dogs on land

[anton 0]

Thirdly,there is no trespass law in this country,you can only be prosecuted for causing damage by trespass (fences,crops,etc).

 

Well pointed out, i've been following this thread very interesting some of the reply's

no law as such against trespass but, they will have you for either aggravated trespass

(this is when you are asked to leave the land by the land owner or an appointed person

and you argue against it. the best method is say nothing and go. you are not required by law to give

any details i.e. name etc)

or as you so quite rightly pointed out damage through trespass mind you i thought

most of the "poacher/lamping" types on here would have known that already

 

btw i think you will find that the discharge of weapons is 60 feet from the center of the queens highway

but, any discharge is bad news

[artic 595]

The dogs should have been on a lead on private land, If it was me and my dogs?? I'd report the matter to the police a land owner/farmer has to have a good reason to shoot a dog?? worrying stock etc: he can't just shoot a dog or at it!! if its just off the lead!!! I'd report the fecker for reckless discharge of a firearm and causing alarm and distress

 

Tom

THAT WILL BE A HARD ONE TO PROVE IN THE LAW AND COURTS. UNLESS WITNESSED BY A THIRD PARTY THAT THE LANDOWNER/FARMER INTENDED TO POINT AIM AND SHOOT AT THE DOG THEN IM AFRAID ITS NOT GOING NO WHERE. CAUSING ALARM AND DISTRESS IS ALSO HARD TO PROVE. IT HAS TO BE ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION.

THE PERSON IN QUESTION WILL USE THE EXCUSE OF YES I SHOT AT A CROW ETC.....

AS A MEMBER OF PUBLIC YOU CANNOT CHOOSE TO REPORT SOMEONE FOR SOMTHING YOU BELIEVE HAS DONE WRONG.I.E REPORT THE FECKER FOR RECKLESS DISCHARGE OF A FIREARM CAUSING ALARM AND DISTRESS. THE POLICE WILL DECIDE WHEN THEY ARE CALLED TO SCENE WHAT ACTIONS TO TAKE. THE CPS WILL DECIDE WHEATHER OR NOT TO PROCEED.

[littlefish 549]

as far as i,m aware the dog has to be worrying stock and there has to be a witness before the farmer can do any shooting,

 

As i understand it, a farmer only has to think that a dog may worry livestock on his land and he is entitled to shoot it.

[Matt 160]

Am not sure, but I was under the impresssion that "Any dog not on a lead where there are sheep present, may be shot by the farmer (or his agent) in the interest of stock control and management"

You are under the wrong impression. The dog must be 'in the act' of worrying, and the law clearly states 'as a last resort'.

 

As i understand it, a farmer only has to think that a dog may worry livestock on his land and he is entitled to shoot it.

 

Totally wrong. They are NOT entitled to shoot a dog if they 'think' it 'may' worry livestock.

 

The law is clear:

 

1. The dog has to be actually in the act of worrying.
   
2. It must be as a last resort (i.e. the farmer must try and stop it by other means first)
   
3. They have to inform the police of their actions within 48 hours.
   

The other area of contention is about highways. The law states that it is an offence to discharge a firearm (that includes airguns) within 50 feet of the centre of a public highway, if by doing so you interfere or endanger a member of the public.

[SMOGGY 34]

not saying what the farmer did was right, but why were they on his land in the first place if they haven't got premission, when i grew up on my dads farm i was sick of arguing the toss with strangers, over why people think its ok to let their dog run all over some else land(whether their doing any damage or not). Its some else property, you wouldn't like it if i came into your house uninvited and let my dog run around your home and just say its ok because we're not doing any harm,

 

ok its a bit extreme letting off his firearms, but do you take a chance in been bitten by the dogs, or been attacked by the owners?

 

and when it comes to what the law actually says - well how many of us on here actual abide by the law totally !

 

There was no harm done - lesson learnt (don't go back there)

[para1 11]

not saying what the farmer did was right, but why were they on his land in the first place if they haven't got premission, when i grew up on my dads farm i was sick of arguing the toss with strangers, over why people think its ok to let their dog run all over some else land(whether their doing any damage or not). Its some else property, you wouldn't like it if i came into your house uninvited and let my dog run around your home and just say its ok because we're not doing any harm,

 

ok its a bit extreme letting off his firearms, but do you take a chance in been bitten by the dogs, or been attacked by the owners?

 

and when it comes to what the law actually says - well how many of us on here actual abide by the law totally !

 

There was no harm done - lesson learnt (don't go back there)

 

SMOGGY You can't threaten people with firearms (don't go back there) no matter how much fecking land you own .I would have called the police there and then (mobile every body's got one)and said I was being threatened by someone with a shotgun see what would have happened then. I don't smoke but i do get careless with my fag ends, bast**ds piss me off.

[leegreen 2,100]

not saying what the farmer did was right, but why were they on his land in the first place if they haven't got premission, when i grew up on my dads farm i was sick of arguing the toss with strangers, over why people think its ok to let their dog run all over some else land(whether their doing any damage or not). Its some else property, you wouldn't like it if i came into your house uninvited and let my dog run around your home and just say its ok because we're not doing any harm,

 

ok its a bit extreme letting off his firearms, but do you take a chance in been bitten by the dogs, or been attacked by the owners?

 

and when it comes to what the law actually says - well how many of us on here actual abide by the law totally !

 

There was no harm done - lesson learnt (don't go back there)

Feck me it wasn't you was it Smoggy?

[brookie 1,193]

only once the prick would shoot a gun towards my kids he wouldnt shoot it again the arrogant twat

[Caravan Monster 323]

If a landowner does something as reckless as this with a gun, call the police. Use your mobile- video the fecker ranting and making threats and firing his gun- he' ll go to prison- it doesn' t matter how much land he owns.

 

Get really fecked off with landowners who think its still the nineteenth century, and they can do what the feck they like just because they happen to have inherited a farm or estate.

 

Just think what would happen if you did the same thing at the bottom of your garden- you would be doing time.

[Malt 379]

I'd get on the phone to the old bill. We all feel that the law is against us a lot of the time, but it's also there to protect us. From what I can gather, the farmer broke the law and should face the consequences, the same as any one of us would.

[desertdog 149]

if the farmer in question gets to see this subject he,s probably handed his self in for the fear of a lynch mob, dont let him get away with it, phone plod.

[the patman 4]

after reading the replies i decided to call plod they came tonight to hear what happened straight away he implied we shouldnt have been there so i informed him about the situation regarding the control of dogs and that if they wanted us to leave they should have asked. also found out that the farmer in question doesent own or rent the field that we were in anyway plod went up to see farmer who gave a different account of what happened but he has had a check up to see if his licence is in order and logged the incident incase there is any more bother.this is not the first time this has happened only nobody has ever had the balls to stand up to him. thanks for all replies.

[Ratman2 2]

Something doesn’t quite add up here, I may be wrong, but I have a gut feeling. :db: