Neighbor's Dogs Killed 18 Chickens

[FrankHomestead]

OK see this is one of the reasons I'd go to jail!! the court looks at chickens as a "serve a purpose animal".but not a dog??? Nope. what makes a dog's life more valuable than a chicken's life? Opinion. And that's bullshit.

 

[FrankHomestead]

Let's not confuse prey drive with aggression, folks.

I actually associate prey drive in the same category as aggression when it comes to MY dogs. Being the lifestyle I live, if a dog is persistent on my flock, that is an aggressive dog, to my standards. let's say in a city the dog would be deemed aggressive if went after people. In my situation....I wish they'd go after people. PLEASE, attack my in-laws so they never come back!!! Still nope....lick and wag their tails...*sigh*

 

[jvls1942]

the point is the value of the chickens lost.
it doesn't matter one iota whether you replace them or not.
you lost your chickens, you had time, feed and labor in them, . plus housing.
POL ? some were giving eggs. that is past POL. they were laying hens.
and I would not even mention that they were potential layers. as far as they know, they were all laying. prove otherwise..
You are going to have to go gor the gusto, because you never know how much they will not allow..
put it all out there and let the judge whittle away..

 

[centrarchid]

I think their will be proportionality to anything a court would award for loss of birds. Losses occured on chicken owners property but no protections in place. That will be factored in.

Also think about how this discussion would be considered by the same court or the dog owners. Doubling down I think is the word used for what is likely to occur.

 

[jvls1942]

any animal attacked on your property by a neighbor's dog is protected by imminent domain. it is on your property. period.
if the neighbor's dog stayed on their property there would be no issue.

 

[centrarchid]

Courts will vary depending on who is making call. Some will be like me. Law is not that black and white.

 

[The Moonshiner]

I think their will be proportionality to anything a court would award for loss of birds. Losses occured on chicken owners property but no protections in place. That will be factored in.

Also think about how this discussion would be considered by the same court or the dog owners. Doubling down I think is the word used for what is likely to occur.

Having a hard time understanding what is meant by most of this post but this part I get but don't agree with....
"Losses occured on chicken owners property but no protections in place. That will be factored in."
When someone's animal comes onto your property and kills your animals it doesn't matter if you had no protection or fort Knox they are liable for damages.
You are not required to provide any protection from outside threats.
There are cases here every now and again for livestock killed or injured never heard of a court ever interested on what kind of or how you provided protection.
You are responsible for containing your own animals to your property not whether or not the other party did enough to stop your dog from getting to your animals.

 

[jvls1942]

Having a hard time understanding what is meant by most of this post but this part I get but don't agree with....
"Losses occured on chicken owners property but no protections in place. That will be factored in."
When someone's animal comes onto your property and kills your animals it doesn't matter if you had no protection or fort Knox they are liable for damages.
You are not required to provide any protection from outside threats.
There are cases here every now and again for livestock killed or injured never heard of a court ever interested on what kind of or how you provided protection.
You are responsible for containing your own animals to your property not whether or not the other party did enough to stop your dog from getting to your animals.

kind of what I said but in a different way.

 

[centrarchid]

Run it through the courts and see. The situation leading to losses had two parties at fault.

 

[The Moonshiner]

Courts will vary depending on who is making call. Some will be like me. Law is not that black and white.

I would love to see one example of that. Any links to such a cases outcome involving reduced compensation for owners lack of providing adequate protection?