steps to make sure it can't happen again with Dog No. 2 due to losing Dog No. 1, then what does it matter whether they lost Dog No. 1 to a bullet or to rehoming?
If someone is going to be an irresponsible owner, and believe me I see this day in day out, then they're going to be irresponsible no matter what happened their last dog. I see people going through dog after dog after dog, each one before going missing to the shotgun, traffic accidents, stolen, strayed, whatever. You can't stop gobsh!tes being gobsh!tes.
A lot of the problem would be solved overnight if the present laws we have, and new microchipping laws on the way, were properly enforced. But again, having spoken with sheep farmers and as I've read on this thread, in some cases the guards take no interest at all.

Genghis Cant · 12-11-2014 06:05PM

kowtow wrote: »

It is not the farmers right, or role, to kill dogs in order to prevent future damage to his own or to neighbours stock. He has only a defence against shooting a dog in the act of worrying his own livestock, and that is exactly as it should be and what appears to have happened here.

To suggest otherwise is to suggest that it is acceptable for every local neighbourhood busybody to impound every - in their opinion - dangerous tractor, trailer or piece of machinery on the public road in order to prevent future accidents or to seize every wondering calf or bullock which has broken a fence and destroy it - to prevent it escaping in the future and causing damage to a neighbour. Where appropriate that is a job for the authorities, and that is why the law rests as it does.

The dog in the photo was wearing a distinctive collar. I assume his owner can be traced, the correct action for the farmer concerned - for whom I have complete sympathy - is having shot the dog in the act, to sue the owner comprehensively for damages, including future abortion e.t.c. and to seek maximum publicity when he does so.

This shouldn't be about sending messages or teaching lessons.

Just to be clear. It's you that's suggesting otherwise, not me.
I'm merely making the point that this dog was a suspect in other killings, and would I'd suggest kill again had the farmer not rightly dispatched him.

_Brian · 12-11-2014 06:15PM

doubter wrote: »

It's alien to you that many people see their dogs as their kids?
That explains a few things.:rolleyes:

Your right.
Children are young humans.
Dogs are dogs, nice to have as a pet if your a responsible owner.

MayoAreMagic · 12-11-2014 06:15PM

DBB wrote: »

As per my previous post.
If the dog is handed to a good rescue, and there are plenty of us about:
1. He will not be sold. And the owners are most certainly told. Not to do so makes the rescue liable.
2. He may, but responsible owners to whom rescues take enormous trouble to vet properly, will make sure the dog is kept on-lead.
3. No rescue should rehome a dog unless it's neutered. End of.

That is all fine. But in practice, how many take the method of giving their dog to a rescue? What percentage of people don't just keep quiet, get their few pound for the animal and forget all about it? Don't get me wrong, I would much rather the above, Im no animal hater. But I have been around long enough to see how more often than not things actually go in such circumstances, rather than how I would like them to go.

Also, I would say that the militant approach that OldNotWise is expressing is part of the problem. What if the farmer is right and your dog is killing animals? So many times I have heard of guys being told that their dog was seen worrying animals only to be greeted with a similar view to the one you just expressed. And every time, the guy was proved wrong, at the cost of a few more animals in the process. This idea of going on the ultra defensive without actually knowing the facts - and lets face it, you don't - is all wrong. People seem to always jump to the conclusion that every farmer is out to kill their dog for no reason. It isn't logical.

Cran · 12-11-2014 06:22PM

Just to everyone here I can guarantee you shooting a dog is a deterant. Its well know what's the chances a neighbour of mine will do if dog found on his farm, no loose dogs on road or atleast very rarely

OldNotWIse · 12-11-2014 06:26PM

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

That is all fine. But in practice, how many take the method of giving their dog to a rescue? What percentage of people don't just keep quiet, get their few pound for the animal and forget all about it? Don't get me wrong, I would much rather the above, Im no animal hater. But I have been around long enough to see how more often than not things actually go in such circumstances, rather than how I would like them to go.

Also, I would say that the militant approach that OldNotWise is expressing is part of the problem. What if the farmer is right and your dog is killing animals? So many times I have heard of guys being told that their dog was seen worrying animals only to be greeted with a similar view to the one you just expressed. And every time, the guy was proved wrong, at the cost of a few more animals in the process. This idea of going on the ultra defensive without actually knowing the facts - and lets face it, you don't - is all wrong. People seem to always jump to the conclusion that every farmer is out to kill their dog for no reason. It isn't logical.

