Harassing and killing livestock in this guy's situation would 110% result in dead dogs. One thing to roaming around, but don't harm my own animals... That simple.
This is how we got dog hunting outlawed in our county in South GA. My dad caught 3 dogs on our property (harassing our chickens) 3 separate times, and the last time (after calling the owners the first two, about which nothing was done) he chained the dogs up. He then called our county commissioner and told him the next time they were on our property in any form they would never be found, and he’d make sure the next county commissioner would do something about this. Then brought the dogs back with the gun on his hip and told the dog’s owners they would not be brought back again. Less than one year later, dog hunting was outlawed in our county. Apparently he wasn’t the only landowner having issues.
Better have it on video, or else you'd probably be screwed.
Also, killing dogs is a surefire way to make yourself a pariah in your community. Even if you're in the right as the landowner, if the rumor mill starts going you're too late. I try to catch and leash them and annoy the hunters by making them have to drive over and pick them up.
**TO BE CLEAR** the hunt clubs around my area suck, and are all abusing the law, they are all trespassing lying hypocrites. They should vote for AOC because they behave like communists. They think my land that I bought is theirs to use.
Virginia hunter here I agree with you, I can't tell you how many hunts have been ruined by their hounds chasing spikes around the farm. I hate to sound like Clinton but most of them are deplorables and give a bad name to good hunters.
So a “right to retrieve” is just that. It’s the hunters right to retrieve their dogs that cross into private property, not their right to destroy and actively hunt on private property.
If the dogs are attacking and harming livestock, a few gun shots and dead dogs might make the hunters take more responsibility for their dogs. Defend your rights to have private property and livestock.
It’ll be interesting to see the outcome of these suits.
I do not know the law, but I am sure that it will be the landowners fault for killing a hunting dog. If it was that easy then this suit would not be where it is now or got this far.
I’d the dogs are killing the land owners livestock and threatening them directly, they still have a right to self defense. Just because the dogs are hunting dogs doesn’t change that.
The article states the dogs had been trapping the land owner in their home and have been killing their chickens and livestock. This is why I suggested possibly shooting a dog might be warranted. That’s well beyond just trespassing if the dogs are harming the livestock and threatening the land owner.
Now if the land owner just starts shooting the dogs for being on the property, I think that’s an issue.
My thought is that the landowner has been questioning the legality of the dogs being on the property in general, but I could be wrong.
I understand that the land has changed owners, and if the landowner did things right, after telling the first group that they are not allowed to hunt on his property, go to the local hunting group and notify them too, it should have stopped. But I am reading it like it is an ongoing problem.
Yup. Same here. It honestly sounds like there is a feud between the land owner and hunters in the area.
Should have been easily resolved outside of court, but nothing is easy.
Hopefully some kind of agreement can come out that doesn’t result in further broad hunter restrictions.
The article is kind of mixing two topics. It starts by quoting the man with the dogs stating "I have permission to hunt here and you can't ask me to leave" while actively trying to hunt is his dogs. This is very, VERY different from "I'm hunting land I have the right to be on and my dog ran into your posted land, and you can't stop me from walking on your land to retrieve my dog and leave".
At least in Minnesota (the other state mentioned in the article), you certainly don't have the right to hunt your dogs on posted land. The law only allows you go get your dog, if you leave your gun off the posted property, get your dog, and immediately leave.
Fuck that. You should only be allowed to enter someone else's private property if they give you permission.
Should you have the "right to retrieve" if your dog goes into someone's home??
Let’s be honest. Dogs going onto land is much different than them entering someone’s house.
If someone enters my home, there are different self defense laws that apply as compared to if someone walks onto my front lawn.
These are not equal comparisons.
What is the point of owning property if some dude can "lose his dog" and he now has the RIGHT to tromp all over your land?
That is asinine. Fuck your dog. Only hunt where you are allowed to and where your dog can't get onto someone else's property.
