So there’s been a story on the news* about a hound dog in Vermont that was shot by a game warden for chasing deer – and the owners are sobbing about how wrong it was, how the dog was just “playing” with the deer.
Screw them. They’d been warned repeatedly, including in writing, that they had to stop their dog from doing that. Neighbors had complained multiple times. It’s against the law in Vermont to let your dog chase wildlife, especially in the spring, when the animals are recovering from the stresses of winter and bearing young. The law explicitly allows game wardens to shoot dogs doing that.
The dog wasn’t at fault; she was just doing what came naturally.
The warden wasn’t at fault – he was following the law after repeated attempts to resolve the problem less drastically.
The owners are the ones at fault, and I have no sympathy for them – only for the poor dog who had to pay for their irresponsible carelessness, and the animals she’d chased and frightened.
Not just Vermont, harassing wildlife is treated with severity in most places I know of. And you often don’t need to call a warden or other LEO first. Keep your pets on leash or supervised.
In Arkansas, land owners can shoot unattended dogs. Chasing deer is frowned upon, except during the right deer season. Fox hunters have a bit more freedom to run their hounds. But it is considered good form to tell landowners of your intent. We are.next to a huge state owned property so we get a lot of fox hunters. Generally it doesn’t bother us.
Personally I would rather let the dog be. I don’t like killing animals of any kind. As stated the dog owner is at fault.
The law does allow fines. But it appears from the story that there had been multiple attempts to get them to comply already; also, and this isn’t in the story, I suspect that the warden caught the dog in midchase yet again and knowing the history felt he had to put a stop to it by the only means guaranteed to work. Heck, if I’m going to speculate, perhaps the warden came upon the dog when it had cornered or pulled down a deer – or its fawn – and was about to kill it.
It’s an occupational hazard of owning a dog, I guess. It’s unreasonable to keep an active dog on a leash all the time, and sometimes, deer just break cover out of nowhere - it’s happened to me and my dog several times - I’m fairly sure my dumb little mutt (no bigger than a cat, but deeply fond of running, and will try to run along with anything else that is running) genuinely just wants to run with the tree-head doggos, but that makes it no less frightening and dangerous for the deer.
In short, I try really hard to do my very best to keep my dog under control because it’s not in my interest to lose her either because she runs into trouble (or runs so far as to become lost), or gets shot by a farmer or gamekeeper (admittedly probably a smaller risk here in the UK than in the USA, but still a nonzero risk). If it happens, I’ll certainly be sobbing about it (but not on the TV news) - I feel like I’m being as responsible as I possibly can, under the circumstances. You can’t control everything.
It’s a shame that our ultimate response to every problem is “shoot.” You know the authorities are going to shoot the deer too when they decide there’s an overpopulation.
This case got to where it did partly as a consequence of dogs being considered property. Animal Control could have taken the dog in response to repeated infractions if the dog’s well-being was a principle concern of the law. Instead, the law finds it easier to destroy the “property” if “it” is misused rather than try to seize “it.”
I am a dog person through-and-through but do not want to see wildlife (even pigeons) harassed by anyone, but it seems like this situation could have been resolved some other way.
The relevant Vermont law states: “A State game warden, deputy warden, sheriff, deputy sheriff, constable, police officer, or State Police may kill by shooting with firearms, dogs, whether licensed or unlicensed, when in such close pursuit as to endanger the life of a deer or moose or found in the act of wounding, maiming, or killing deer or moose."
So the warden couldn’t legally have just shot the dog because it was in the woods, it had to have been chasing or already caught a deer.
Sympathy all around but the warden did what had to be done. Least sympathy for the owners but I’ll let just a hint that direction as well. Just because you can afford and love a pet doesn’t mean you are a person who should have one but that is just how it is.
