Shooting Dogs

[danthekeeper]

Having read in a number of posts that farmers have the right to shoot dogs that worry stock I think some clarification is required.
Farmers do not have a legal right to shoot dogs that sheep worry what they do have is a legal defense for their actions and this is far from an absolute defense. The charge being criminal damage the dog owner then may subsequently take out a civil action against the defendant,

The defendant (farmer or agent to the stock owner) would need to prove to a court that their actions where lawful and that all other possible means to stop the worrying had been tried before the animal is shot.

A person who shoots a dog on the premise of stock worrying would also run into firearms law the use of a rifle to shoot the dog would no doubt breach the conditions imposed on their firearms certificate.I am not sure but I doubt any firearms licencing dept would issue a rifle for such a purpose.

The dog owner does however commit an offence of stock worrying and upon conviction the stock owner would be entitled to damages.

It is also worth adding that wild animals are exempt from these rules and this also includes game birds so a dog owner cannot be convicted of worrying wild deer,pheasants etc and nor can their dogs be shot.

This post is far from being definative and I am no lawyer but as any one can see to state that a farmer has the right to shot dogs is an over simplication of the law.

I welcome others comments and or corrections.

Cheers Dan

[fairplay]

This may help a little further:

Animals Act 1971
3)Subject to subsection (4) of this section, a person killing or causing injury to a dog shall be deemed for the purposes of this section to act for the protection of any livestock if, and only if, either—
(a)the dog is worrying or is about to worry the livestock and there are no other reasonable means of ending or preventing the worrying; or
(b)the dog has been worrying livestock, has not left the vicinity and is not under the control of any person and there are no practicable means of ascertaining to whom it belongs.

The trouble arrises when a dog owner is convinced their dog will not harm a fly and thinks it is fine for the dog to be inquisitive and 'make new friends' with the sheep or lambs, not realising the mere presence of the dog near sheep is enough to cause an abortion.

Naturally all farmers will give the owner plenty of opportunity to control the dog, but I can imagine it becoming very frustrating for a farmer in the above situation where the owner refuses because he or she thinks the dog is no threat.

Dog owners have to remember, the farmer has seen it all before, many times, and he knows when there is a threat, after all, the sheep and their lambs is his livelihood.

Neil.

[davecatt]

I'm not absolutely certain on this so please correct me if I'm wrong: I think I read somewhere that one of the ammendments to the act that created new rights of access to the country side states that dog owners are now required by law to keep dogs on a leed where livestock is present, and also at all times anywere in the countryside During the ground bird nesting season.

Now if I'm right about this, perhaps the public, many of whom ignore what afterall is just simple commonsense anyway, need to be made aware of the legal requirement.
Dave

[danthekeeper]

To quote Natural England,

By law, you must control your dog so that it does not scare or disturb farm animals or wildlife. On most areas of open country and common land, known as "access land",you must keep your dog on a short lead between 31st march and 31st July and all year round near farm animals.

At certain times,Dogs may not be allowed on some areas of access land or may need to be kept on a lead, you should follow any official signs.

It is not however a legal requirement for dogs to be on a lead on a public footpath but they should be under control.

[fairplay]

To me, the law regarding dogs is most unsatisfactory and far too complicated.
I am Countryside Officer for the Suffolk branch of the Ramblers Association.
Before I joined, the RA had been campaigning for some years for a 'Right to Roam'. We didn't get that, instead we got (controlled) Open Access to Moors, Downland and Heathland including registered Common Land (which surprisingly, the public had no general right to enter unless a commoner with rights,or permission from the owner who could even be the Parish Council).

Also, any land owner could dedicate voluntarily his land to be included on the Open Access Conclusive Map, but quite understandably, not many landowners took up this offer, BUT, the Forestry Commission did.

To clarify, Open Access land is NOT a public right of way (PROW), but a PROW may pass over it, be it only a footpath or bridleway or even Byway open to all Traffic (BOAT) formerly referred to as RUPP's.

This is where it gets complicated - whilst on a footpath, you may take a dog at all times, but at all times it must remain under control, on the footpath, and within sight.
Once the dog strays from the footpath and enters private land either side, the land owner can ask/tell you to keep the dog under control within the footpath.
If you argue or refuse, you automatically BECOME A TRESPASSER, because you are not using the footpath for it's intended purpose, and if he so wishes, the landowner is allowed in law to use REASONABLE FORCE to eject you.

Now where the path passes over Open Access land, again your dog must be under control, but if it strays or you take it onto the Open Access land between 1 March and 31 July IT MUST BE ON A FIXED SHORT LEAD.

