Coyote Poacher Kills Dog - Chatham Area

I don't know the poster, but took this from Facebook. If you know anyone who was out in this area on the weekend please encourage them to return the animal for a proper burial:

To the coyote hunter who was out on my parent's posted property Sunday around 1:30pm yesterday, or anyone who knows them.

My parents would like to bury their dog. Collared with municipal tags. Mull ON. Knights Line/Base Rd.

Please have the decency to bring her back where you found her or leave a note in the mailbox etc. with her location ( you were directly across from their house, they heard the shots, then saw the blood and drag to the abandoned rail trail shortly after) Probably won't want to identify yourself, understandable. From hunters to hunters trying to sort this out. Thanks for sharing this post.

Going with the assumption that the hunter didn't know this was a pet until it was too late. Thanks.

About 500 yrds due south of Knights Line/Base Rd. Attachment 38099Attachment 38100Attachment 38101Attachment 38102

That is a terrible shame , someone's pet killed , accidentally ?? , because the shooter was trigger happy , did not properly identify his target.
Purposely ?? we will never know , stuff like this happens too many times , as we have seen posted on here over the years.

I hope the owners can find out who did it and have him charged by the MNRF AND Police he then can suffer the consequence.

That dog looks nothing like a coyote. Very sad. Irresponsible “hunter” if you want to call them that. Reminds me of the story of a guy who shot an elk thinking it was a deer.
Rule number one, know your species that you’re hunting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Besides trespassing to hunt,anyone who can't tell the difference between a Coyote and this pup needs to sell their gear and give up Coyote hunting for good. I hate it when this shyte happens. It's probably useless to ask the clown to do the right thing.

I'm so sorry that has happened to you. Hard enough to lose a dog in a normal way let alone that way. I'm so sorry.

Just to say first that loosing a beloved pet is very hard. Sorry to hear about it.

But now I will be the devil's advocate for a second. Since this came off of Facebook can anyone find a alternative source to the story.....

If it's a Anti-hunting hoax we are only helping by calling out the "Hunter". If it was a real event there should be other sources to backup the Facebook post.

I think age and betrayal/hoaxes made me doubt many more things these days, then I would have in the past

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Just to say first that loosing a beloved pet is very hard. Sorry to hear about it.

But now I will be the devil's advocate for a second. Since this came off of Facebook can anyone find a alternative source to the story.....

If it's a Anti-hunting hoax we are only helping by calling out the "Hunter". If it was a real event there should be other sources to backup the Facebook post.

I think age and betrayal/hoaxes made me doubt many more things these days, then I would have in the past

---

Snowwalker, you may be on to something here. As much as I am disgusted by this if it is true, and I fully support any efforts to get to the bottom of this, remember PETA and ALF are in an all-out push right now trying to sway public opinion against Canada Goose over the use of coyote trim.

The original poster (Dave-Ash Boogaart) has been an active member of the 519 Hunting and Fishing group on Facebook for 4 years. If this was a hoax, it would be blatantly obvious to anyone in that neighbourhood as the location of his parents' home is posted (see photos for exact location of the incident). I doubt someone would be an active member for 4 years (posting about hunting and fishing) and then decide to create a hoax. Look him up if you're a member of the group.

I believe this is a real incident and one that tugged hard on my heart strings, which is why I chose to share it here. Someone out there knows something...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by benjhind

The original poster (Dave-Ash Boogaart) has been an active member of the 519 Hunting and Fishing group on Facebook for 4 years. If this was a hoax, it would be blatantly obvious to anyone in that neighbourhood as the location of his parents' home is posted (see photos for exact location of the incident). I doubt someone would be an active member for 4 years (posting about hunting and fishing) and then decide to create a hoax. Look him up if you're a member of the group.

I believe this is a real incident and one that tugged hard on my heart strings, which is why I chose to share it here. Someone out there knows something...

---

Thanks for the extra info. 4 years does help with the credibility. I don't think you have to worry about me doubting too much about the post.

But remember the Anti's are very good at playing the long game..

For Example: How many "Trophy" pictures have you seen me post in the years I have been on here. I have "Talked" about hunts, but have I posted anything other then scenes of pretty woods. Using myself as an example you could say that yes I am talking the talking and saying the right things, but could you prove I am a hunter?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Thanks for the extra info. 4 years does help with the credibility. I don't think you have to worry about me doubting too much about the post.

But remember the Anti's are very good at playing the long game..

