My neighbor lets her chickens free range my yard constantly?

[McChooky]

Its better to be safe than sorry .Always best to consult a lawyer concerning property rights and livestock laws.

 

[NotAChickenKiller]

Different places have different laws. That may be the law where you live, but I recommend anyone else check their own local laws before doing that. Many US states do have similar laws, but I don't know about all of them, and I certainly do not know about other countries. It's safest to check first.

Thank you. I'm sure I would get in trouble. I think that at this point law enforcement would see anything as harassment. Gotta remember...law enforcement told me to shoot them knowing they could charge me for felony animal cruelty. This is Ohio. Good ole boys club and this middle age female is not in the club

 

[NatJ]

Gotta remember...law enforcement told me to shoot them knowing they could charge me for felony animal cruelty. This is Ohio.

Many places have laws that appear contradictory: you're allowed to kill a dog that is killing or chasing livestock, but you get in trouble for animal cruelty if you injure the dog instead of killing it, or if you kill it at any other time.

(I'm not positive whether that is the case in Ohio or not. In general, I think the "kill the dog" laws have existed longer, and then people made animal-cruelty laws without paying enough attention to what other laws already existed.)

 

[U_Stormcrow]

First, I am NOT an attorney.

Second, the law you read isn't the law. The law as interpreted by Judges is the law, and words in statutes often take on legal meanings far different from the common parlance. Or, for reasons of classical avoidance, judges try to interpret statutes in ways which do not result in one statute conflicting with another. Sometimes, that takes some torturous twisting and bending.

Ohio has a statute allowing a property owner, under some conditions, to kill an "at large" animal (such as a dog) while its in the process of harassing or destroying livestock. That statute is "the law". Ohio also has "Goodard's Law", and a recently passed additional reporting and enhanced penalty alteration to Goddard's Law which makes it a felony to kill or injury the very same animal, seemingly without exception for its attacks on other animals or livestock. That is also Ohio law.

The Ohio Courts (it appears to me) have "resolved" that conflict by grafting additional requirements onto the original statute allowing for the lethal protection of livestock. The offending animal must not only be trespassing - which occured the moment it entered the property, but it must have defeated or otherwise overcome an affirmative barrier to its entry - such as a fence. They justify this because the section of law regarding livestock and their protection ALSO governs fencing...

This may make for a relevant and interesting read to the above opinion.

Note, however, that its irrelevant to the original poster, who is both unwilling to spend moneys to fence things out, AND, even if they were willing to expendd those funds, they are unwilling to take the actions then permitted by statute -*killing the dog*- when (if) it defeated that fence.

 

[NotAChickenKiller]

First, I am NOT an attorney.

Second, the law you read isn't the law. The law as interpreted by Judges is the law, and words in statutes often take on legal meanings far different from the common parlance. Or, for reasons of classical avoidance, judges try to interpret statutes in ways which do not result in one statute conflicting with another. Sometimes, that takes some torturous twisting and bending.

Ohio has a statute allowing a property owner, under some conditions, to kill an "at large" animal (such as a dog) while its in the process of harassing or destroying livestock. That statute is "the law". Ohio also has "Goodard's Law", and a recently passed additional reporting and enhanced penalty alteration to Goddard's Law which makes it a felony to kill or injury the very same animal, seemingly without exception for its attacks on other animals or livestock. That is also Ohio law.

The Ohio Courts (it appears to me) have "resolved" that conflict by grafting additional requirements onto the original statute allowing for the lethal protection of livestock. The offending animal must not only be trespassing - which occured the moment it entered the property, but it must have defeated or otherwise overcome an affirmative barrier to its entry - such as a fence. They justify this because the section of law regarding livestock and their protection ALSO governs fencing...

This may make for a relevant and interesting read to the above opinion.

Note, however, that its irrelevant to the original poster, who is both unwilling to spend moneys to fence things out, AND, even if they were willing to expendd those funds, they are unwilling to take the actions then permitted by statute -*killing the dog*- when (if) it defeated that fence.

Wow that is confusing. I'm going to spend my weekend reading the Ohio Revised Code (ORC) and the Goodard's Law. I'm not sure but I think all this means I've been kicked off my property by a bunch of chickens. Just for an update, I got a hold of records and requested the police reports and call log and I found no police records were submitted, only call logs that say nothing about telling me to shoot them. No calls from the dog warden. I'm just going to kick back and leave it to karma and pray they don't attack my dogs. Thank you for your response

 

[McChooky]

Wow that is confusing. I'm going to spend my weekend reading the Ohio Revised Code (ORC) and the Goodard's Law. I'm not sure but I think all this means I've been kicked off my property by a bunch of chickens. Just for an update, I got a hold of records and requested the police reports and call log and I found no police records were submitted, only call logs that say nothing about telling me to shoot them. No calls from the dog warden. I'm just going to kick back and leave it to karma and pray they don't attack my dogs. Thank you for your response

Thats why some of us cave and build a fence lol

 

[hprc2002]

If she does not want to listen, find a good receipe for the rooster ("coq au vin" recommended)

 

[JMJ62]

"At Large".

Those are the keywords you want to look for in your municipality's code. Not, necessarily because you should immediately do what you are legally entitled to do - but because it provides a clear line in the sand with which you can guage an appropriately proportional response.

My birds free range. I'm a big proponent of it. ON MY (30 acre) PROPERTY.

Your neighbor is irresponsible and selfish, disrespecting the property rights of every one of her close neighbors, and co-opting your land for her purposes. Creating a "nuisance" - another legal phrase you should familiarize yourself with - in the process.

I recommend a blunt conversation. Not a threatening one, but a hopefully educational one, about the risks her birds pose to others, and the damages they are causing for which she is responsible. You might even offer to help her construct (at her expense, of course) a more secure run for her birds.

If those efforts fail, then I'd use lawful process to end her bird ownership. You can see my flock in my sig - if I had a neighbor like her, it would have already cost me my NPIP certification, and would threaten my culling project and my egg sales. I have little patience, and less tolerance for that.

I've for to agree with you, I know that when started with our chickens 3 years ago we didn't worry about our neighbors and our chickens, they stay in our yard. But when we got our rooster his crowing became an all day event and we asked our neighbors if this was a problem, they were ok with it, it wasn't very loud by them and 2 of them grew up on farms so were nostalgic about him. But I recommend to deal with it directly even if she may be moving away in a year. She isn't responsible enough to be a good owner...seems like she is just feeding the local predators!

 

[TheFarm41]

Borrow a dog for a while. I bet the chickens will move along.