What are you on about? I know where my dog is all the time, she wouldn't have the chance to go off worrying or maiming sheep. Hence why I pity the fool who tries to blame her for something she hasn't done. Ironic that you'd refer to me as militant when I'm not the one with the gun.

Kovu · 12-11-2014 06:35PM

doubter wrote: »

What i'm saying is that farmers are known for coming to your door and stating your dog has been worrying my sheep and making threats. Thats whats wrong and by god don't ever try that with me cause you'd be running for yer life. (next to the fact that my dogs are in a secure environment (locked into the house) so they can't get out.
I am all for defending your lifestock in an actual attack. I will fight against accusations and demands of PTS/shooting in ANY other case.

That's quite a big tar brush you're hitting us all with!

What Con is showing us in this case is the brutal clean up that some unfortunate farmers have to deal with. If a farmer sees a dog worrying his livestock, he is going to react. He's not going to know if the dog was doing it for the first time or the fifteenth time.
Farmers care for their stock too, if they see animals being mauled, they will react and rightly so. I don't think anyone posting on this thread would like to walk out their front door this morning and see that savagely on their farm or a neighbours farm.

How would you any of you feel if your dogs got out and were attacked by a roaming dog, arriving back with half his face ripped off like that lamb? Would you change your views on how to deal with vicious dogs or would you be willing to give them another chance?

DBB · 12-11-2014 06:38PM

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

That is all fine. But in practice, how many take the method of giving their dog to a rescue? What percentage of people don't just keep quiet, get their few pound for the animal and forget all about it? Don't get me wrong, I would much rather the above, Im no animal hater. But I have been around long enough to see how more often than not things actually go in such circumstances, rather than how I would like them to go.

You are right of course, in practise there will be some who slip through the net. Even in other spheres of life, I get dogs in whose owners tell me they're marvellous with children (they hate them), love the car (they puke in it), get on with other dogs (they explode at the mere sight of them) and so on. You'll always get people who will lie, just to get themselves out of a hole, even if it means they land someone else right in it. And I do appreciate it's a very thin line, realistically.
In reality, in cases where the laws are actually enforced, where sheep are not killed and the owners have to get rid of the dog one way or t'other after the fact, the judge will often rule that the dog is delivered to X rescue group to be appropriately and responsibly rehomed, and the farmer fully and fairly compensated. To me, if this was a more widespread unfolding of events, it'd make for a more equitable resolution all round.

Cran wrote: »

Just to everyone here I can guarantee you shooting a dog is a deterant. Its well know what's the chances a neighbour of mine will do if dog found on his farm, no loose dogs on road or atleast very rarely

Yet I know quite a few case where it hasn't acted as a deterrent, particularly where the owner knows fine well the dog can't be traced back to them.

Connemara Farmer · 12-11-2014 06:47PM

doubter wrote: »

buy you any goodwill from people around you.

4 dog attacks resulting in multiple fatalities and additional maulings in each instance this year.

At least two I can think of last year.

They are only the ones I can remember or knew about, how many more?

Another case a number of years ago 80 ewes killed.

Goodwill?

deckycoop · 12-11-2014 07:07PM

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I pity the fool who approaches me with that ultimatum.

i pity your dog if you didnt have the cope on the take the ultimatum seriously..

as con said earlier the second shot was a warning shot.

Capercaille · 12-11-2014 07:14PM

I feel sorry for the livestock injured, the owner of the stock and the dead dog. The owner of the dog has sole responsibility.

valderrama1 · 12-11-2014 07:20PM

Have a dog myself OP... He's lovely and love him to bits, but I know that if I let him off leash he could well do something like this. Just his nature even though he has never bitten anyone or anything and has always been well treated (so not bad tempered).
It's not too much effort to make sure that they stay away from sheep though. That is just taking the piss... It's also against the law if it's a dangerous dog (looks like a rottweiler?)

The dog owner is responsible for this, they should be fined and at least see you good for the cost of the sheep and the cost of the worry to the other sheep.

nealcassidy · 12-11-2014 07:29PM

every dog out there bites. My sisters terriers all always nipping at other dogs in the park. but their bites are harmless.