For Example: How many "Trophy" pictures have you seen me post in the years I have been on here. I have "Talked" about hunts, but have I posted anything other then scenes of pretty woods. Using myself as an example you could say that yes I am talking the talking and saying the right things, but could you prove I am a hunter?

---

You've taken out enough members to vouch for you. I on the other hand have posted pics only to be accused of recycling game for the photo op LOL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by benjhind

The original poster (Dave-Ash Boogaart) has been an active member of the 519 Hunting and Fishing group on Facebook for 4 years. If this was a hoax, it would be blatantly obvious to anyone in that neighbourhood as the location of his parents' home is posted (see photos for exact location of the incident). I doubt someone would be an active member for 4 years (posting about hunting and fishing) and then decide to create a hoax. Look him up if you're a member of the group.

I believe this is a real incident and one that tugged hard on my heart strings, which is why I chose to share it here. Someone out there knows something...

---

Understood...man, that sucks.

He is not a hunter, he's a trespassing scumbag. People like that deserved to be KO'ed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finsfurfeathers

You've taken out enough members to vouch for you. I on the other hand have posted pics only to be accused of recycling game for the photo op LOL.

---

Sure. But my game picture record sucks..:ashamed:

Just too busy enjoying it all I guess.:cool:

So sad. That is my worst fear, I've seen vehicles stop on the road when my dog is going across a field. Makes me almost feel sick thinking about it

If they were able to find the drag mark down to the rail line, where did it go after that? Unless the shooter had an atv/sled on the rail tracks I'd think they would be able to follow tracks back to another property or truck tracks and someone might have seen it.

I really hope they find their dog and this dirtbag that shot it, Accident or not, needs to be held accountable. More bad press for hunters.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Just to say first that loosing a beloved pet is very hard. Sorry to hear about it.

But now I will be the devil's advocate for a second. Since this came off of Facebook can anyone find a alternative source to the story.....

If it's a Anti-hunting hoax we are only helping by calling out the "Hunter". If it was a real event there should be other sources to backup the Facebook post.

I think age and betrayal/hoaxes made me doubt many more things these days, then I would have in the past

---

This is definitely not a hoax.
The MNRF are aware who this group of guys are. Just a matter of investigating it.

My dog accidentally killed a neighbours ferret . I brought it back alive , buy very sorry.

What are the chances it's not a case of mistaken the dog for a coyote?

So many things wrong with what happened. I hope the person that killed the dog owns up to the mistake. I would loose my shytt if someone shot my dog!

On a side note I gave up coyote hunting in Essex county & sold my .223. It was getting impossible to secure permission with the urban sprawl we are seeing in this county. Farmers have had too many bad experiences like this one & turn you down when you ask. I focus on deer hunting in 92B instead.

The perpetrator of this crime is no more a hunter than I am a hockey player just cause I wear a maple leaf sweater.I wish people would stop calling him that.He is a criminal and has committed a crime the moment he thought about trespassing even before he pulled the trigger then fled the scene.Accident or not.Someone knows something,you owe it to the sport and true hunters to come forward.It is in the best interest of everyone.
People have been shot "mistaken" for game animals and have not faced any consequences.In a case not long ago was not a bow hunter shot and killed by a man with a rifle shooting from his truck who swore he was shooting at a deer.I thought rifle hunting deer in S Ont was illegal,shotguns only.That guy was charged and it then disappeared from the headlines.

This one stings because just 2 weeks ago a group was calling coyotes 150 yards from my house. My coyote-sized dog was going mental and I'm glad I was outside to hear it and get him inside. I consider him fairly well-trained, but asking him not to leave the back yard for an injured rabbit a short distance away is a lot. My backyard is a woodlot, and they were hunting the next field over.

The hunters were across the property line and had permission from my neighbour. They did everything right.

I'm glad so many of you are so confident. A coyote-sized dog moving across a field at 300 yards in the early morning half-light, while you're squinting through a scope with your heart beating heavy... I'm not as confident. I've seen black coyotes, blonde coyotes, and coyotes you'd swear were interbred with dogs (which were sent away for DNA analysis and determined to not have dog DNA).

In this case, though, it was broad daylight and the poachers did not ask permission. Had they bothered to do so, they would have met the dog that they eventually killed and known to look for it.

This is another reason I have issues with dogs running free, I understand off leash but I mean no checks and balances by the owner, which in a lot of cases farm dogs are.

I have watched farm dogs running deer and rabbits and killing game animals the same as coyotes but I have also seen the after effects of a dog getting caught in a snare and being really lucky his foot got through too and not just his neck. I warned the guy that his dog will get himself killed, if not by the coyote packs but by the traps, cars, trucks or some guy shooting at something that he did not identify (tall brown dog about the size of a fawn).

It makes me sick to think that someone would go out and shoot the family pet, it really does, this is why when we get a dog it will not be free ranging, too many predators out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Couliewalker

The perpetrator of this crime is no more a hunter than I am a hockey player just cause I wear a maple leaf sweater..

---

Hockey player...no.......lobotomy patient...possibly....;)

You are very right about the "CONFIDENCE " thing Benjhind.

Something our friends to the south say is "EVERY bullet that you send down range has a lawyer attached to it". They don't just mean the home defence people, it means home/self defense, hunting, at the gun range.

Personally when I am hunting, I feel like I am swinging a bat in a china shop. I would never want to not have enough doubt to double check every shot before I pull a trigger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

What are the chances it's not a case of mistaken the dog for a coyote?

---

could have been a noisy constantly barking dog disturbing neighbors all around. at all hours of the day and night. owners didn't give a crap, so someone fixed it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zoli 16ga.

could have been a noisy constantly barking dog disturbing neighbors all around. at all hours of the day and night. owners didn't give a crap, so someone fixed it.

---

You have a vivid imagination !!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zoli 16ga.

could have been a noisy constantly barking dog disturbing neighbors all around. at all hours of the day and night. owners didn't give a crap, so someone fixed it.

---

It could have been fixed by reporting the issue to a By Law Enforcement Officer, not the way you suggested, which is really a drastic/draconian way of doing things . :mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaycee

It could have been fixed by reporting the issue to a By Law Enforcement Officer, not the way you suggested, which is really a drastic/draconian way of doing things . :mad:

---

could've been fixed with a bark collar, or the owners of the beloved pet taking responsibility for their mutt after they let it out and shut the door behind it, then just to go back to the TV set.

As discussed somewhere here before I'm sure....its a 'Me' society, and the responsibility apparently is on others to deal with the dog owners lack of consideration for others.

just say'n.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaycee

It could have been fixed by reporting the issue to a By Law Enforcement Officer, not the way you suggested, which is really a drastic/draconian way of doing things . :mad:

---

show me where I suggested one should shoot a noisy dog please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zoli 16ga.

could've been fixed with a bark collar, or the owners of the beloved pet taking responsibility for their mutt after they let it out and shut the door behind it, then just to go back to the TV set.

As discussed somewhere here before I'm sure....its a 'Me' society, and the responsibility apparently is on others to deal with the dog owners lack of consideration for others.

just say'n.

---

Please read the OP before posting such crap !!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaycee

That is a terrible shame , someone's pet killed , accidentally ?? , because the shooter was trigger happy , did not properly identify his target.
Purposely ?? we will never know , stuff like this happens too many times , as we have seen posted on here over the years.

I hope the owners can find out who did it and have him charged by the MNRF AND Police he then can suffer the consequence.

---

just followed the train of thought and comments from the second post....and most of the rest

but your right.

People trespass= believable
People shoot other peoples pets= believable
People shoot from the road= believable
People dragging a dead collared dog across a field= unbelievable
JMO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

You have a vivid imagination !!!

---

No he is just speculating on other reasons the dog could have been shot.

Maybe the shooter had been confronted by owner for trespassing and saw a quick revenge.

Now it says in the post the owner heard the shots, but did they hear any calls( rabbit in distress for example).

I am sure the investigator is running every possible reason through his/her mind. How every strange they will be eliminated.
Alien attack? No. :joker:
Animal sacrifice? No. :joker:
Etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onelessarrow

People trespass= believable
People shoot other peoples pets= believable
People shoot from the road= believable
People dragging a dead collared dog across a field= unbelievable
JMO

---

Hiding evidence?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Hiding evidence?

---

Bingo !!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

No he is just speculating on other reasons the dog could have been shot.

Maybe the shooter had been confronted by owner for trespassing and saw a quick revenge.

Now it says in the post the owner heard the shots, but did they hear any calls( rabbit in distress for example).

I am sure the investigator is running every possible reason through his/her mind. How every strange they will be eliminated.
Alien attack? No. :joker:
Animal sacrifice? No. :joker:
Etc.

---

Not many guys call around here. We push bushes and walk ditch banks....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Hiding evidence?

---

If that we're the case, they are far dumber than originally thought. It's not like Police of MNRF would allocate any funds to conduct an investigation, beyond "gee....guess you'll want to bury that".

Sucks nonetheless, but can't see removing the dog for any sane reason, other than to purposefully inflict emotional harm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebulldog

If that we're the case, they are far dumber than originally thought. It's not like Police of MNRF would allocate any funds to conduct an investigation, beyond "gee....guess you'll want to bury that".

