Chicken owner charged after shooting dog.

[YellaDog]

Quote:
The dog was 3 years old...but they'd only had it for a month. My guess is they got it from a rescue.. Either a shelter or a rescue, since it was three...you don't buy three year old purebreds at the petstore or breeder.

In fact, I'd be willing to bet $20 they got it from a rescue, which brings up an interesting thought.....don't most rescue organizations require fenced yards and that the new owners sign agreements to do certain basic things in order to ensure the dog's safety?

We did, and we got ours from the humane society..

So............doesn't it stand to reason, then, that the rescue or humane society should have a bone to pick with Mr. Gapp?

Someone should find out where the dog came from and tell them that one of their dogs didn't last a month with this idiot because he totally disregarded all the things he agreed to do.

If they jumped in and chewed his hiney for his stupidity, public opinion would most likely begin to swing in the other direction.

That's a fantastic idea and you are right, they usually won't let you adopt unless you have stated you have a fence, etc.
If it's a rescue, they will be very upset about that dog only lasting a month with that guy.
Where are the Oregonians? Aren't there any members who can find out where he got that dog? And if you do...report it to them.

 

[:D chicken]

i cant find many articles about this its really hard only that one cited

 

[Cats Critters]

This is the comment I left last night:

To me my chickens are my pets just like my cats and my dog and if my dog was attacking chickens(or any other livestock) I would understand if he was shot and would willing to pay for any damages and to replace the chickens(or livestock).This dog should have been on the end of a leash not bothering the chickens. If that dog had been harassing (harming) a dog or cat you would all be ticked off, but no you think chickens aren't pets and to a lot of people who own them think they are just like that dog was a pet. Is one pets live worth more then group of others?
PICTURES

One of my babies

 

[Mom2Cool]

Actually young adults are often retired/sold to a regular home. Show dogs, working dogs etc. a show dog often isn't shown until it's 2 years old so that it isn't doing the goofy puppy stuff etc. And working dogs like police &/or search & rescue I think are young adults too when they decide if they fit the bill or not & then the ones who don't are retired to a pet home. I believe however the screening & agreements would be much the same as rescue. Either way it's wrong to have them off leash & out of control..... Even a dog who will listen to commands if they're off on their own & out of sight of their owner well they're no longer looking for a command because the alpha isn't there. You know out of sight out of mind... Golden retrievers are real smart & my 2 golden girls they know they're not suppose to eat or chase chickens (I know they know this) but I still would not just walk away & leave them on their own with the flock in the back yard.... They're just dogs & they don't know.... It's funny in a way because these dog owners aren't just a danger to chicken owners & pedestrians etc but to the dogs they own. They have no idea what those dogs are going to run into off leash & out of sight. Someone with a gun or another dog that viscious or even wild animals. They're just irresponsible.

 

[JennsPeeps]

In case you're interested, here's a bio for the reporter who wrote the article. I think it includes contact information.

http://www.ktvz.com/Global/story.asp?S=7166318

 

[Mom2Cool]

chicken :

Quote:
The dog was 3 years old...but they'd only had it for a month. My guess is they got it from a rescue.. Either a shelter or a rescue, since it was three...you don't buy three year old purebreds at the petstore or breeder.

In fact, I'd be willing to bet $20 they got it from a rescue, which brings up an interesting thought.....don't most rescue organizations require fenced yards and that the new owners sign agreements to do certain basic things in order to ensure the dog's safety?

We did, and we got ours from the humane society..

So............doesn't it stand to reason, then, that the rescue or humane society should have a bone to pick with Mr. Gapp?

Someone should find out where the dog came from and tell them that one of their dogs didn't last a month with this idiot because he totally disregarded all the things he agreed to do.

If they jumped in and chewed his hiney for his stupidity, public opinion would most likely begin to swing in the other direction.

hehe wasnt reading carefully but ya im gonna try to dig some stuff up on this... very suspicous if u ask me​

you could try going to their breed club rescue I would google golden retriever rescue Oregion. I'm sure you'll find them through the national breed club too. If he's had the dog for just a month it might even still be listed as a dog who's "gone home" some where because he's only just gone home a month ago.

 

[JennsPeeps]

I just sent the reporter the following:

Dear Ms. Melhaf;

Your article at http://www.ktvz.com/global/story.asp?s=10576548 has sparked considerable discussion on the website called www.backyardchickens.com. Here is a link to the thread: https://www.backyardchickens.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=204274

Many of the people who read the site feel that your article was strongly biased toward the man who was breaking the leash law and permitting his dog to wander unsupervised. He is portrayed as the victim in your story whereas the man who shot the trespassing dog is described only as "the shooter". I strongly encourage you to read the entire thread on BackYardChickens to get another viewpoint. You'll also find that several of our enterprising members have tracked down the laws in Oregon and Redmond regarding dogs off-leash, definitions of livestock, and the protection thereof. The homeowner who was protecting his property and livestock has been portrayed unfairly, and your article does not seem to demonstrate journalistic unbias.

