Dogs and Sheep

[PeteL]

This is a topic that has troubled me for some time and I thought it might be useful to clarify it.]

 

I want to know the legal position (as the shooter with permission to shoot on a Farmer's/Landowner's land) if the shooter sees a dog or dogs chasing sheep and possibly killing some. In other words caught in the act, blood on the muzzle, etc

Are you allowed to shoot it/them there and then?

Do you need a witness, say the Farmer/Landowner and thereby getting his authority to eliminate the killer dog/s.

Would it be a good idea to get the express consent of the Farmer/Landowner in writing at the time of obtaining his permission to shoot over the land?

Is such an action covered by the Firearms Acts as being in connection with managing an estate?.

I wouldn't want to whack someones pet, but if the owner of the sheep insists it be done, you are then in a very difficult position.

Does the Law say that other means of stopping the killing must have been exhausted before lethal force is used and such efforts may need to be demonstrated to a Court?

I am aware that domestic pets are property and thus subject to the same Laws as other property.

 

IMHO a shooter could find himself in a very difficult position because if he refuses to shoot the culprit/s, he will probably have his permission withdrawn. OTOH, whacking someones dog could land him in Court and may result in a loss of FAC, a heavy fine and a criminal record.

Anyone with legal training or access thereto where this matter might be clarified?

Peter

[TonyH]

You do well to ask these pertinent questions before zapping dogs. I've been in the same position, when a few years ago I witnessed two dogs racing round the flock of sheep on one of my permissions, seemingly preparing to worry one or two... I chased them off, and when I reported to the farmer he said he thought he knew whose dogs they might be, and invited me to shoot them next time i saw this happening. Cautiously, I consulted the firearms section at police HQ, who advised me to apply for a specific amendment to my FAC adding, on top of "vermin control", the words "and for the lawful protection of livestock". They suggested this as a precaution since dog owners are famously protective of their beasts even where they behave outrageously, and that even if i shot a dog that I caught in the act of worrying sheep its owner might well take me to court, so i needed all the paperwork protection possible...

I'd advise you to do likewise - better safe than sorry! Even when you're in the right you can be buggered about by vindictive or silly people: I recall some friends of my parents, who hit a dog in their car when it ran out into the road and went for them - clearly bonkers and out of control, but its owner successfully sued them for damages...

Regards, TonyH

[baldie]

Yes you can legally shoot the dog, if its unleashed, on private land, and in amongst livestock. The only exception in law, being a pack of hounds...they are legally protected.

However, once you have shot the animal, the owner is then legally entitled to sue you for willful destruction of property. You also must have the previously mentioned condition on your fac.

Unless absolutely neccessary, i wouldn,t.

[Chris-NZ]

. dog owners are famously protective of their beasts even where they behave outrageously, and that even if i shot a dog that I caught in the act of worrying sheep its owner might well take me to court,..

 

 

No worry in NZ guys- if you even think a dog's worrying sheep, there's more than enough justification to blast it and the cops would back you up.

 

One of my patients has a vineyard which they let sheep graze on, and some mongrel has been having a go on and off. Quite a few sheep have gone west, and it's only a matter of time before he perforates it. No worries about what the owner will think

 

Chris-NZ

[Ronin]

It creates a load of hassle (for you), the dog owner will complain to the police, they will visit you and ask questions, they may even interview you and consider prosecution.

 

You must have evidence that livestock are or have been worried or killed, just cos dogs are loose in a field does not make it ok to slot them.

 

If on the other hand you have dogs on the loose prior to lambing time and a ewe has aborted or a sheep been savaged, then make the decision.

 

 

Mobile phone with camera or video is wonderful tool for obtaining this evidence, no matter how poor the quality,

 

 

There have been several cases in my area where dogs have been shot whilst worrying sheep, no prosecutions, but the riflemen were on dodgy ground (FAC) for a while until it was proven that the dogs had acted in the way described..

 

 

It would have to be something pretty bad for me to consider placing the crosshair on a doggy.

[hughes.s]

A direct quote from my certificate, Which I did not specificly apply for, under, Conditions/additional conditions 7©"The shooting of animals for the protection of other animals or humans." When I offerd this "service" to a farmer he declined asking me to try to gather information so he could sort it himself, (small village etc)

[PeteL]

Thanks for all the helpful replies so far.