Sucks nonetheless, but can't see removing the dog for any sane reason, other than to purposefully inflict emotional harm.

---

X2 can't punch owner......shoot dog.


Very cowardly nut possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

Not many guys call around here. We push bushes and walk ditch banks....

---

Good info. Thanks.. also means rabbit distress call is not something dog hears unless it's a real rabbit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

Hiding evidence?

---

I think that would be adding more evidence as opposed to hiding lol. But, like BBG implies, maybe they're just not bright

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onelessarrow

I think that would be adding more evidence as opposed to hiding lol. But, like BBG implies, maybe they're just not bright

---

They shot a dog with a collar in the middle of an empty field, is broad day light. Sounds like genus material to me.
( Careful heavy sarcasm )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

They shot a dog with a collar in the middle of an empty field, is broad day light. Sounds like genus material to me.
( Careful heavy sarcasm )

---

Agree.
Unfortunately there's no shortage of people that always play the dump card. Wasnt my intention blah blah blah, but it takes a special kind of loser to drag that collared dog out of that field.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onelessarrow

Agree.
Unfortunately there's no shortage of people that always play the dump card. Wasnt my intention blah blah blah, but it takes a special kind of loser to drag that collared dog out of that field.

---

Don't worry about a Zombie Apocalypse it will never happen.

The Dumb"butt" Apocalypse on the other hand is in full swing.

Problem, is if you shoot a zombie in the brain it dies, shoot a dumbbutt in the head and you'll go deaf from the sound of the air rushing through the hole to fill the vacuum. ;)

Son of a....

Loosing a pet is a very sad affair indeed.I lost my cat 2 years ago,and I am still feeling the pain.

Now back to the post:
So far we know what was stated on the Facebook .We may never know the truth how the thing really played out.
So far we have a good understanding the guy/girl made some mistakes(likely )but we do not know the facts.

So far we seen on this very forum that the poor guy/girl (hope he/she feels bad about the whole situation)would be lynched by many.

So why we are wondering why he /she is not coming forward after everything was done,when he/she (if he /she indeed) did dragged the poor dog from the field .
So why we are eventually crucifying this guy(girl)if we do not know all the facts(any of us just goes by what was stated on the Facebook...not challenging what was posted ,yet that is our only info available).

What happened to the-Innocent until proven guilty?

I feel as much bad as the owners of the poor dog do....but why WE are making harsh statement without knowing the facts???

I think it is not fitting very well.

There is no excuse for killing some ones pet, unless it was a vicious attack by the dog, upon the shooter whom ever they were, he/she.
A vicious attack, is highly unlikely, the best case scenario is mistaken identification of the target by someone unfamiliar with what a coyote actually looks like , this again makes you wonder , as the pictures of the dog/pet show it to be wearing a collar.
The collar is visible in both pictures of the dog.

The shooter must have known they did wrongly did shoot/kill it because they had taken it away to hide, get rid of the evidence of their stupidity.

Have there been any updates or new info?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

Have there been any updates or new info?

---

Nothing new ......yet.

Does not appear on face book any more under original poster?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gbk

Loosing a pet is a very sad affair indeed.I lost my cat 2 years ago,and I am still feeling the pain.

Now back to the post:
So far we know what was stated on the Facebook .We may never know the truth how the thing really played out.
So far we have a good understanding the guy/girl made some mistakes(likely )but we do not know the facts.

So far we seen on this very forum that the poor guy/girl (hope he/she feels bad about the whole situation)would be lynched by many.

So why we are wondering why he /she is not coming forward after everything was done,when he/she (if he /she indeed) did dragged the poor dog from the field .
So why we are eventually crucifying this guy(girl)if we do not know all the facts(any of us just goes by what was stated on the Facebook...not challenging what was posted ,yet that is our only info available).

What happened to the-Innocent until proven guilty?

I feel as much bad as the owners of the poor dog do....but why WE are making harsh statement without knowing the facts???

I think it is not fitting very well.

---

The azzhole knowingly was trespassing and discharging a firearm on private property. Some people have a problem with a dog roaming free on its own property, why? Nothing at all wrong with allowing your dog to roam free on your own property what so ever. Also to take the dog and hide it from owners is a very disgusting act. I only hope they are found and charged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

The azzhole knowingly was trespassing and discharging a firearm on private property. Some people have a problem with a dog roaming free on its own property, why? Nothing at all wrong with allowing your dog to roam free on your own property what so ever. Also to take the dog and hide it from owners is a very disgusting act. I only hope they are found and charged.