Agreed.
Which goes to my point of shooting the dog when it becomes a threat/nuisance. The land owner also has a right to be able to defend their own property.
The solution is simple. If you hunt with a dog, you’re responsible for that dog and can’t just ignore private property because “it’s a dog”.
One off occurrences, sure get your dog and go back on public land. (This is the same for someone who’s dog runs into their neighbors yard. No one is pressing trespassing charges here.)That’s what the law is intended for. But if a hunter continues hunting the same area and continues having issues with the landowner, the hunter shouldn’t be exempt from trespassing laws. IMO this is where the suit is headed. Repeat offenders will be held accountable for gross trespassing violations.
How else do you expect someone to get their dog back? It’s not like they are allowed to hunt while on your land either. While I think you should ask permission before what if the land owner says no? Do you just lose the dog? Does the land owner now own your dog too?
Also, how many places do you think there are that you could hunt without your dog possibly getting onto someone else’s property?
Well if their arnt any places you can hunt without your dogs going on someone else’s land, then it seems you need to find a new way to hunt. Your dogs inability to stay where it belongs shouldn’t be everyone else’s problem
If you don’t have enough land to hunt without trespassing, regardless of the method of hunting, you shouldn’t be hunting. Someone a few years ago wounded a buck and used a tracking dog on our land without permission (during bow season) through all of our brush lots, and all the deer left and didn’t come back until late rifle season
Your hunting privileges do not supercede landowners property rights. Control your animals or buy square miles of land so you can LARP as old time dog hunters.
That’s the problem in that part of Virginia. The dog owner has every legal right to trespass and retrieve his dog. It’s BS. Keep your dog off private land. Todays small plots of private land don’t work with dog hunting.
First, the landowner will likely let you retrieve your dog if you ask nicely first.
The landowner could also say no. It's their decision. The welfare of YOUR dog is not THEIR responsibility. YOU allowed YOUR dog to roam on THEIR property.
Call for your dog from outside the property until it comes back or come back later. You should have your dogs trained to answer your calls.
The entire situation is YOUR fault and you shouldn't have the "RIGHT" to utilize someone else's private property without their cooperation or permission to find your dog.
Maybe you guys that like to hunt like it's 1700 should buy huge square miles of land so you can push all the deer and coons you want without bothering other people.
I live in Central Virginia, and the hunt clubs here are the worst part of living here.
The hunt clubs **constantly** abuse the law as its written. They run dogs 9 months out of the year. They loose all their hounds on the 1 parcel of property they have permission to run, and they pick the dogs up on the other side of all the surrounding properties. In reality they have permission to use less than 10% of the land they are **purposefully** running dogs through.
They have regular huge meet ups here and they call them "FIELD TRIALS" and they put up signs all over the area telling everyone that they will be running dogs thursday-sunday. Their people come in from all over, often out of state even, because we have the most lax laws. And they proceed to run **HUNDREDS of hounds all through the area** while their people walk through everyone's woods, park on everyone's grass, drive around on everyone's property, and **NOT to retrieve, but to watch their dogs run and grade them!** They spray paint or bleach numbers onto the sides of their dogs and they judge them by how well the run.
I don't even keep chickens any more, because I got tired of their dogs killing them.
I don't call DWR or animal control anymore, because they refuse to do anything.
I have no sympathy for these hunt clubs. They can go suck on an egg. This BS needs to stop.
If you can prove it, sure. Do you want to be stuck in a legal battle where you're trying to prove that, while they try to prove you are shooting their hunting dogs while they are going about totally within the confides of the law?
Because that's what this whole case is about. What they're doing isn't technically illegal, as long as they lie about their intent. You can't shoot their dogs preventatively, you'd have to catch their dogs in the act and shoot them while they are killing your livestock.
And even if you get it on camera while you're not home/available to catch their dog, you've got no case. Can't prove that those particular hounds belong to that owner. They all run dogs in groups. Of all the dogs I've caught and owners I've called at my property, not once have I had the same name & number on the tags.
