Shooting dogs

[Tf223]

I’ve yet to use a rifle to shot a dog worrying our sheep, but have shot three myself and my father one other with a shotgun.

Each time reporting to the police, who made the owners collect the carcass in my three cases, and on the fourth making identification somewhat easier as the dog took off peppered with shot after being bowled over. In that case we pushed for the police to prosecute, and they did after a small debate about public interest. Initially they wanted the owner to pay us for the damage and we argued and demo’d the resources that they’d ploughed into investigating such offences in recent years made it in the public interest to take such action rather than brush it under the carpet. The court also gave us compo even though we never asked for it.

Would I use a rifle? - yes without a doubt, and have carried it for this purpose following a spate of attacks.

I have however also know other farmers to shot a dog and dispose of the carcass without making it known beyond another trusted farmer. But in that case the owners of the dogs were not to be crossed, so done for their own safety.

As always it’s the owners fault, not the dog. Just a shame despite speaking with them, the police speaking with them, were left in the position that carrying round guns for this purpose is occasionally essential.

 

[Ade8mm]

I’ve yet to use a rifle to shot a dog worrying our sheep, but have shot three myself and my father one other with a shotgun.

Each time reporting to the police, who made the owners collect the carcass in my three cases, and on the fourth making identification somewhat easier as the dog took off peppered with shot after being bowled over. In that case we pushed for the police to prosecute, and they did after a small debate about public interest. Initially they wanted the owner to pay us for the damage and we argued and demo’d the resources that they’d ploughed into investigating such offences in recent years made it in the public interest to take such action rather than brush it under the carpet. The court also gave us compo even though we never asked for it.

Would I use a rifle? - yes without a doubt, and have carried it for this purpose following a spate of attacks.

I have however also know other farmers to shot a dog and dispose of the carcass without making it known beyond another trusted farmer. But in that case the owners of the dogs were not to be crossed, so done for their own safety.

As always it’s the owners fault, not the dog. Just a shame despite speaking with them, the police speaking with them, were left in the position that carrying round guns for this purpose is occasionally essential.

Noted and thank you for your reply.

 

[Selous]

Sorry but pheasants, partridges and anything that you may choose to rear are covered whilst captive. No different to sheep.

You may well be correct, however this is the source I recalled this from that gives a definition of livestock as following:

Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act 1953

An Act to provide for the punishment of persons whose dogs worry livestock on agricultural land; and for purposes connected with the matter aforesaid.

www.legislation.gov.uk

Interpretation and supplementary provisions.
(1)In this Act—

• “agricultural land” means land used as arable, meadow or grazing land, or for the purpose of poultry farming, pig farming, market gardens, allotments, nursery grounds or orchards; and
• “livestock” means cattle, sheep, goats, swine, horses, or poultry, and for the purposes of this definition “cattle” means bulls, cows, oxen, heifers or calves, “horses” includes asses and mules, and “poultry” means domestic fowls, turkeys, geese or ducks.

Interpretation from DEFRA

The definition of "livestock" under this act is quite wide and includes cattle, sheep, goats, swine, horses and poultry. Poultry, however, does not include game birds such as pheasants and grouse.

Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act - Summary

 

[Tf223]

Noted and thank you for your reply.

Do report each occasion, at least the police can go and have words to try and put a stop to it.... that is unless the dog needs to ‘disappear’ quietly.
I do not advocate the latter, but understand the need.

And the police when all said and done were very supportive of the legal defence and need to shot. Little concern presented especially as those incidents were the culmination of several local incidents and reports to the police.... probably done them a favour in a way.

 

[bobthedug]

Well you're certainly wrong then! You have answered you own comment. What does a gamekeeper rely on for his income?

I don't think I'm "certainly wrong" Not looking for an argument but I went through something similar with my friend and neighbour years ago when his hens were being killed by a dog. If you care to read the last paragraph. This is from a Government website.

Under criminal law if a dog worries livestock on agricultural land then the owner and anyone else under whose control the dog is at the time will be guilty of an offence under this Act. To come under the act the dog must have been attacking livestock or chasing it in such a way that it could reasonably be expected to cause injury or suffering to the livestock or, in the case of females, cause abortion or loss of or diminution of their produce. It is also an offence, introduced by later legislation, for the dog to be at large, ie not on a lead or otherwise under close control, in a field of sheep. There are limited exceptions to this last provision, for example sheep dogs and police dogs.