---

Dogs can't read and or respect property lines, I love dogs but come on let's be realistic here, letting your dog roam loose is asking for trouble. There is lots of blame to go around here but some of it is self inflicted by not have control of the dog. I live out in the country but my dog is always tied off, if and when I walk him off leash I always have it's leash in hand ready to control the dog.

Had this dog been on a leash this would never have happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gibb

Dogs can't read and or respect property lines, I love dogs but come on let's be realistic here, letting your dog roam loose is asking for trouble. There is lots of blame to go around here but some of it is self inflicted by not have control of the dog. I live out in the country but my dog is always tied off, if and when I walk him off leash I always have it's leash in hand ready to control the dog.

Had this dog been on a leash this would never have happened.

---

The dog was under control....on its own property !!!!! If this asshat hadn’t been trespassing and not identifying his target, it would not have happened..,,,the owner does not share any blame here !!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

The azzhole knowingly was trespassing and discharging a firearm on private property. Some people have a problem with a dog roaming free on its own property, why? Nothing at all wrong with allowing your dog to roam free on your own property what so ever. Also to take the dog and hide it from owners is a very disgusting act. I only hope they are found and charged.

---

I know where you are going but there are many reasons why it is wrong to let a dog roam free, even on your own property.

You must remain in control of that animal, it is your responsibility. I know that most farmers who have a dog roaming have control of that dog and that dog sticks around the farm but I also know of situations where dogs run all over humanity chasing everything that is there, including rabbits, turkeys, grouse, deer, which makes it very much illegal and in many cases grounds for being destroyed.

Like I said, I know where you were going with this but the blanket statement is untrue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gibb

Dogs can't read and or respect property lines, I love dogs but come on let's be realistic here, letting your dog roam loose is asking for trouble. There is lots of blame to go around here but some of it is self inflicted by not have control of the dog. I live out in the country but my dog is always tied off, if and when I walk him off leash I always have it's leash in hand ready to control the dog.

Had this dog been on a leash this would never have happened.

---

The dog was minding it's own business on its own property, since when can someone or his animals not use and enjoy their own land? Stick with the facts, the dog was shot on its own land and taken and dumped to never be found. The idiot who shot the dog is to blame and nobody else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

I know where you are going but there are many reasons why it is wrong to let a dog roam free, even on your own property.

You must remain in control of that animal, it is your responsibility. I know that most farmers who have a dog roaming have control of that dog and that dog sticks around the farm but I also know of situations where dogs run all over humanity chasing everything that is there, including rabbits, turkeys, grouse, deer, which makes it very much illegal and in many cases grounds for being destroyed.

Like I said, I know where you were going with this but the blanket statement is untrue.

---

Blanket statements will always get you in trouble.
How can you say 'in many cases grounds for being destroyed'? The grounds for shooting a dog are very specific and in such instances even the legal agent is required to prove a level of intervention prior to such an act. There are numerous court cases which have ruled against the person doing the shooting as an example.
The definition of being 'in control' especially for a farmer with areas of fencing is very flexible and you will not be able to pin any responsibility back on that farmer for this situation.
As has been said.....'stick to the facts'

A friend of mine was found to be 20% responsible for a car accident, by his insurance company, even though he was asleep in bed and his car was parked in his own driveway. Someone missed a curve and plowed into his car. He had to go to court and win ,to get his repair bills paid. So you can be found responsible, even if you have done nothing wrong. Something like letting your dog roam your own property.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by krakadawn

Blanket statements will always get you in trouble.
How can you say 'in many cases grounds for being destroyed'? The grounds for shooting a dog are very specific and in such instances even the legal agent is required to prove a level of intervention prior to such an act. There are numerous court cases which have ruled against the person doing the shooting as an example.
The definition of being 'in control' especially for a farmer with areas of fencing is very flexible and you will not be able to pin any responsibility back on that farmer for this situation.
As has been said.....'stick to the facts'

---

The MNR near Bonfield Ontario used to give permission to the guys hunting deer to shoot dogs running deer during the open rifle season, there is no use of dogs in that particular zone yet gangs run dogs anyway.

"In many cases grounds for being destroyed" did not define such grounds, just stating that there are lots of different instances where they can be and many people do not understand that. I have a few friends that think it is just find to have their dogs running off leash in the bush and chasing deer, they never seem to think about the potential impact, like causing the doe to abort the fawn or run to the point of dying of exhaustion, etc.

