Chicken owner charged after shooting dog.

[Brindlebtch]

Years ago when I was young and a lot more active and the city was considering anti-dog legislation we would arrange for dog breeders and performance people to bring their dogs (leashed) and stand outside city hall, which was nice and shady and park like. We could sit on benches and there would be many many people and dogs just sitting around chatting and having an nice time.

What about a nice chicken outing the morning of the court date? Nice picnics and socializing.

 

[Rillion]

Man, I've been trying to read the comments on the KTZV site, but there are so many of them, and so many of them are depressing!

Comment: "But chickens are worth so much less than dogs!"
Reply: Hmm, I see dogs offered for free all of the time...in fact, there are loads of them sitting in pounds all over the country because nobody wants them.

Comment: "But you eat chickens!"
Reply: Plenty of chicken owners do not, or at least don't eat their own chickens. And I would be willing to eat dog, if it weren't illegal.

Comment: "But the dog is a family friend!"
Reply: And chickens can't be? I guess you need to read the BYC forum and see how upset people can be when their chickens die, especially when they die because somebody's dog ate them!

Comment: "But the dog was a Golden Retriever! It wouldn't hurt a fly."
Reply: Last I checked, retrievers are bird dogs. Besides, all dogs have a hunting instinct. It's dumb to say that any of them would never chase and kill another animal.

Comment: "You must just hate dogs!"
Reply: Funny, most of the people I see siding with the chicken owner love dogs, or at least have nothing against them. They just see the dog as the attacker and the chicken owner as the defender.

Comment: "Nobody loves a chicken!"
Reply: Ohhhhhh, you have no idea......

Okay, I'll stop now. Just had to get that out.

 

[Brindlebtch]

Man both my dogs and me have been bitten by golden retrievers!

And I have AmStaffs, I know I know..................but they are my babies, too, right along with my chickens!

 

[DiVon80]

Quote:
I agree with you! This is a post I need to get off of!

 

[Tweeza]

Quote:
It is a firearm.

That's an amazingly silly statement. Where's the fire? It's air powered. Is a slingshot a firearm? Words have meanings.

We borrowed a pellet gun once to target practice. That pellet gun shot a pellet that penetrated deep into a piece of plywood. I can see where it would have killed a dog hit in the right place. This was not a bb gun but more like a real gun!!!

A big piece of duck tape with "bang your dead" written on it would have been a good thing if the dog was friendly enough. If the dog wasn't friendly then the guy did the right thing. I think I stradle the fence. I can see both sides and feel for both sides. But, this was not a case of an accidental escape. The guy was obviously frustrated with irresponsible dog owners.

 

[vicki2x2]

Quote:
Dear Mr. Dugan,

This email is in support of Ed Harris. Mr. Harris was recently charged with shooting a dog in Redmond for harassing his chickens. Backyard poultry keeping is a growing hobby. Chickens make great pets and are fun and interesting.

A dog owned by John Gapp was allowed to run loose and enter Mr. Harris' yard. A dog does not have to be in the coop to injure or kill a chicken. It just has to be running around the coop acting like it wants to get in. The birds panic and fly into the walls of the enclosure breaking their necks or causing other serious injuries. Since Mr. Gapp readily admitted to a newsreporter that he lets his dogs run in the area often, it is probably safe to assume that his dogs are repeat offenders. A person can only take having their pets threatened for so long before they have to stop the predator. Dogs are predators. Chickens are prey animals. They don't mix.

I have read the Oregon state statutes and the Redmond city codes. The laws appear to allow the shooting of a dog if it is killing your livestock. Under state law, poultry are livestock. Under city code they are not.

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.