No offence is committed, however, if at the time of the worrying the livestock were trespassing, the dog belonged to the owner of the land on which the trespassing livestock were and the person in charge of the dog did not cause the dog to attack the livestock. The definition of "livestock" under this act is quite wide and includes cattle, sheep, goats, swine, horses and poultry. Poultry, however, does not include game birds such as pheasants and grouse. Conviction under this act would lead to a fine.

 

[baguio]

You may well be correct, however this is the source I recalled this from that gives a definition of livestock as following:

Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act 1953

An Act to provide for the punishment of persons whose dogs worry livestock on agricultural land; and for purposes connected with the matter aforesaid.

www.legislation.gov.uk

Interpretation and supplementary provisions.
(1)In this Act—

• “agricultural land” means land used as arable, meadow or grazing land, or for the purpose of poultry farming, pig farming, market gardens, allotments, nursery grounds or orchards; and
• “livestock” means cattle, sheep, goats, swine, horses, or poultry, and for the purposes of this definition “cattle” means bulls, cows, oxen, heifers or calves, “horses” includes asses and mules, and “poultry” means domestic fowls, turkeys, geese or ducks.

Interpretation from DEFRA

The definition of "livestock" under this act is quite wide and includes cattle, sheep, goats, swine, horses and poultry. Poultry, however, does not include game birds such as pheasants and grouse.

Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act - Summary

When they include grouse in the definition it shows how limited the knowledge of the writer is. Trust me, if the dog got into a release pen and killed all of the pheasants or partridges contained within it before getting shot, the law will side with the keeper.

I have a keeper friend who came close to pulling the trigger but manged to catch the dog before handing it in to the police to return to the owner. The police warned the owners that they were VERY lucky to get their dog back THIS time.

 

[david1]

I have been in a similar position in central Scotland, a dog walkers, English Springer Spaniels were chasing my daughters ponies all around the field barking and continually going for them, I found the owner on my property, I threatened that his dogs would be shot if they did this again, at the time I was standing with my rifle as I had been out checking my zero. The dog walker went crazy and shouted and swore at me and said he was going to the police. The police duly turned up at my house saying I had threatened a member of the public..... I then explained exactly what happened and what he did and his behaviour..... and how his dogs were, I didnt hide the fact I said "I would shoot his dogs". The police left and returned a couple of hours later. The dog walker was cautioned and told I was within my rights to shoot his dogs and advised him to put his dogs on a lead. The only thing the police said to me was before I shoot his dogs make sure I have read the BASC guide lines first.

He never came back with his dogs......

 

[Tf223]

The Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act wont side with a keeper when poults are expressly not included in the legal definition of livestock as contained within the Act.

I would argue that a poult pen arguably should be secure against dogs in the same way as for foxes?! So perhaps they were not afforded the protection for that reason?

 

[baguio]

The Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act wont side with a keeper when poults are expressly not included in the legal definition of livestock as contained within the Act.

I would argue that a poult pen arguably should be secure against dogs in the same way as for foxes?! So perhaps they were not afforded the protection for that reason?

What have foxes got to do with anything? I would argue that the dog should be under control rather than being allowed to destroy someone's livelihood. The law as a rule is pretty sensible and usually comes to sensible decisions.

 

[gixer1]

If you shoot a dog and haven’t at least warned the owner in writing I don’t think you would be in a good spot.

mid the owners are both solicitors surely they have a bit of sense and may try to solve the issue.

before I would shoot a dog I’d try and get a vid of said dog worrying the sheep, I’d have a copy of a letter I’d sent to the owner warning them (dated) and then the final straw would be pulling the trigger, this should give you a pretty solid defence if it goes to court.

mid you shoot it without the above I think you may lose your FAC.

regards,
Gixer

 

[Tf223]

What have foxes got to do with anything? I would argue that the dog should be under control rather than being allowed to destroy someone's livelihood. The law as a rule is pretty sensible and usually comes to sensible decisions.

Don’t disagree RE control. But the law is not always sensible, and is often full of vagueness, and often contradicted by the gov guidance. In this however this Act is 100% clear and precise on what livestock is and is not. If that defence was bought up in court (IF) then it would quickly fail.

