sniffynintendo Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 Two pet husky dogs were shot dead when they strayed onto the agri-science farm next to Hillsborough Forest Park. Pets 'Ice' and 'Alaska' were shot dead by staff at the Agri-Food and Biosciences Farm (AFBI) last week after they were discovered worrying pregnant sheep. Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/im-devastated-says-owner-of-pet-huskies-shot-dead-on-farm-16102380.html#ixzz1jJyNbIdB A petition has been launched http://www.change.org/petitions/the-government-get-justice-for-ice-and-alaska#sign Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyMom09 Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 That's so terrible! I will be signing the petition Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tams Teeko and Keeta Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 I think its absolutely awful that this has happened and wonder why on earth a company like that didnt have a tranq gun....but....and i'm sure i'll be scorned for this......as a dog owner in the UK, I know that if my dogs get onto farm land the farmer has every right to shoot them. By saying they shouldn't...it puts the value of my animals above the value of theirs (which is of course exactly right to me....but to the farmer...their animal is more important). I certainly feel for the poor man (and dont know enough about the place to say if it was improperly secure or not) and think its awful. A ruling of tranquiliser before bullet should be passed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sian_lea Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 I think its absolutely awful that this has happened and wonder why on earth a company like that didnt have a tranq gun....but....and i'm sure i'll be scorned for this......as a dog owner in the UK, I know that if my dogs get onto farm land the farmer has every right to shoot them. By saying they shouldn't...it puts the value of my animals above the value of theirs (which is of course exactly right to me....but to the farmer...their animal is more important). I certainly feel for the poor man (and dont know enough about the place to say if it was improperly secure or not) and think its awful. A ruling of tranquiliser before bullet should be passed! Very true i would be devestated if my two were shot, i agree you can also see the farmers point of view that is his hard work and income to support his family, that he felt was being threatened and definitley tranquilisers are the way forward to benefit both parties involved in incidents like these. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mydiamond Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 I can't believe they actually shot the dogs.. Just WHAT do they mean by "there's no other choice"?! Just call the dog warden or walk up to the huskies to drive them away :mad: it's not like they'd bite or even growl if someone tried to make them leave the sheep alone =\ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sniffynintendo Posted January 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 In this case it was a government test facility which was not adequately fenced beside a popular local park, it was not a loan farmer out to protect his livelihood , which I think I could begin to understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tallulah Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 i think its absolutely outrageous that " that was the only choice" why not call the dog warden or vet, the dogs where micro chipped so it not like its hard to trace the owner! Plus if it was government testing grounds it should be either more secured or sign posted, not only that its by a public path, your bound to get people with dogs walking either off lead how r you going to stop your dog running at speed over to livestock?! I understand the the farmer that he has to keep their livestock safe but you could say for both parties they should have securer fencing or pens!! Again ud think most farmer would have secure paddocks or barns which they could of secured the dogs in and waited till either a warden or vet came!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Angel n Auroras Mum Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 edited coz I didnt realise they got free from their pen and were not offlead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onlythisgirl Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 I don't think shooting them was the answer by any means! They were family pets and could have been approached! They had several options but they choose the easiest one. I understand that they were worried for the safety of their animals, but what would they have done if it had been kids in there 'worrying' his sheep? I'm sure he would have taken different actions then, for the same reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skarre Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 As sad as this is that the two dogs were shot, surely the owner should be making sure their fence is in order to control their dogs before putting the blame onto someone else. I know this area very well, I live in nearby Lisburn, and the dogs escaped from Culcavy which is a good mile and a half from this site the owner should have better control over their dogs. In fact, it is illegal in Northern Ireland for a dog to be worrying animals under the Dogs Act (1983) NI and this owner should consider himself/herself very lucky not to be on the wrong end of a prosecution for failing to control their dogs. Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onlythisgirl Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 Without seeing his garden we don't know how secure it was, It may have been the most secure garden you could find, but we all know that despite our best efforts Huskies are escape artists! Also lots of things are illegal, doesn't make the crime punishable by death though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tams Teeko and Keeta Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 It does say in the article that originally they rounded the dogs up but they got free and also that they did try repeatedly to catch the dogs. And to be fair....to anyone who doesn't know huskies...well 2 could be pretty bloody intimidating. I think tranquiliser guns are the answer but....if heaven forbid this happened to me, I must admit I would fully blame myself. It isn't the facilities responsibility to keep dogs out, only to keep their animals in. I do think its awful...but not a situation where blame can really be placed anywhere...more a very, very tragic incident. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onlythisgirl Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 It does say in the article that originally they rounded the dogs up but they got free and also that they did try repeatedly to catch the dogs. And to be fair....to anyone who doesn't know huskies...well 2 could be pretty bloody intimidating. I think tranquiliser guns are the answer but....if heaven forbid this happened to me, I must admit I would fully blame myself. It isn't the facilities responsibility to keep dogs out, only to keep their animals in. I do think its awful...but not a situation where blame can really be placed anywhere...more a very, very tragic incident. I agree! I wasn't saying the owner or the huskies were not accountable, just that these things happen and shooting them was a bit extreme! If they had been aggressive then I would say that trying to catch them maybe wasn't the best idea and a tranquillser gun should be used. It doesn't say though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tams Teeko and Keeta Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 I agree! I wasn't saying the owner or the huskies were not accountable, just that these things happen and shooting them was a bit extreme! If they had been aggressive then I would say that trying to catch them maybe wasn't the best idea and a tranquillser gun should be used. It doesn't say though. Ahh sorry I misread. Tranq gun is definitely the best plan I think. But, maybe it'll happen, maybe not. Though if it did I think it would only be big companies or government based companies that would do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onlythisgirl Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 No worries, it can be hard to tell how things are meant in writing! Yeah, it's a shame. I imagine it happens quite a lot dogs finding their way onto farm land etc. Wouldn't they have tranquillisers on site for their animals anyway for when they need medical care? It could be easier to put in place than it sounds.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darc-Brittany Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 Signed, stupid resolution. I don't care if they were "worrying the sheep" I feel worst off for the dogs because their lives were taken from them way too soon. Who knows how far the sheep were even along, it's a government testing facility, I don't care too much for facilities like that. One of the dogs was only a year old ;_; So sad, I signed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darc-Brittany Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 Oh and ftr, no one messes with my dogs >_> I'd get revenge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skarre Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 @ onlythis girl: I was turning the owners argument around, playing devil's advocate if you will, he stated in the article "there is not satisfactory fencing in place to secure both areas". He was basically saying the onus is on the site to keep his dogs out. I am saying that is wrong and the onus is on him,as the owner of the dogs, to ensure that his property is in order to prevent them escaping. Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicolae Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 iv just signed. poor babies r.i.p little ones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taiya Blue and Miko too Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 It does say in the article that originally they rounded the dogs up but they got free and also that they did try repeatedly to catch the dogs. And to be fair....to anyone who doesn't know huskies...well 2 could be pretty bloody intimidating. I think tranquiliser guns are the answer but....if heaven forbid this happened to me, I must admit I would fully blame myself. It isn't the facilities responsibility to keep dogs out, only to keep their animals in. I do think its awful...but not a situation where blame can really be placed anywhere...more a very, very tragic incident. Totally agree, it's a hard situation that brings mixed feelings. Yes, it was wrong that the dogs escaped. Yes, it was wrong that they were worrying pregnant sheep. Yes, it was wrong they were shot instead of tranquilised or caught and held securely. One of the reasons that Miko was up for rehome is that there is a husky locally going round worrying and attacking sheep To date there have been around 15 killed by this one dog but they can't 100% prove that it is the dog everyone knows it is - and this dog happens to be Miko's father (farmers have seen him covered in blood but not at the exact time of the killings). Miko and his pal, Bruno, escaped just before xmas (over an 8ft wall with a banked run-up) and were luckily immediately seen by a neighbour who realised they were the pups, caught them