The fact that you can, legally, be sued by the dog's owner, is very worrying, even if it can be proven to the satisfaction of a Court of Law that the animal is killing or causing damage. However, the dog's owner is also in a difficult position because the owner of the sheep is likely to sue him for the damage caused - and that could be a lot of money!.

Before shooting the dog, I should think that gathering as much evidence as possible - the mobile phone video is an excellent idea - and submitting that to the authorities would be the way to go. I expect that you'd have to be very certain about the situation, of course, and preferably, have an independent witness. The local police, I presume, will investigate and, if all is kosher, come to the same conclusion as yourself. Any disparity and you could have a problem.

Not come across the situation personally but I know some chaps who have and it's not nice.

WRT the post on FAC conditions:

On my FAC the following appears: "or , in connection with the management of any estate, other wildlife". Hopefully, this would cover the situation. Perhaps I should apply to get the condition in hughes.s post put on my ticket.

To quote from the HO Guidance: "Under the Animals Act 1971, a person may, under certain specified circumstances, shoot a dog found worrying sheep, cattle or other livestock (see also paragraph 14.22).

14.22 Section 9 of the Animals Act 1971 provides a defence for shooting a dog if the defendant acted to protect livestock, and subsequently informs the police within fortyeight hours of the incident. The defendant can only act in defence of livestock in such a way if the livestock, or the land on which it is, belongs to them or to any other person under whose express or implied authority they are acting."

 

I'm a dogs person and would be very, very reluctant to shoot someones pet, perhaps even to the extent of losing my permission on that land. I dunno, perhaps I should wait until the situation arises, which, hopefully, it never will.

Peter

[MikeT]

As a sheep farmer this is a subject close to my heart.

 

Firstly PeteL is correct in saying the shooting of dogs worrying sheep is covered by the Animals Act 1971.

 

This act does not give farmers a legal right to shoot such dogs but rather allows them to use the act as defense if questioned, prosecuted or sued for doing so. You must act within the act and follow it precisely.

 

I should also point out that your fac must be so conditioned, dogs are not vermin. Mine is conditioned " For the lawful protection of livestock" and "The humane killing of animals" alongside the usual vermin, fox and deer etc.

 

Please remember that this condition must relate to your rifles and must not be confused with the expanding ammunition condition using similar wording which is printed on your fac.

[Alycidon]

In over 40 years of shooting I have only ever known of two dogs shot for sheep worrying, one of those carcases was deposited on its owners doorstep in the village a couple of miles away with a bill for damages. This must have been maybe 45 years ago when attitudes were a bit different, the dogs owner paid the damages.

 

Being from farming stock I would go the spade route today if push ever came to shove.

 

Nearest I have come is with a German Shepard that we aquired from a Rescue center, lovelly lovelly dog but she was developing as a sheep worrier. She went missing one afteroon, took an hour to find her, she was playing wolf and dinner with a lamb, catching it and letting it go. I aimed the landrover at her to drive her off it as it was all I had to hand. Lamb was exausted and had numerous slight puncture marks in its skin, it recovered but I gave the dog to a work college who already had three and understood that she needed keeping away from sheep. Last I heard she was doing well.

 

A

[TonyH]

...Sheriff never came out either,They(Law) told him(neighbor) if the farmer asked ya once,then told ya

what would happen,then ya cant blame him.The faults all yours and you should have tried harder.

 

308Panther

- and Alycidon:

In over 40 years of shooting I have only ever known of two dogs shot for sheep worrying, one of those carcases was deposited on its owners doorstep in the village a couple of miles away with a bill for damages. This must have been maybe 45 years ago when attitudes were a bit different, the dogs owner paid the damages.

 

Common sense + natural justice. Wonder why there's so little of these in evidence today when it comes to dealing with the law...?