The number of cats that roam around my area too is disgusting, people just think that they are natural and should be allowed to roam, then blame the coyotes for the drop in grouse/turkey numbers.

Couldn't agree more about the cat issue and not defending someone using dogs in a no dog area; however, MNR cannot grant that permission under the current regs to some hunters to shoot dogs as in the example quoted. Not to say someone did not say/do that but certainly not under current law.

Anyone shooting at someone's dog,anywhere,better being carrying a badge and warrant card PLUS have reasonable and probable grounds. Having said though,the dipshyte who shot the farmer's dog will get bugger all for charges out of it if/when caught. "Trespassing to hunt" is a set fine of $150. Even criminal charges are pretty "iffy". "Destruction of private property" is only a summary conviction offense. As much as it PO's everyone,in the end,not much will come of this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishermccann

A friend of mine was found to be 20% responsible for a car accident, by his insurance company, even though he was asleep in bed and his car was parked in his own driveway. Someone missed a curve and plowed into his car. He had to go to court and win ,to get his repair bills paid. So you can be found responsible, even if you have done nothing wrong. Something like letting your dog roam your own property.

---

Apples to oranges.....not even a close comparison.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

Anyone shooting at someone's dog,anywhere,better being carrying a badge and warrant card PLUS have reasonable and probable grounds. Having said though,the dipshyte who shot the farmer's dog will get bugger all for charges out of it if/when caught. "Trespassing to hunt" is a set fine of $150. Even criminal charges are pretty "iffy". "Destruction of private property" is only a summary conviction offense. As much as it PO's everyone,in the end,not much will come of this.

---

There will not be a set fine !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

Anyone shooting at someone's dog,anywhere,better being carrying a badge and warrant card PLUS have reasonable and probable grounds. Having said though,the dipshyte who shot the farmer's dog will get bugger all for charges out of it if/when caught. "Trespassing to hunt" is a set fine of $150. Even criminal charges are pretty "iffy". "Destruction of private property" is only a summary conviction offense. As much as it PO's everyone,in the end,not much will come of this.

---

A badge is not needed at all in some area,s and the excuse to kill a dog could be pretty slim ie the dog was threatening me?The law in unorganized Townships,s


3) Where any person finds a dog running at large contrary to this Regulation and the dog is in the act of attacking or threatening to attack a human being, he or she may kill the dog.

(4) No damage or compensation shall be recovered for the killing of a dog under this section. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 732, s. 5.

The guy who shot this farmers dog will probably get hammered with a careless hunting charge just on the fact he shot a dog wearing a collar for a coyote,never mind the closeness to the farm and trespass.The fact he moved the bloody dog will also gleam plenty of DNA evidence should they wish to pursue this far.I would think a fine in the $1000 to $3000 range is the average right now.Might also get a ban on the hunting license if they had one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishermccann

A friend of mine was found to be 20% responsible for a car accident, by his insurance company, even though he was asleep in bed and his car was parked in his own driveway. Someone missed a curve and plowed into his car. He had to go to court and win ,to get his repair bills paid. So you can be found responsible, even if you have done nothing wrong. Something like letting your dog roam your own property.

---

They call this contributory negligence.

Contributory Negligence Definition: The negligence of a person which, while not being the primary cause of a tort, nevertheless combined with the act or omission of the primary defendant to cause the tort, and without which the tort would not have occurred.

Boy did this thread go sideways....
Sorry for the loss, must have been awful, hopefully they get some closure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fratri

Boy did this thread go sideways....
Sorry for the loss, must have been awful, hopefully they get some closure.

---

Oh man, no kidding Frank, it's gone right off track, the guy was asking for any info pertaining to the killing of the family dog, not legalities of how if why maybe or any other kind of info....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

They call this contributory negligence.

Contributory Negligence Definition: The negligence of a person which, while not being the primary cause of a tort, nevertheless combined with the act or omission of the primary defendant to cause the tort, and without which the tort would not have occurred.

---

Hi Gilroy-not challenging the law or You,but in the case above with the car owner being charged for Contributory Negligence ,while the owner parked his/her car on his/hers own private driveway? If applied it is a 100% BS,and only good for money grab by our own well protected Insurance Companies.
IMHO!
Where did the owner contributed on his/hers own driveway to this collision other then - OWNING the bloody vehicle.:):):)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

The MNR near Bonfield Ontario used to give permission to the guys hunting deer to shoot dogs running deer during the open rifle season, there is no use of dogs in that particular zone yet gangs run dogs anyway.

