Hound hunters and out of control dogs

[NatJ]

we decided it was time for some impromptu milk bottle target practice in the vicinity (although firing AWAY from where the dog was). Loud bangs got the dog to make itself scarce and it hasn't come back that I've seen.

It's illegal to do that [shoot to kill the dog] in my state if the dogs aren't actively presenting a threat to people, pets, livestock, or wildlife. The previous ones were doing that, but these two new ones were not.

I like what you did here, given that this was the first time with this dog and it was not causing actual harm at the time.

 

[DonyaQuick]

Apparently my husband saw an unfamiliar SUV driving erratically up and down the road in front of our property just prior to when I saw the two new dogs. What a surprise. I'm guessing then that those were some idiots playing at the remote hound hunting thing with their untrained pitbull mix and black lab. So stupid.

If the hound is just passing through I'd give it a break. I do understand if it's harassing livestock or posing a threat that is very frustrating.
Especially if you have repeat offenders. But even your best well-trained hound can blow off your commands sometimes when they get excited and get on a trail.
People put a lot of time money and effort into these hunting breeds and it stinks that there's no good place to go out and let them do what they do without taking the chance they're going to get on someone else's land from time to time.

I realize you may be meaning more traditional/low-tech types of hunting with a dog that stays by the hunter (which I am actually mostly cool with), but please don't try to defend this GPS/radio-collar style of hound hunting to me. I have compassion for runaway/lost pets, but these particular types of hunters are deliberately letting their animals out of line of sight and out of hearing range. They have zero control of their animals and don't intend to have it, so I really don't care how much time/money they've invested. If they don't have legal access to land where they can do what they want within the law, then they have no business having the dogs and using them the way they do.

 

[Bigtom Turkey]

Apparently my husband saw an unfamiliar SUV driving erratically up and down the road in front of our property just prior to when I saw the two new dogs. What a surprise. I'm guessing then that those were some idiots playing at the remote hound hunting thing with their untrained pitbull mix and black lab. So stupid.


I realize you may be meaning more traditional/low-tech types of hunting with a dog that stays by the hunter (which I am actually mostly cool with), but please don't try to defend this GPS/radio-collar style of hound hunting to me. I have compassion for runaway/lost pets, but these particular types of hunters are deliberately letting their animals out of line of sight and out of hearing range. They have zero control of their animals and don't intend to have it, so I really don't care how much time/money they've invested. If they don't have legal access to land where they can do what they want within the law, then they have no business having the dogs and using them the way they do.

This is a much more eloquent way of saying what I was thinking.

 

[shawluvsbirds]

those were some idiots playing at the remote hound hunting thing with their untrained pitbull mix and black lab. So stupid

Now that's dumb
Do you have wild hogs in your area? Maybe they are trying to hunt those.

And I get what your saying and yes, again, I get it. If they become repeat offenders and bothering livestock and you have warned them.. I'm all about sss.
But check what your local law says about that first if they are wearing a radio collar you may get into hot water.
I'm just sayin I have a bit more tolerance for people actually out trying to do something with their dogs..and at least having spent the money to put a radio collar on the dang thing and trying to get their dog back.
I put up with neighbors dogs that are off leash just running amok and no one is doing anything with them at all or even out looking for them all the time.
I don't appreciate that either. But it's not the dogs fault they have stupid owners.

Ps. I don't hunt my hound and I keep him on leash.
But I do have a lot of respect for those that do and wish there was a better solution.
Those dogs can get a long ways away really fast if they take a notion to.
If I were gonna hunt with mine I'd train him to recall with an e collar.
Then some do gooder would see that and have a fit and try to turn me in for animial abuse

 

[DonyaQuick]

But check what your local law says about that first if they are wearing a radio collar you may get into hot water.

Already looked into the laws quite a lot and gave a summary of them previously in the thread. In short, the collar just can't be deliberately damaged or removed. That's it. A fancy collar is not some kind of free pass to roam beyond what is permitted for any other dog.

and at least having spent the money to put a radio collar on the dang thing and trying to get their dog back.

And that is probably the core of the issue with this style of hound hunting in question: the people I'm dealing with were/are definitely NOT trying to get the dog back when it has gone where it doesn't belong because they straight up don't care. They wait until it stops somewhere and then try to trespass. The dogs are used as a means to hunt beyond property boundaries because most people won't stop them as they bomb through, and then they are used as either an excuse to trespass when confronted or as leverage to try to bully landowners into allowing the hunters go in. There is nothing about that strategy that's acceptable to me. That's the last I'll say on my views of specific type of GPS/radio collar long-distance hound hunting, since it should be pretty clear my views of the practice are both extremely negative and not going to change (particularly after that first encounter I had).

 

[NatJ]

I'm all about sss.
But check what your local law says about that first if they are wearing a radio collar you may get into hot water.