and secured them both in a shed till owners came home. When the owners asked the local farmer if he'd seen the pup and the lab x pup he said no, but because of the problems with sheep being killed he would have shot them on sight to protect his livestock and livelihood, on the off-chance they were the dogs killing locally. The owners stated that this was one of the reasons for rehoming Miko (apart from admitting OMFG I didn't realise what a huskamute was like!) as they just couldn't take the risk of him ever getting out again by accident and being shot. Having farming in my family background, having lived on a working farm and having my wonderful dogs I can see both sides to this story and neither side have a happy ending. I think it is a very emotive subject that will have such differences of opinions and will end up with people having to agree to disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onlythisgirl Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 @ onlythis girl: I was turning the owners argument around, playing devil's advocate if you will, he stated in the article "there is not satisfactory fencing in place to secure both areas". He was basically saying the onus is on the site to keep his dogs out. I am saying that is wrong and the onus is on him,as the owner of the dogs, to ensure that his property is in order to prevent them escaping. Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk I understand that, and like i said blame can be placed on both sides. However if this facility is next to a public park, that is used daily be dog walkers, surely it would be common sense to ensure that their fencing is secure? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BingBlaze n Skyla Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 poor dogs u can understand why they did it - but like has been said a tranq should have been used instead - its the dogs owners priority to make sure their dogs are secure - - yes huskies CAN escape - but not all do - mine have never tried to escape the garden I understand that, and like i said blame can be placed on both sides. However if this facility is next to a public park, that is used daily be dog walkers, surely it would be common sense to ensure that their fencing is secure? leads? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onlythisgirl Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 poor dogs u can understand why they did it - but like has been said a tranq should have been used instead - its the dogs owners priority to make sure their dogs are secure - - yes huskies CAN escape - but not all do - mine have never tried to escape the garden leads? Oh absolutely! What i mean is they can't control other people and their dogs, so from a business point of view, wouldn't they want to do something about what they can control which is fix their fencing? They are next to a public area that people and their dogs walk in, so this could happen again, are they going to shoot the next dog that finds it's way in if they can't catch it? Yes, it is up to the dog owner whether they walk their dog on lead or not but they may not be aware of the facility and therefore a potential problem. And if they are aware and still walk their dogs off lead then that's their choice and they would have to deal with any repercussions. Just as a side note, i probably wouldn't have agreed with shooting (to kill) two lions if they had strolled in there and were worrying the sheep. Unfortunately this is a world where people are dominant and have changed the world to their needs and animals are expected to comply. If they don't they suffer the consequences for following their natural instincts. But i think that is probably for a different debate! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sniffynintendo Posted January 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 I agree we should keep our dogs well enclosed & on leads at all times and that farmers have the legal right to protect their animals but escapes do happen and there needs to be a more humane way of stopping a trespassing dog. Tranquilise it & return it to the owners on the condition that their enclosure is fit for purpose & fine them to cover costs, don't just kill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BingBlaze n Skyla Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 Oh absolutely! What i mean is they can't control other people and their dogs, so from a business point of view, wouldn't they want to do something about what they can control which is fix their fencing? They are next to a public area that people and their dogs walk in, so this could happen again, are they going to shoot the next dog that finds it's way in if they can't catch it? Yes, it is up to the dog owner whether they walk their dog on lead or not but they may not be aware of the facility and therefore a potential problem. And if they are aware and still walk their dogs off lead then that's their choice and they would have to deal with any repercussions. Just as a side note, i probably wouldn't have agreed with shooting (to kill) two lions if they had strolled in there and were worrying the sheep. Unfortunately this is a world where people are dominant and have changed the world to their needs and animals are expected to comply. If they don't they suffer the consequences for following their natural instincts. But i think that is probably for a different debate! yeh i agree the business should have a more preventative matter that doesnt involve a gun - its common sense that dogs - can sometimes escape - doesnt matter if its garden or collar - failed lead etc things happen n they should have other ways to prevent dogs from getting in Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.