The problem with staffies or rotties is not that they bite, its the power they pack into their bite. A staffies jaw is shaped differently from that of a alasatian for instance. They are able to get more power in their bite and hence do far more damage.

Its in the nature of all dogs to bite and the owners must take responsibility. By law staffies, rotties, dobermans etc are suppose to be muzzled and on a lead by someone over the age of 16

Farmer Pudsey · 12-11-2014 08:00PM

doubter wrote: »

gee.Thats probably because love is a stronger emotion than money

My mother had a saying when poverty comes in the door love goes out the window

doubter wrote: »

They are trespassing on my land. it's his duty to keep them on his. The road is about a mile down from my house.I just chase them on to the lane.Where they go from there is REALLY not my problem.

You are legally libel if you move animals and they access the public road.

doubter wrote: »

so...let me thin and bring something really silly up...say there's a couple of kids , like 14 years of age or so- chasing your sheep for fun...and you've seen them repeatedly..do you shoot them as well? Cause it will cause your ewes the same stress?

What a stupid comparrison.

ganmo · 12-11-2014 08:25PM

I'm going to address a few points raised
1. Rehome in an urban environment - I'm
A sheep farmer in dublin and I'd say that 98% of dubs have no idea that there are sheep in dublin. Now how are the new family ment to prevent further attacks if they don't know how close they are to potential victims.

2. The majority of attacks come from local dogs - due to our location we have had more attacks from walkers dogs, who have proven to be difficult to extract compo from due to the difficulty of identifying the owners.
We have managed to catch plenty of them that our dog warden took off our hands.

3. Those farmers that threaten that if the dog isn't controlled the dog will be shot would consider it more of a promise

Do the dog owners think it's fair that there are very few sheep flocks that haven't suffered from attacks? So much so that many sheep farmers wouldn't own a gun only for the danger of dog attacks.

ganmo · 12-11-2014 08:28PM

Oh and doubter, you haven't brought anythin to this thread other than complaining about a bad farmer neighbour boo hoo, we all have them

muddypaws · 12-11-2014 08:38PM

I own a dog that was caught worrying sheep, the story I was told, it was the second time, the farmer had him tied to the fence with the gun on him, and the owner begged him not to shoot him, she would get rid of him. He let her take the dog away, it was completely her fault, her fencing was way too low, she'd already had a dog escape and get run over.

He is a husky, a breed with a very high prey drive, that should never be exercised off lead in an unsecure area. He has been with me now for 4 years, he has never caused anymore problems with livestock, as he never gets the chance. I have 7 foot fencing around my property, and my dogs are always on leads when we go out. The dog in question is Crufts qualified as a show dog, and is a working dog, having competed here and abroad. He was only 9 months old when the incident occurred. She didn't sell him on to anybody, she contacted a local rescue, they contacted me, I collected him.

I would say that 99% of northern breeds would worry sheep if they got the chance, so does that mean that nobody in Ireland should ever own them? It is a real shame that there are so many of them, and unfortunately a lot of people own them that don't have a clue, and do let them roam, that's not the dogs' fault.

I completely agree with a farmer's right to protect his/her livestock, including shooting a dog if necessary, as much as I love dogs, sheep don't deserve to be ripped apart. The problem is irresponsible dog ownership, it doesn't matter what the breed involved is, the law states that dogs have to be under effective control, yet I have never once seen any of the dogs that are let wander around here be picked up by the Gards or the dog warden. Accidents happen unfortunately, gates break, fences get blown down, but if the laws about keeping dogs under control were enforced, then the incidents of livestock worrying would be much, much less. When I bought this house 7 years ago, there were no sheep in the area, it was all cattle, now, we are surrounded by sheep and it scares the life out of me. If they had been here when I bought, I would never have got this house.

onyerbikepat · 12-11-2014 08:43PM

Shoot, Shovel and Shut Up! :cool:

marklazarcovic · 12-11-2014 08:43PM

i recently spent over 2k on a 8ft high enclosure for my dog,covering a good sized area for her,she's a rottie akita mix,raised around cattle,not sheep. played with the cows who would play,and stayed away from the cows who didnt like her.. a good dog.

moved home,built enclosure .. new house in middle of sheep laden fields.

my dog has never as much as growled at another dog,despite smaller dogs goin for her in intimidation. is always on harness when out walking.