Already looked into the laws quite a lot and gave a summary of them previously in the thread. In short, the collar just can't be deliberately damaged or removed. That's it. A fancy collar is not some kind of free pass to roam beyond what is permitted for any other dog.

I thought that poster was saying "shoot, shovel, and shut up" won't work as well if the dog has a radio collar on. Either you bury the collar with the dog (so they can find the corpse), or you remove the collar and put it somewhere else (where they find the collar, and you get in trouble for removing the collar from the dog.)

 

[TomNY]

Apparently my husband saw an unfamiliar SUV driving erratically up and down the road in front of our property just prior to when I saw the two new dogs. What a surprise. I'm guessing then that those were some idiots playing at the remote hound hunting thing with their untrained pitbull mix and black lab. So stupid.


I realize you may be meaning more traditional/low-tech types of hunting with a dog that stays by the hunter (which I am actually mostly cool with), but please don't try to defend this GPS/radio-collar style of hound hunting to me. I have compassion for runaway/lost pets, but these particular types of hunters are deliberately letting their animals out of line of sight and out of hearing range. They have zero control of their animals and don't intend to have it, so I really don't care how much time/money they've invested. If they don't have legal access to land where they can do what they want within the law, then they have no business having the dogs and using them the way they do.

Sorry I've been doing it wrong all these years. If you like I could bring a couple hounds and you can show me first hand how you can keep up with them on a four or five hour chase.

 

[MisfitRanch01]

As someone who has hunted with hounds almost my whole life, personally I wouldn’t shoot at them or use bear traps as others have stated. If anything maybe fire in the air, although, if the dogs have relatively good training that won’t scare them, you can just hope they’re “gun shy”. In the state of NC it is against the law to remove or tamper with a radio collar (a) It is unlawful to intentionally remove or destroy an electronic collar or other electronic device placed on a dog by its owner to maintain control of the dog. (I call them tracking collars lol)
I can’t find anything on NYC’s law, if there is one, but I would mess around with that honestly.
As someone on both sides (a farmer wanting to protect their animals, and and someone who has hunted with hounds) if the dog starts to attack a animal, shoot it. (Please don’t take this as rude) I wouldn’t recommend shooting it just because it trespassed, it is a dog with irresponsible owners, it’s not the dogs fault that it doesn’t know property lines.

Edit: Had a little more to add about the irresponsible hound owners.
Like I said I grew up hunting with my farther and his hounds, it seems as though these dogs have little training, with my dads collars there is a ”tone” which is a beeping sound, his dogs were trained to return to him, or othwise stop what they were doing, there was also a “shock” of which could be turned up an down. Like I said, my father trained his dogs good, and we had hunting clubs To hunt with our dogs.
What makes me even more mad is that these owners are setting up a stereotype for hound hunters, which would be that we are irresponsible when most of us aren’t.
They are also not training there dogs properly before letting them go. The bad thing is, it’s not the dogs fault that is wasn’t taught properly, but it is the one who could loose it’s life because of irresponsible people like it’s owners, who set it up for failure.

 

[DonyaQuick]

In the state of NC it is against the law to remove or tamper with a radio collar (a) It is unlawful to intentionally remove or destroy an electronic collar or other electronic device placed on a dog by its owner to maintain control of the dog. (I call them tracking collars lol)
I can’t find anything on NYC’s law, if there is one

It's basically the same for NY state from the things I read (don't look at anything from from the bizarre subset of NY that is NYC though). I forget now whether it was a DEC page or other state documents that had it.

As someone on both sides (a farmer wanting to protect their animals, and and someone who has hunted with hounds) if the dog starts to attack a animal, shoot it. (Please don’t take this as rude) I wouldn’t recommend shooting it just because it trespassed, it is a dog with irresponsible owners, it’s not the dogs fault that it doesn’t know property lines.

That's also basically how the NY state laws work. The way things are written, shooting is clearly meant to be reserved for handling threats and/or serious property damage, not as a default response to seeing a stray domestic animal.

I thought that poster was saying "shoot, shovel, and shut up" won't work as well if the dog has a radio collar on. Either you bury the collar with the dog (so they can find the corpse), or you remove the collar and put it somewhere else (where they find the collar, and you get in trouble for removing the collar from the dog.)

Whether collar or none, my plan so far if I ever have to shoot a dangerous dog has been to handle it the same as a dangerous coyote/bear: do what has to be done and then ring up the relevant authority myself to report what happened like one is supposed to do. Anyway, hopefully I can get my message across to these people by other means and it won't ever come to that. Yesterday heard a lot of dogs in the distance then several bangs in the same area then a certain SUV zooming towards it all, so I don't think I'm the only one in the area getting rankled at this point.

 

[BigBlueHen53]