"In many cases grounds for being destroyed" did not define such grounds, just stating that there are lots of different instances where they can be and many people do not understand that. I have a few friends that think it is just find to have their dogs running off leash in the bush and chasing deer, they never seem to think about the potential impact, like causing the doe to abort the fawn or run to the point of dying of exhaustion, etc.

The number of cats that roam around my area too is disgusting, people just think that they are natural and should be allowed to roam, then blame the coyotes for the drop in grouse/turkey numbers.

---

Unfortunately i have seen it(and likely all of us here, if spent some time in the woods)exactly what Fox was describing.
Farm dogs running wild in the bush,chasing whatever comes their way.
Pet is a pet,and i mentioned this before ,i love pets.....but:

As with other things ,there should be some control to protect wildlife from calamity brought upon them by free roaming house animals.IMHO.

Gilroy, maybe you could give us your legal opinion how someone found guilty in this case, would fair in a civil action.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gbk

Hi Gilroy-not challenging the law or You,but in the case above with the car owner being charged for Contributory Negligence ,while the owner parked his/her car on his/hers own private driveway? If applied it is a 100% BS,and only good for money grab by our own well protected Insurance Companies.
IMHO!
Where did the owner contributed on his/hers own driveway to this collision other then - OWNING the bloody vehicle.:):):)

---

Have a look at this Rankin Garage case.The poor owner of this garage had to go to the Supreme Court to get several decisions overturned which made him liable for some kids stealing car while drunk from his lot.Pretty scary. https://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/cb/37323-eng.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swampsinger

Gilroy, maybe you could give us your legal opinion how someone found guilty in this case, would fair in a civil action.

---

If I was a lawyer I would give you my legal opinion but I am far from a lawyer.The burden of proof generally at a civil trial is lower than a criminal trial and rules of evidence not as onerous,I would think a small claims action would be pretty easy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

Have a look at this Rankin Garage case.The poor owner of this garage had to go to the Supreme Court to get several decisions overturned which made him liable for some kids stealing car while drunk from his lot.Pretty scary. https://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/cb/37323-eng.pdf

---

Thanx Gilroy-this in my eye is a Legal game of Twisting and Turning things .Allowed by law or not-it is not right.
Period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

Have a look at this Rankin Garage case.The poor owner of this garage had to go to the Supreme Court to get several decisions overturned which made him liable for some kids stealing car while drunk from his lot.Pretty scary. https://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/cb/37323-eng.pdf

---

The darning thing in his case was that he always left the keys for the car/truck in the cup holder..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

A badge is not needed at all in some area,s and the excuse to kill a dog could be pretty slim ie the dog was threatening me?The law in unorganized Townships,s


3) Where any person finds a dog running at large contrary to this Regulation and the dog is in the act of attacking or threatening to attack a human being, he or she may kill the dog.

(4) No damage or compensation shall be recovered for the killing of a dog under this section. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 732, s. 5.

The guy who shot this farmers dog will probably get hammered with a careless hunting charge just on the fact he shot a dog wearing a collar for a coyote,never mind the closeness to the farm and trespass.The fact he moved the bloody dog will also gleam plenty of DNA evidence should they wish to pursue this far.I would think a fine in the $1000 to $3000 range is the average right now.Might also get a ban on the hunting license if they had one.

---

Youbetcha! I'm well aware of dogs running at large that have a real belligerent attitude in an unorganized township is a no-brainer,for sure. I was writing specifically of regular guy hunters in the lower counties who seem to think a hunting license gives them "carte blanche" authority to dispatch any dog running at large. People with tht attitude and dumb jackasses that pull the crap in the OP I want to see have their arses nailed to the nearest wall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

Youbetcha! I'm well aware of dogs running at large that have a real belligerent attitude in an unorganized township is a no-brainer,for sure. I was writing specifically of regular guy hunters in the lower counties who seem to think a hunting license gives them "carte blanche" authority to dispatch any dog running at large. People with tht attitude and dumb jackasses that pull the crap in the OP I want to see have their arses nailed to the nearest wall.

---

I agree with you that this law is for unorganized townships and does not apply to this situation,but I wanted to highlight the law because its implications are important.There are many groups running hounds after deer in unorganized townships because this is where we still have vast areas of Crown land to run on.
The law is written in such a way that almost any running dog could get killed.I remember last year on this forum we discussed a beagle being killed while it was running deer by a hunter in a neighboring camp who said he was threatened by the dog.

I do not know why this law in unorganized townships was enacted,maybe because of the lack of bye law officers.I do know on aboriginal reserves there are lots of stray dogs forming feral packs that could be a serious threat to citizens,maybe this was the initiative for the law as its written.I suspect some of us will be surprised by the wording of this law.