Your article is very disappointing.

Jennifer ***​

 

[Biddieacres]

Quote:
I sent this e-mail to the Redmond Police Department

To Whom It May Concern:
I recently read a news article that stated that a Redmond resident was arrested after he shot a dog with a pellet gun. He was charged with discharging a firearm in the city limits. The news article stated that chickens weren't livestock, so he couldn't defend them. Oregon state law defines them as livestock, city code does not. However, I think your officer was mistaken about his right to protect his property. Your city code states:

5.025 Discharge of Weapons.
1. No person other than an authorized peace officer or Airport personnel (designated by
the Airport Manager) controlling animals on the airport, or Public Works employee
(designated by the Public Works Director) exterminating burrowing animals at the
cemetery shall fire or discharge any gun or other weapon, including spring or airactuated
pellet guns, or a weapon which propels a projectile by use of a bow or sling,
explosives, or jet or rocket propulsion.
2. The provisions of this section shall not be construed to prohibit firing or discharging any
weapon by any person in the lawful defense or protection of his property, person or
family or at any duly licensed firing range.
3. A violation of this section is punishable as a Class A misdemeanor.
[Section 5.025 amended by Ord. #93-23 passed June 8, 1993]
[Section 5.025 amended by Ord. #98-10 passed January 27, 1998]

As you can see, the code states that he can protect his "property," not just livestock. Oregon State law is also very exact in its wording that a person can protect their livestock from a dog harassing them:

State Law

609.125 Definition of “livestock.” As used in ORS 609.135 to 609.190, “livestock” means ratites, psittacines, horses, mules, jackasses, cattle, llamas, alpacas, sheep, goats, swine, domesticated fowl and any fur-bearing animal bred and maintained commercially or otherwise, within pens, cages and hutches. [1999 c.756 §11]

609.150 Right to kill dog that harms or chases livestock. (1) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, any dog, whether licensed or not, which, while off the premises owned or under control of its owner, kills, wounds, or injures any livestock not belonging to the master of such dog, is a public nuisance and may be killed immediately by any person. However, nothing in this section applies to any dog acting under the direction of its master, or the agents or employees of such master

I own pet chickens. Yes, they can be pets. I know through experience that it can be very devastating to have dogs come and kill and/or injure them because some dog owners act in irresponsible ways. A dog doesn't have to be inside the coop to kill or injure them. It just has to be running around the coop acting like it wants to get in. This scares the birds and can often cause them to break their necks as they fly into the sides of their enclosure. That is why most state statues include the term “harassing.” It really doesn't matter if the dog is mean or not. Even if it just wants to play, playing with a dog will kill a chicken. The life of a dog does not take priority over the life any other type of pet.

I'm sending you this message because I hold police officers and departments in very high regard. There are a lot of poultry people in this country, and it is a growing trend. Having a golden retriever invading a yard and killing pet chickens is no different than having a pit bull come into a yard and killing a golden retriever. A pet is a pet. There is a lot of internet talk going on about this incident. Your officers and department will be under scrutiny to see if the actual laws and codes are upheld. Please don't let this injustice to Mr. Harris continue. I'm sure the man was desperate to stop the flow of stray dogs roaming onto his property and harassing his pets.

The article I read didn't mention if the dog owner was ticketed for having his dog roaming off leash. Was he? I know it may seem odd that somebody so far away would care about this, but chicken owners all over the country are following this. There are internet groups with as many as 35,000 members monitoring this situation.

Thank you very much for taking the time to read this.

Thank You,
Jody

Will you be my friend? hehe

 

[horsejody]

Quote:
The dog was 3 years old...but they'd only had it for a month. My guess is they got it from a rescue.. Either a shelter or a rescue, since it was three...you don't buy three year old purebreds at the petstore or breeder.

In fact, I'd be willing to bet $20 they got it from a rescue, which brings up an interesting thought.....don't most rescue organizations require fenced yards and that the new owners sign agreements to do certain basic things in order to ensure the dog's safety?

We did, and we got ours from the humane society..

So............doesn't it stand to reason, then, that the rescue or humane society should have a bone to pick with Mr. Gapp?

Someone should find out where the dog came from and tell them that one of their dogs didn't last a month with this idiot because he totally disregarded all the things he agreed to do.

If they jumped in and chewed his hiney for his stupidity, public opinion would most likely begin to swing in the other direction.

That's a fantastic idea and you are right, they usually won't let you adopt unless you have stated you have a fence, etc.
If it's a rescue, they will be very upset about that dog only lasting a month with that guy.
Where are the Oregonians? Aren't there any members who can find out where he got that dog? And if you do...report it to them.

I think I found the rescue, but I won't post their name. It's not their fault, so I wouldn't want them bombarded with e-mails. I did send them an e-mail with a link to the article and asked them to please not let the couple take anymore dogs.

 

[horsejody]

Quote:
Of course!! Always!!