 

[Twodogs]

My rambling thoughts on the matter.

Firearms Act 1968, Section 16 Possession of firearm with intent to injure.
It is an offence for a person to have in his possession any firearm or ammunition with intent by means thereof to endanger life or cause serious injury to property, or to enable another person by means thereof to endanger life or cause serious injury to property, whether any injury to person or propertyhas been caused or not.

When considering your position remember, as previously quoted, dogs are property. Intending to shoot a dog, for whatever reason, in my books would constitute serious injury to property. The intent might be your reason for having the firearm at that time at that place.

MINIMUM sentence five years at her majesties pleasure.

And we haven’t even considered Criminal Damage.

Contrary to popular belief, a farmer does not have a legal right to shoot a dog that is worrying their livestock - what they have is a legal defence. Shooting a dog must be a last resort. Dogs are classed as property so shooting a dog could trigger criminal damage proceedings and the farmer will have to prove he had a ‘lawful excuse’. The farmer will need to show that his sheep were in immediate need of protection, and that his actions were reasonable having regard to all the circumstances. The farmer could also face civil proceeding for damages for the loss of the dog. The farmer will need to prove that the dog was worrying or was about to worry the livestock, and there was no other reasonable means of ending the worrying. What is regarded as ‘reasonable’ will depend on the individual facts of each case. It is imperative that if a dog is shot it is reported to the police within 48 hours of the incident (regardless of whether the dog is killed or merely injured), failure to do so may impact on the above defences.

Sheep worrying law UK

Advice for farmers and dog owners about sheep worrying

www.crombiewilkinson.co.uk

If you ever find yourself in the position of a confrontation with a dog owner and have a firearm in your possession, consider the following:
Section 16A possession of firearm with intent to cause fear of violence.
It is an offence for a person to have in his possession any firearm or imitation firearm with intent—
(a)by means thereof to cause, or
(b)to enable another person by means thereof to cause,
any person to believe that unlawful violence will be used against him or another person.

Hypothetical situation but not unrealistic, dog owner upset, sees you with firearm and feels threatened, goes to police and reports. Don’t be surprised if you are arrested at gunpoint. Up to you to explain no intent, though up to the prosecution to prove the intent for a successful prosecution. Firearms licensing are not bound by such rules.

Under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, it is an offence to cause unnecessary suffering to dogs. Possible proceeding under this act maybe a particular concern if the dog is not killed cleanly with one shot. Breach of this act can have severe punishment with up to six months’ imprisonment and/or fines of up to £20,000. The use of a gun in these circumstances could potentially lead to a review of the farmer’s gun licence. Although, it is not a ground for revocation any review carries with it a risk that it maybe revoked.

Sheep worrying law UK

Advice for farmers and dog owners about sheep worrying

www.crombiewilkinson.co.uk

I would hate for anyone believing they were doing the right thing having to defend themselves in court.

 

[jimmy milnes]

Get the dog in ya vehicle on the quiet an take it to the local pound saying you've found it worrying stock but you don't know who it belongs to, everytime they have a call to pick it up it'll cost them.. No laws broken,

 

[countrryboy]

If you shoot a dog and haven’t at least warned the owner in writing I don’t think you would be in a good spot.

mid the owners are both solicitors surely they have a bit of sense and may try to solve the issue.

before I would shoot a dog I’d try and get a vid of said dog worrying the sheep, I’d have a copy of a letter I’d sent to the owner warning them (dated) and then the final straw would be pulling the trigger, this should give you a pretty solid defence if it goes to court.

mid you shoot it without the above I think you may lose your FAC.

regards,
Gixer

I'm not an expert on this but pretty sure that could potentially make it worse for the shooter as looks premeditated.
Im sure I've read that in the past on 1 off these threads.

Slider or vss might know more about that so I wouldn't take it as gospel.
The reason I remember it was beforehand I would off done exactly wot u advise above.