Redmond city code



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]



It would appear that city code allows for the discharging of a firearm within the city limits if it is in defense of your property. It doesn't say that the property has to be livestock. I think that it is a real shame that Mr. Harris is facing charges. He was protecting his property (as it appears the law allows). An irresponsible dog owner put Mr. Harris in the unfortunate position of having to decide whether his chickens lived or the dog lived. I don't see how it can be considered animal cruelty to shoot the dog but not be animal cruelty to allow the dog to cause the suffering of chickens breaking their necks in a panic. Having a golden retriever come into your yard and kill your birds is no different than having a pitbull come into your yard and kill your golden retriever. It is ridiculous that Mr. Harris was even charged.



There are thousands of poultry enthusiasts watching this across the country. There has been quite a bit of chat about it on the forums. One forum alone has over 35000 members. We are all watching to see how this comes out. I truly hope that the law recognizes that dogs kill poultry (yes, even nice dogs) and the laws have been carefully crafted over the years to allow people to deal with them when they are a threat. It also seems that the city code was written to allow people to discharge a firearm to defend their property. If the dog owner cared so little about his dog that he let it run wild, why should Mr. Harris have cared any more about it when it was threatening his chickens?



I don't live in your area, but this really hits home for me. Last year, my neighbor's dogs (whom they claim to love) got loose. They killed 13 of my pet chickens. It was heartbreaking. Most of them were rare and hard to replace breeds that I had raised from chicks. The monetary loss was over $1000. The grief was much greater. Yes, chickens can be pets, and they can be loved like other pets. I love dogs. I have a dog that I treat better than many people treat their kids. But it is disgusting when some dog owners expect to be able to use other people's property as if it was a public dog park. Doing so puts the dog, people and other people's pets at risk. Also, please don't think that it is always feasable or safe to get hold of a dog to stop a killing frenzy. I personally know of 2 occasions where a a person was injured trying to get hold of a dog that was after chickens. Regardless of the breed, it is never safe to grab a strange dog that is excited and exercising a strong prey drive. Dogs (especially poorly trained bird dogs) get so excited over poultry that it is very likely that they will bite a stranger that grabs them. Many otherwise friendly dogs are very dangerous around poultry. They view them as irresitable squeaky toys to tear to shreds. Loose dogs cannot be trusted. That's why we have leash laws.



Please, don't let the injustice against Mr. Harris continue. The whole country is watching.



Thank you for taking the time to read my message.



Sincerely,

Jody

That is an awesome letter Jody, can you add about 35000 names to that???

 

[Wolf-Kim]

Quote:
I agree with you! This is a post I need to get off of!

What are you two talking about? The chicken owner did NOT own the dog. It was somebody else's dog harrassing his birds and tresspassing on his land.

Here's the summary:
Dog owner turns his dog loose to "excercise"(AKA do whatever it wanted)
Dog, unnattended by his owner, ran onto someone's land and around the chicken coop.
Chicken owner shot dog.
Dog died shortly after, (due to what I imagine was a lucky shot).

Sorry if the summary was unneccesary. I just think you guys are a little confused, or at least I'm confused on whether you are confused or not. Just trying to clear it up.

 

[citrusdreams]

Quote:
I agree with you! This is a post I need to get off of!

The dog was not out with the owner: the owner took the dog out for a walk, unleashed the dog, and then couldn't find him.

He didn't shoot the dog while it was running by: he shot at it with an airgun and went back outside with a bigger gun to take out the dog, meaning the airgun didn't stop the dog from being where he shouldn't have been in the first place.

I don't really get what you're so mad about. The dog's owner was violating a leash law, in addition to trespassing, and was nowhere near the dog to supervise. The chicken owner, otoh, saw a threat to his chickens and shot at the dog with an airgun, and with that failing, got a more powerful weapon and shot the dog. He's not going to be prosecuted for anything more than firing a firearms within city limits. The ordinances are black and white to support him.

 

[crait]

If the city ever gets me for having my birds in The City and they try to say they're livestock, this will be perfect evidence to protect myself with.

 

[deerman]

Quote:
I agree with you! This is a post I need to get off of!

I had two deer killed by dogs just running along the fence, peafowl also.

Dogs dont have to get in the pens to kill animals.