Article in local newspaper

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...4ed690638b.jpg

https://www.chathamdailynews.ca/news...-investigating

I haven't posted in awhile, first off, what happened was a terrible event for this family. Secondly, as a learning experience for all members, please identify the characteristics of this animal that would lead to a positive identification as a domestic dog. I'm not trying to cause a stir but I can see how someone looking through a scope could mistake this animal as a coyote. I've personally hesitated shooting coyotes until I was confident that it was not a domestic dog due to all the hunting I do in somewhat built up areas. I look for gait and behavior to tip me off. Any other recommendations.

The Facebook generation looking for the 'hero shot' and the accompanying likes is likely at play in this case. I've never seen so much road shooting, wanton tresspassing and shoot first identify later as the last 10 years. The dog was on his own property. Case closed. Not at large. Hope the perpetrators have the book thrown at them. Law enforcement likely has a good idea of the perpetrators.

Is shooting somebody's family dog not covered in the Ontario Hunter's Education course? I mean, for those who haven't learned this already in everyday life. Can you sleep through this course and still pass? I don't believe people are inherently bad, but stupid... A little education should eliminate these sort of mistakes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkyHawk

Is shooting somebody's family dog not covered in the Ontario Hunter's Education course? I mean, for those who haven't learned this already in everyday life. Can you sleep through this course and still pass? I don't believe people are inherently bad, but stupid... A little education should eliminate these sort of mistakes.

---

How "much" education do you think it would take? ( Rhetoric Question)

An eight to ten hour class will never cover enough, a two week course would only discourage most.

Some people come from Families that hunt, and have been spoon feed over years growing up.

Others are lost before they even start, and can only try to memorize the right answers and pass.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by angelo

I haven't posted in awhile, first off, what happened was a terrible event for this family. Secondly, as a learning experience for all members, please identify the characteristics of this animal that would lead to a positive identification as a domestic dog. I'm not trying to cause a stir but I can see how someone looking through a scope could mistake this animal as a coyote. I've personally hesitated shooting coyotes until I was confident that it was not a domestic dog due to all the hunting I do in somewhat built up areas. I look for gait and behavior to tip me off. Any other recommendations.

---

Not tresspassing would be my very first recommendation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

How "much" education do you think it would take? ( Rhetoric Question)

An eight to ten hour class will never cover enough, a two week course would only discourage most.

Some people come from Families that hunt, and have been spoon feed over years growing up.

Others are lost before they even start, and can only try to memorize the right answers and pass.

---

Okay, so I went ahead and took the course. It's not in there... There is no formal training on not shooting people's family pets.

In all seriousness though, I do think the MNR needs to allot some of the mandatory classroom time to cover things "not to do while hunting", common infractions, even uncommon infractions. I think this would help.

FYI the course is over ten hours now. I just gave up 8-4 Saturday and Sunday to gain very, very little that wasn't right out of the regs or their book which I've been reading for the past 4 months... I did tell this story to the future coyote hunter sitting beside me, so hopefully this helps him out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkyHawk

Okay, so I went ahead and took the course. It's not in there... There is no formal training on not shooting people's family pets.

In all seriousness though, I do think the MNR needs to allot some of the mandatory classroom time to cover things "not to do while hunting", common infractions, even uncommon infractions. I think this would help.

FYI the course is over ten hours now. I just gave up 8-4 Saturday and Sunday to gain very, very little that wasn't right out of the regs or their book which I've been reading for the past 4 months... I did tell this story to the future coyote hunter sitting beside me, so hopefully this helps him out.

---

You will still watch rabbits run past you a few times before you remember your there to shoot them.:D

If you need to educate people not to shoot a house dog then I’m sorry to say that’s the least of our problems IMO.

ing pricks man. i was looking at properties recently with my father and came across to deer carcass right off in the ditch view able form the road just inside his gate. fresh maybe a day old. called the ministry. needs to stop just wish there were maybe some more conservation officers they've gotten cut to around 300 last time ive heard. just a shame.

The event of shooting the poor dog was indeed a sad one.
This thread has gone for quite some time ,and created some ruffles.
However we hear nothing much anymore about the who-how and why.
No perpetrator,no outcome...........

Alas it is becoming a wrestling ground for some of us(including me.......?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

You will still watch rabbits run past you a few times before you remember your there to shoot them.:D

---

Thanks for the first useful tip...

Here is another. Guys make sure you keep your house rabbits off crown land...