oh dear...

gettingready

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2221414/Farmer-shoots-collies-dead-escape-boarding-kennels-owners-holiday.html?ICO=most_read_module

krlyr

Farmer totally within his rights here. As harsh as it is, regardless of whether his sheep have any physical wounds, he has the right (and responsibility) to protect his livestock. A chase alone can be physically harmful to a sheep, even without a bite - stress, shock, the abortion of a lamb, a muscle sprain, etc. so the owner claiming no sheep was physically injured doesn't mean much (and the alternative, the farmer waiting for the dogs to actually attack before doing anything, would be cruel on the sheep). With no owner in sight, and presumably being somewhere quite remote where there's not many people to call for help, shooting the dogs may well have been his safest bet to ensure the dogs didn't injure the sheep.

Both the kennels and owners are to blame here. The owners should not have given permission for the dogs to be exercised off-lead after being made aware that one of the dogs had cleared the fence previously. Surely the only way to know this is for the dog to have run off and not recalled - I doubt the kennel would specifically take a dog out and encourage it over the fence to check whether they could clear it, as they'd just end up teaching the dogs how to escape, so the only way I can see them knowing is for similar to have happened (but the dog either recalled or been caught before any harm was done). Therefore the argument that the dogs would not run off is obviously untrue.
Equally, the kennels should not have given the option of the dogs being let off-lead, with permission or not. As the temporary keepers of the dog, they would have an obligation to protect both the dogs and the neighbouring livestock and should have refused to put either at risk since they knew the dog could escape.
If blame had to be placed with one party, my view would be that the kennels are the ones ultimately responsible. Regardless of what the owners had said, the kennels had the physical choice to let the dogs loose or off-lead. It's not just even a matter of having had blind faith in the owner (if a Husky owner who's dog showed a high preydrive was booked in to the kennels and the owner said it was fine to go off-lead, would the kennel follow this blindly too?) but the kennels themselves knew that at least one of the dogs could escape and they should have put their foot down on the matter - or turned away the customer if they could not accept that. I also think 4' fencing is quite poor for a kennel establishment, especially knowing that a livestock farm is on neighbouring land.

Tragic ending for the dogs, too late to change anything for them, but hopefully the kennel will make their land more secure or tighten their rules on which dogs are allowed off-lead, and the owners should definately take a bit more care with any future dogs.

gettingready

I would never leave Zara in kennels, any kennels.

If I go away, she goes for home boarding with people who know her and know how/where she can/can not go, how she reacts to things etc.

Kennel not secured in a way that dog escaped - worst nightmare.

Tropez

I'll wait for the conclusion of the investigation by the regulatory board before deciding whether the farmer had legitimate cause to shoot the dogs.

moggymutt

Horrible. Most of the farmers round here are actually very reasonable, and in a colleague of mine's case, rounded up his 2 golden retrivers that he had found loose in his field of sheep, and kept them safely in a stable, until my colleague could fetch them. Some farmers are very trigger happy though. These poor owners may possibly never get to know if the dogs were acually worrying the sheep or just merely in the field.

I know a kennels around here where several dogs escaped- the owner had such a high opinion of herself that she reckoned that all dogs were safe off a lead.

I think the kennels is dreadful in this instance. I worked in kennels once, and it was a dreadful eye opener. One kennels in this area proved so bad by not feeding dogs their special diets, resulting in some dying, that the vets cut out all the adverts for the kennels that were on the back of their appointment cards.

Faith177

My two do occasionally go into kennels as we attend a festival every year and they can't go.

However I checked the kennel before I booked it to check they were ok. I also expressed to the kennel that my two must NEVER be allowed off leads. As they are huskies you have a snowball hope in hell of getting them back!

I do feel for the owners here but it sounds like all parties are equally responsible in this. The owners ignored the kennels advise adout being off lead from what I understand. The kennel didn't act on their knowledge that one had escaped before. The farmer was a little bit too trigger happy.

A terrible accident and I feel so sorry for the two dogs

pelirocco

Many years ago our beagle wriggled out of his lead and started chasing sheep , luckily for us the farmer let him off with a warning because the ewes werent in lamb . had he done it again he would have been shot

zaksmum

How awful. Surely the kennels are totally negligent here? Not that this helps the poor dogs, or their owners.

olias

I live rurally, I know farmers, and I own dogs. This farmer is a dangerous, arrogant, trigger happy idiot. I suspect that beneath this is an ongoing dispute between him and the kennels owner.

Look at the evidence -The kennel owner and farmer are neighbours and have been for 8 years - therefore it must have been obvious to the farmer that there was a high likleyhood that the dogs were from his neighbours business, and were therefore someones loved pets, and that if any loss occurred, then it would have been paid for. Instead the farmer shot them without any attempt to catch them, and dumped them callously in a brook, again, without even asking enquiring with his neighbour. No sheep was injured. No sheep was in lamb, therefore no worry about spontaneous abortion. The farmer claims they had a sheep pinned down, yet the animals were both shot in the chest whilst jumping aver the brook, and again, no sheep was found with an injury.

Yes, the law does allow farmers to shoot dogs worrying their livestock, but...

Section 9 of the Animals Act 1971 provides that the owner of livestock, the landowner, or anyone acting on their behalf is entitled to shoot any dog if they believe it is the only reasonable way of stopping it worrying livestock.

...My underlining.

Olias

krlyr

olias wrote: »

Look at the evidence -The kennel owner and farmer are neighbours and have been for 8 years -

Equally the kennels must know there are sheep right next door. They know they have a dog that can jump their 4' fencing. They may know that the dog's ancestors come from a working background since the customers are regular, but even if they don't, they're Collies - so reasonable to assume they may take more than a passing interest in sheep. So why did they let this dog off-lead in an area they know it can, and has, escaped from?

olias

I'm not disputing the kennel owners were in the wrong - or the dogs owner for that matter for saying it was ok for their dogs to go off lead. The issue is that the farmers reaction was completely disproportionate and not 'reasonable' in the circumstances according to the law or any man in the streets interpretation.

It would have been 'reasonable' to shoot, if he couldn't locate the owners and the dogs were savaging a sheep, or even if they were chasing and distressing pregnant ewes and he had tried to catch or chase away the dogs and failed. But that wasn't what happened. He should and quite easily could have rang his neighbour and said get your ar5e round here NOW, there are two dogs I suspect are from your kennels in among my sheep and I WILL shoot them and/or charge for any losses if they are not caught and removed immediately.

The fact is that the reaction was disproportionate, unreasonable and therefore not right or legal.

Olias