Some landowners, such as the Forestry Commission, do not require this, meaning that so long as your dog remains under control, it can be off lead all year round (To me, this is where dogs get lost and deer are killed - there are 'LOST DOG' posters all over the place in woods near me)

In special circumstances Open Access may be CLOSED to the public, but where a footpath crosses it, the path remains unaffected.
This is when the dog walking public have to be extra vigillant as the closure will most likely be because a very rare creature is or may be present. The CLOSURE NOTICE may not always disclose the reason.

There is a lot, lot more to include, especially regarding livestock, but my tummy is rumbling and I have some cold duck to finish off.

Neil.

[larachmor]

Our local wood, within the Cairngorms National Park, is a designated SPA – a specially protected area, in this instance, to offer protection for the population of capercaillie – Britain’s most threatened bird – from all intentional or reckless disturbance, including that caused by dogs. The more familiar Loch Garten RSPB reserve will be more familiar to many. They too however are bound by a law that does not require owners to keep their dogs on leads at any time of year. During the important nesting season they are required to keep dogs on a short lead OR under "close control." The law is therefore inherently weak when it comes to addressing the problems caused by loose dogs – or more accurately – their owners.

[danthekeeper]

Thank you all for the replies but the thread seems to be moving back to whether dogs should be on leads and this is covered in another thread.

My original post was to explore the rights or wrongs of a stock owner shooting a dog that is stock worrying and the aim was to dispel the myth that all farmers are waiting with loaded guns ready to shoot any dog that strays more than 10 feet from it's owner.

Cheers Dan

[fairplay]

Sorry I drifted off topic there Dan, I was trying to cover too much and just as I was getting to the point, hunger got the best of me, then I had a few more glasses of port and that was me done for the night.

Yes, you've said it all really, although I believe the reason why more dogs have not been shot is because farmers have a very hectic life and simply do not have the time to sit in wait for an incident to happen.

The sad thing, is that when a dog has to be shot the press usually and correctly, withhold the name and address of the farmer to avoid reprisals by the extremist mentality, some of whom I'm certain are reading this post right now, and I guess a farmer has this always in the back of his mind.

In a lot of cases the farmer will have a dog or dogs himself, so knows only too well the upset to the owner shooting a dog will bring.

BUT WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVES ?

Come on Wabbers, this is quite a serious issue and only 4 of us are talking here.
Put yourself in the farmers position, how would you deal with the problem of dogs frightening or killing livestock ?

Neil.

[PMG]

I guess it was my comment in the dogs on leads thread that 'led' to this thread. To my mind its quite simple - a farmer has the right to shoot any dog he sees chasing his sheep around his land - whether he will actually shoot it is another matter - depends on the circumstances and the feelings of the farmer - but he has the right to do it if he wishes.

I think this ought to make dog owners more careful about keeping their dogs under control. Having said that there will always be daft folk or sometimes just a mistake and bad timing but it will usually come down to the original issue - keeping control of your dog - its your dog - your responsibility and some dog owners will not do this - therefore I say that all dogs should be banned from nature reserves simply because you cannot rely on a responsible owner. It only takes one unruly dog and stupid unconcerned owner to wreck the entire breeding season for certain birds ....... I just don't believe that all people and all dogs should have access to all places ........

I don't have a dog just now but at Easter in 1980 I took in a large collie-type that had been roaming in our urban area (against my mothers wishes - but within a week it was sleeping on my dad's bed, despite dad building a super kennel ........) We had dogs before so were not novices to dogs - but never had a sheepdog - steep learning curve coming........ We took him out with us and the first outing into the fells he took off into the first field with sheep in, rounded them up and brought them to us then sat down and waited for further instructions ........ In my minds eye I could see this new dog being shot right in front of my eyes ....... We took him home, had him neutered which allowed us to take full control of a dog which was old enough to know his own mind and please himself, and kept him on a lead where there was sheep. With love and training he became the best dog we ever owned - he went everywhere with us - had a great deal of freedom but did as he was told - and the farmer who owned the caravan where we stayed would use him from time to time when his young bullocks broke free - so he got to round things up occasionally too

Pauline

[danthekeeper]

The point of this thread was to show that farmers DO NOT have a legal right to shoot a dog worrying stock.
The farmer has a legal defense for his actions but he would still have committed an offence that being criminal damage if he shot a dog it is then up to the farmer to prove in a court that his actions where legal.

It is far easier to scare monger and suggest that livestock farmers are out there waiting to shoot your dog than to address the real problems surrounding irresponsible dog owners.

Pauline this thread was not instigated because of your comments I have spent some time reading old threads on this forum and the suggestion that farmers will shoot your dog seems to be a reoccurring comment and one that I felt needs some legal clarification.

Dan