is in heat,neighbours dog wanders up to my house whilst im at work,a small male dog. i come home to find the enclosure breached, she seemingly forced it open at one point... its a serious fence,required serious effort.. effort i did not think could be made.

i come home from work..dog gone..go to neighbours,there dog missing too..panic

3 hours searching,hoping to see her in a field herding cattle..not chasing sheep for kicks.

eventually find her at the end of two fields away,with the male dog,no sheep in the fields they passed through thankfully.

i would have understood the farmers stance if he seen her chasing his sheep and shot her,at the same time i would like to think that if the farmer had seen the efforts i had made to ensure she could not roam and money i had spent then maybe the trigger might not be pulled..

after all,accidents happen ..its not always black and white,not always stupid owners of one dog..but in fact in this case my neighbours dog is allowed ramble coz its little..which as my bitch is in heat drove her mental to get out to him,causing her to break out.

id have understood as i said,but im not a irresponsible dog owner either,which i would have been tarred with had she chased sheep.

DBB · 12-11-2014 08:48PM

ganmo wrote: »

I'm going to address a few points raised
1. Rehome in an urban environment - I'm
A sheep farmer in dublin and I'd say that 98% of dubs have no idea that there are sheep in dublin. Now how are the new family ment to prevent further attacks if they don't know how close they are to potential victims.

2. The majority of attacks come from local dogs - due to our location we have had more attacks from walkers dogs, who have proven to be difficult to extract compo from due to the difficulty of identifying the owners.
We have managed to catch plenty of them that our dog warden took off our hands.

3. Those farmers that threaten that if the dog isn't controlled the dog will be shot would consider it more of a promise

Do the dog owners think it's fair that there are very few sheep flicks that haven't suffered from attacks? So much so that many sheep farmers wouldn't own a gun only for the danger of dog attacks.

Irresponsible owners are irresponsible owners.
It all comes back to the owner.
It wouldn't matter to me where the sheep are, or what county they're in. My dogs will never, ever get access to them even though we live in a rural area, and walk across rights-of-way where livestock are kept. Why? Because I keep my dogs securely contained when not out on walks, and when I am out on walks, I wouldn't dream of allowing them anywhere near livestock unless they're on-lead. That's the law: you're breaking the law if your dog is not under effectual control at all times.
But once again, good owners like me, and many others like me, are tarnished by idiots who don't know, or don't care where their dogs are, no matter what county they're in. And in your case, people's dogs were taken by the warden, but the owners still had to take no responsibility for what they'd allowed their dogs to do. It's not just farmers these people annoy, they annoy everybody due to allowing their dogs do as they want, crapping all over the place and being a nuisance. And I'd hazard a guess they cut corners in other aspects of life too, selfish greedy behaviour has become rife in this country.

whelan2 · 12-11-2014 08:55PM

sup_dude wrote: »

What I don't understand is why the dog needs to get shot when it's the owners responsibility...
Let's say on the very very off chance my dog started chasing sheep, I would much rather rehome the dog to a city location. It solves all problems, the sheep are safer and the dog isn't killed for what is essentially a natural thing for a dog to do.

we took in a dog as a rescue dog, we where told it was good with kids, on day 3 it mauled my daughters face....... should we have moved the dog on to other people?

ganmo · 12-11-2014 09:01PM

i had one dog that i grew up with, got her when i was 12, and she was the only dog i was happy to walk through a field of sheep with(even the sheepdogs need watching).
she learned from a young age that woolies weren't for playing with, still remember her as a pup trying to get a ram to play with her. I often confronted people about walking with dogs off leads and they'd look at me with mine off the lead and assume their dog was the same. but she was my own dog in our own field with our own sheep. if i was near anyone else's field she'd be tied to my arm

Mad4simmental · 12-11-2014 09:32PM

If your dog is under your controle at ALL times it will never be at the wrong end of a gun.

If you are incapable of looking after your dog and it worrys livestock it's bang bang. That's your fault not the dogs. Black and white simple.

I understand pet owners getting hot under the coller here but the simple fact is if you look after your dog it will never happen.

These photos are only one of thousands of attacks every year and are here to educate people that may not know the other side of the story.

If you see a dog loose or let wonder the roads call the dog pound and you may save it.

