Chicken owner charged after shooting dog.

[Rillion]

I love how the flyer they wrote speaks as if it's their God-given right to walk their dogs off-leash in the "large wooded uninhabited area" and anything bad that happens as a result is anyone's fault but their own.

Yes, it's lovely to take your dog for a walk in the forest or in a park. But you know what? You're incurring some risk by doing that. The risk is that your dog might get in a fight with another dog or cat, have a bad encounter with a snake, porcupine, skunk, etc., or-- if your dog is not trained well enough to stay with you-- may trespass on someone's property and cause them to feel threatened enough to hurt or kill it.

Responsible dog owners realize that this risk exists, and keep their dog close to them while on the walk and not on other people's property. The fact that John Gapp chose to walk his dog in the wooded area is really beside the point entirely, as the dog was not shot there. His dog was shot in someone's backyard, where it didn't belong, because he didn't control it. Face facts, Mr. Gapp, it's your own fault.

 

[LizzyJo]

Here is my favorite part of John's and Jo Ann's flyer--

PLEASE, PLEASE BEWARE! If you have a dog, don't let him/her get close to Harris' house.

Let it run anywhere else in the whole world by not by the Harris house. They still don't get it.​

 

[LizzyJo]

cmjust0, how did you get a copy of the flyer? What a sleuth! Good work!

 

[WalkingWolf]

Quote:
Let it run anywhere else in the whole world by not by the Harris house. They still don't get it.

Hey I like that I think I will have that posted on my fence 'PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE BEWARE! If you have a dog do not let him get near my chickens in my yard' works for me. Just control your dog and no problems.

 

[LizzyJo]

 

[cmjust0]

Quote:
What chaps my hide is that the Gapps and others like them have the gall to use the term "walking" to describe the act of taking your dog into a wooded area and turning it loose.

I mean, how is that "walking" a dog? When you "walk" a dog, aren't you supposed to walk, too?

Ya know, another member pointed something out and it's bugged me ever since.. The story says that the dog went out of his sight and he called her and called her, then "came upon" a home on SW 43rd street..

Ok, so you're thinking....he must have continued walking through the woods looking for the dog, right, and then come upon the back of Harris's house..

But then, when he finds his dead dog, he states that he carried her BACK TO THE CAR.

Where did the car come from?

I mean, obviously he either A) returned to the house without the dog and jumped in the car to go hunt her down, or B) he never actually set foot in the woods with his dogs to begin with.. Think about it -- there's no actual evidence that he accompanied his dogs at all..

I wouldn't doubt one bit that his idea of "walking" the dogs is getting up to open the back door, then promptly re-gluing his fat rear end to the couch.

I mean...did you see the guy? He doesn't exactly look like the twice-a-day hiker type. He could use a walk, himself.

 

[cmjust0]

Quote:
Oh, don't you worry about that.. I gots my ways.

(...plus, if I tell you how I did it, other people may do it, and they may not be so discreet with Harris's street address...

)

 

[horsejody]

Well, I sent a cordial e-mail to the news station stating that the report was a bit biased. I just got their response:

Hello,
Thank you for your concerned email regarding the story we did on the dog/chicken story in Redmond, OR. Based on our comments on the bottom of the article, I would say the responses have been mixed nearly half and half by both chicken and dog lovers. But many times, our love for our pets, whatever kind they may be, actually can help you see bias in a story like this, believe me, I have seen it before.
But I have actually received emails saying that it was a balanced story. We are only able to report what the police and those involved tell us. The fact is, the man with the chickens, Ed Harris, was charged and has a court date. The police say it was animal abuse and according to them, chickens are not livestock. I cannot argue, nor is it my job, to argue with the police when they charge someone. We can ask why, or sometimes ask what evidence they have, but for now, it is in a judge's hands. We just reported those facts and contacted both sides involved. Unfortunately, as you read, Ed Harris was not able to comment just yet by advisement of his attorney, or else I would have put his entire side of the story on air just as I did the dog owner. He was very friendly with me and wished he could speak and said it was a tragedy. The dog owner, John Gapp, knows he did wrong by not having a leash on his pet, no one is arguing that fact and they readily admitted it. But unfortunately, according to police, that fact didn't matter. It most likely will come into play if they go to trial and who knows, the charges may very well be dropped. But for now, the police maintain it was animal abuse.

If you'd like to contact them you can call and speak with an officer at Redmond PD: (541) 504-3400 because it sounds like you're more upset with the charges than possibly with my story. We reported the facts as the police told us and more is to come. There is always more to a story. Thank you for your concern, and I'm sorry you feel that way.

Sincerely,
Nina Mehlhaf
NewsChannel 21

 

[Brindlebtch]

cmjust0 I am seriously impressed with your research and your discretion!

Isn't it funny how in most towns and cities nowadays how 'uninhabited' areas are surrounded by 'inhabited' areas? It just boggles the mind!

 

[FrenchHen]

horsejody is more than a squeaky wheel, she's a chicken attorney!

Great work!