TonyH

[silentsoulsleave308holes]

A direct quote from my certificate, Which I did not specificly apply for, under, Conditions/additional conditions 7©"The shooting of animals for the protection of other animals or humans." When I offerd this "service" to a farmer he declined asking me to try to gather information so he could sort it himself, (small village etc)

 

 

 

 

this unfortunately my friend is exactly the point that so so many people make this mistake

 

read the beginning of this paragraph again very very carefully and you will realise that this paragraph relates to AMMUNITION ONLY

 

it DOES NOT relate to the firearms for which you have UNLESS it states so in a separate condition

 

the problem with this paragraph is that people do not read it correctly and people believe that they can

 

1) humanely kill animals, with what ever gun they have

2) shoot deer, even somebody with only a 22rf will have the ammo paragraph on their ticket

3) and your answer of the shooting of/for the protection of

 

it actually reads..........

the cert holder may possess, purchase or aquire AMMUNITION, or the missiles of such ammunition,in the cals auth....and used only in connection with;

 

a) the lawful shooting of deer (min 240 cal etc and condition on your license to do so, ie not a 22rf)

 

the shooting of vermin or, in connection with the management of any estate (for people mainly who have large cals open for smaller pests ie 308 for deer,fox,vermin etc)

 

c) the humane killing of animal; (knacker men etc)

 

d) the shooting of animals for the protection of other animals or humans ( example..a person auth to work on behalf of defra to slaughter in the case of foot and mouth etc)

 

NO dig meant to you personally but many many people make this mistake and it could be a very very costly one

 

 

REMEMBER it is standard wording on a computer that is used ie: click and drag and relates to ammo only

 

a) lawfull shooting of deer............would still mean that you would have to use a min cal of 240 etc etc

 

the shooting of vermin or, in connection etc etc means you may do so only if your cals are autherised for that purpose

 

c) the humane killing of animals................means you MUST first have one or more of your firearms opened for such use and it would clearly state in another paragraph and would clearly state which firearm (this clause is usually cleared for people that do animal collection, knacker men/women or a limited number of autherised fac holders who arrange stalking for clients etc etc who may need a hume dispatch tool

 

d) the killing of animals for the protection of other animals or humans..................use your loaf..........this is meant for..........or should i just say think about a foot and mouth situation

 

no personal bitch meant to any one person(s), its just a mistake that is made over and over again

 

if you want your firearm(s) to be cleared for humane killing then contact your local firearms dept and apply for it to be clearly entered onto your license

 

there are going to be some that will want to argue this but please go read your license properly

 

thankyou

[stag1933]

We had a case here some years ago.

A tearful tourist called on a local farmer and said a big dog had attacked a sheep in a nearby stream and that when they had tried to chase it away it had approached them snarling with bared teeth.

Eric took his .243 and went to investigate and as stated the dog [a Rotweiller] was still there.

As he approached to check the sheep the dog came forward showing its teeth so Eric shot it between the eyes, one deceased sheep and a very dead dog.

Almost immediately the Police arrived having been summoned by another tourist. Whilst they were taking all details the owner of the dog appeared and a nasty situation was arising so the Police sensibly asked Eric to leave.

 

Subsequently the owner of the dog was prosecuted, fined and had to pay compensation for the dead sheep. It also transpired that the dog had been seen chasing sheep and lambs on the previous day.

 

HWH.

[silentsoulsleave308holes]

the were meant to be but I could not get them to go away

 

every time i re-typed the b it kept changing it back

[silentsoulsleave308holes]

there.........it did it again, waht the frak is going on

[PeteL]

Yes,

Silent is quite correct, I plead guilty to not reading my FAC correctly. Thanks, my friend. I think I need to talk to my Firearms Dept.

It would appear that, unless you have the condition on your ticket, you cannot kill dogs worrying/killing sheep.

Peter

[grahamfarmer]

hi guys,

 

went down this road a few years ago and asked for the relevent condition to be put on my fac at renewal time, i was advised that as a farmer and occupier of land relateing to my fac i didnt need the relevent condition as i have rights to protect my livestock as petal has pointed out . all i was advised to do is to ring in the dog worrying to police control if the owner is present give them one chance to bring the dog under control if they cant then shoot the dog and inform the police within 48 hrs. if no owner present then shoot it and take to vets to see if chiped and then you can get address to sue owner for any damage.

 

if i didnt have a fac then if i ask anyone to shoot a dog then they do need the relevant condition on their ticket .

 

 

 

graham.