Go back a few pages and read graysides post it's dpot on and very edacuational for sumone that may not know much about sheep or the problims/mess left behind long after the dogs chase the sheep.

5live · 12-11-2014 10:00PM

doubter wrote: »

Indeed.And those laws are outdated and need to be reversed.If farmers have the right to shoot pet dogs AFTER the fact, surely I have the right to protect my valuable lifestock?The bill for the horses injury is at over 1,000 euro- and the farmer is being ignorant about it. So excuse me if I have zero tolerance for b****. But the good thing is, I am now going to be very ignorant of his lifestock on the fairly busy main road.he already had 2 cows killed by cars but apparently hasn't learned his lesson.No more warnings from me early in the morning..I'll just chase whats on my field on to the road where they came from..i might even fire a second warning shot.
Again, you were in your right caching that dog in the act.Everything else is taking it too far and it will not buy you any goodwill from people around you.I wouldn't count on their help if anything happens to your lifestock.

As Farmer Pudsey said previously, you will be liable for any and all damage caused by animals you let loose onto public property.

Genghis Cant wrote: »

Any idea where you stand legally by chasing another man's lifestock from your land onto a public road, and a busy one at that?

I think he is aware now, hopefully.

doubter wrote: »

so...let me thin and bring something really silly up...say there's a couple of kids , like 14 years of age or so- chasing your sheep for fun...and you've seen them repeatedly..do you shoot them as well? Cause it will cause your ewes the same stress?

A silly argument, equating an animal with a human life

Genghis Cant wrote: »

So...Do you know the legal position pertaining to hunting another man's lifestock onto a public thoroughfare?

I think it might be getting through:pac:

I have a zero tolerence to dogs on my land. I have neither the time and inclination to follow a marauding dog back to its owners house only to be met with mealy mouth apologies and unkept promises that it will not happen again.

Luckily, i have only lose a few sheep to attack but the aftermath of abortions and mis-mothering is one i refuse to have to deal with again. Losses of over 30% of scanned lambs and pet lambs from ewes too stressed to mother lambs of close to 30% the same year. The mental stress and quadrupling of time needed to manage the flock in the aftermath of the last attack nearly led me to exit sheep.

My neighbouring sheep farmers and i decided enough was enough. We canvassed our neighbours to control their dogs and we bought guns to protect our flocks. We occasionally have to shoot a dog, mostly from outside the area(one from 5 miles away!) but we have mostly got the situation under control now, mostly thanks to neighbours who call when a dog is seen in the locality, or they see a neighbours dog loose and ring them before harm is done.

Responsible dog ownership is rare, unfortunately. One neighbour went away on holidays and left a small bag of dog food for his dogs for the 2 weeks they were away. How idiotic was that?

doubter · 12-11-2014 10:13PM

Kovu wrote: »

That's quite a big tar brush you're hitting us all with!

What Con is showing us in this case is the brutal clean up that some unfortunate farmers have to deal with. If a farmer sees a dog worrying his livestock, he is going to react. He's not going to know if the dog was doing it for the first time or the fifteenth time.
Farmers care for their stock too, if they see animals being mauled, they will react and rightly so. I don't think anyone posting on this thread would like to walk out their front door this morning and see that savagely on their farm or a neighbours farm.

How would you any of you feel if your dogs got out and were attacked by a roaming dog, arriving back with half his face ripped off like that lamb? Would you change your views on how to deal with vicious dogs or would you be willing to give them another chance?

Dogs attack for a reason. There are many things us ' humans' still don't understand about that. And, frankly, I've had that situation at my hands. The dog in question was trapped and brought to rescue.she was assessed and it turned out that us ' humans' had used her as a bait dog. Why on EARTH would i punish her for that by killing her? She was adopted out by a very responsible rescue to a single dog home with an active owner and lived a long and happy life.

Capercaille · 12-11-2014 10:19PM

I have a small farm. The neighbours have a sheepdog who occasionally wanders. During the summer the dog entered my meadows. I knocked politely on the door and asked them and stop the dog going into my meadows. Better to give them a chance than get the dog hurt/shot (don't have a gun anyway/would have to get neighbour to shoot it). If I did get the dog shot it would poison relations forever.

Do you know where your DOG is? [WARNING: CONTAINS GRAPHIC IMAGES]

Comments