To be honest glad I'm not in that position, for all u may be 100% within ur rights ( making a vast assumption here but the owners sound real 1st class erseholes)
I would imagine the type of person that allow there dog to behave ho it does and as lawyers I'd say u will be in a world off trouble if I have not crossed the TS and dotted I s. Being lawyers it could cost us fortune.
As there precious Fido would never do that/was only playing with them etc

I would be joining an org to cover ur erse for legal costs, possibly a farming/sheep org might be more proactive and stand up for u more than some shooting orgs

 

[Mossypaw]

If you shoot a dog and haven’t at least warned the owner in writing I don’t think you would be in a good spot.

mid the owners are both solicitors surely they have a bit of sense and may try to solve the issue.

before I would shoot a dog I’d try and get a vid of said dog worrying the sheep, I’d have a copy of a letter I’d sent to the owner warning them (dated) and then the final straw would be pulling the trigger, this should give you a pretty solid defence if it goes to court.

mid you shoot it without the above I think you may lose your FAC.

regards,
Gixer

All sound advice, but not much use when a dog is in a field of heavily pregnant ewes ripping lumps out of them.

 

[gixer1]

I'm not an expert on this but pretty sure that could potentially make it worse for the shooter as looks premeditated.
Im sure I've read that in the past on 1 off these threads.

Slider or vss might know more about that so I wouldn't take it as gospel.
The reason I remember it was beforehand I would off done exactly wot u advise above.

To be honest glad I'm not in that position, for all u may be 100% within ur rights ( making a vast assumption here but the owners sound real 1st class erseholes)
I would imagine the type of person that allow there dog to behave ho it does and as lawyers I'd say u will be in a world off trouble if I have not crossed the TS and dotted I s. Being lawyers it could cost us fortune.
As there precious Fido would never do that/was only playing with them etc

I would be joining an org to cover ur erse for legal costs, possibly a farming/sheep org might be more proactive and stand up for u more than some shooting orgs

I don’t think it matters as long as you can show good reason, usually the law need all possible avenues to be exhausted prior to more extreme methods.

 

[slider]

If you shoot a dog and haven’t at least warned the owner in writing I don’t think you would be in a good spot.

mid the owners are both solicitors surely they have a bit of sense and may try to solve the issue.

before I would shoot a dog I’d try and get a vid of said dog worrying the sheep, I’d have a copy of a letter I’d sent to the owner warning them (dated) and then the final straw would be pulling the trigger, this should give you a pretty solid defence if it goes to court.

mid you shoot it without the above I think you may lose your FAC.

regards,
Gixer

Sorry but that is rubbish. If you have a dog worrying and killing sheep you need to deal with the problem. You HAVE a defense in law if you shoot a dog either in the act of worrying and you have no other means of stopping it.

A dog that has its blood up is not going to run way if you say "shoo" and may well turn on you if you try to catch it

 

[Selous]

When they include grouse in the definition it shows how limited the knowledge of the writer is. Trust me, if the dog got into a release pen and killed all of the pheasants or partridges contained within it before getting shot, the law will side with the keeper.

I have a keeper friend who came close to pulling the trigger but manged to catch the dog before handing it in to the police to return to the owner. The police warned the owners that they were VERY lucky to get their dog back THIS time.

I don’t know how it would be interpreted as I’m not a barrister and I suspect this would depend on legal precedent but the wording of the act does not fill me with confidence that a keeper could shoot a dog chasing pheasants.

 

[Greenmist]

As the owners of said dog are solicitors, why not seek their counsel on the matter? Providing of course the first half hour is free, might serve as a wake up call

 

[NP435]

Your avatar says you're posting from Wyoming. The state law there doesn't say that …. it appears to be firmly on the side of the dog.

Joe Biden in Washington DC also gets away with an unruly dog by all accounts.

Wyoming Dog Bite Law

A dog bite victim in Wyoming can recover compensation under the doctrines of negligence, negligence per se, scienter and intentional tort. There is no state dog bite statute so this is a “one bite state.” Individual counties and cities may have ordinances creating strict liability, however...

dogbitelaw.com

Joe Biden's dog, Major, bites second person in a month

German shepherd ‘nipped someone while on a walk’, then today one of the dogs left faeces on the White House floor

www.theguardian.com

Ade8mm ... official advice for UK sheep farmers:--

Sheep Worrying | National Sheep Association

This area of the website provides lots of advice to help you and your pet have fun and safe days out without disrupting the important work of sheep farmers.

www.nationalsheep.org.uk

Biden should lose his dog too IMO. As for statue I may be wrong but in practice biting dogs die in my part of the world.