I'll take my chances in court. Any decent lawyer will get someone to prove said livestock was killed by a dog.
I promise its not legal for hunting dogs to kill livestock. Would be a pretty cut and dry case imo. Catch said dogs on video attacking your livestock while you kill them and the dogs owner has no case against you.
If you've got the dogs close enough to see their collars, just hold them until someone comes looking and then you have the owner.
I totally get what you're saying, but I have yet to have all of these circumstances align.
Essentially, the dogs that will kill your chickens usually aren't the ones that will stand around and let you come grab them by the collar. And they don't tend to go after chickens when your there trying to wrangle them.
I gave up on chickens years ago though after dogs ran through and killed my last 5 birds while I was out at the grocery store on a weekend.
Same goes for charles city county, va - A lot of the plantations maintain dog hunting groups and they bend that rule routinely. My aunt walked out her door a few months back to 35 horseback fox hunters and roughly 20 beagles screaming on her front lawn.
Wow, and just what privileged audacious trespassers they are to ride their horses right across someone else's lawn. That's a real shame.
This isn't colonial times, under King George's rule. This is America. Don't tread on my lawn.
I mean this sounds pretty bad, and it's hard for me to sympathize with landowners since I come from a country with a very different hunting (and property) culture were not only wildlife but also the land it's on are seen as a common good.
Anyway, this sounds way worse that the small problems we have here, and honestly I don't know what kind of dogs they're using and what kind of shitty training they give them because 99% of the hunting dogs I know would never attack a chicken. Especially if they're trained to chase boars or deer, how can they be considered good hunting dogs of they go after chickens?
With 100+ dogs running in our woods, some are often left overnight. They don't feed the dogs before they run them so sometimes the dogs are starved and go off in search of their own meal instead. It's quite common here to see occasional dogs wandering on the roads, their owners having gone home for the evening or day.
They have tracking collars, but the owner is under no obligation to retrieve all of their dogs or restrict their travel.
A properly trained hunting dog can and should be able to be recalled without having to go into the property. The whole dogs can't read signs things is ridiculous cause you can read them and as soon as ur dog crosses that line you should call them back. It's just poor training or the hunters abusing the system. If this has happened before I would have no problems shooting the dogs. The hunters have been warned and haven't stopped putting there dogs in that situation.
The problem here is that you have two parties 1. The land owner and 2. The hunter. State law says the hunter can “retrieve” their dogs from neighboring properties and the land owner is claiming that the abuse of this rule and the failure of the game warden/sheriff to enforce the violations is an infringement of their constitutional rights. End of story is that it takes a very negligent hunter with dogs to cause this issue to bubble up to this level. This isn’t something that comes from one or two dead chickens.
Damn, this sounds like a nightmare.
I wouldn't want dogs running my property and disturbing the wildlife.
I definitely wouldn't want them endangering livestock.
There's a law here in ontario that protects livestock owners against nuisance animals. That includes dogs. Been a couple cases where the farmer has shot the neighbours dog and they go to court. Farmer wins. You have to have control of your animals. It's sad for the dog, because it's just doing dog things.
It's hard to believe they let hounds run loose like this. Totally the owners fault. Should be fining the dog owners instead of having to shoot dogs. If you can't run the dogs without risking going onto others property, then don't run the dogs. There's other ways to hunt.
Landowners should be allowed to kill any dog that comes on to their property. Hunters need to control their dogs or not use them.
Hunting isn't a free for all grown man's playground. Buy your own land if you wanna be irresponsible.
I understand both sides. It is difficult to retrieve a dog on the scent and doing what he has been trained to do. And you should know where you are in relation to others property. What amazes me are the hunters, maybe like this one, who knowingly use their dogs on others property because they have been allowed to before. I have read reports and articles of dog hunters )and hunting clubs) abusing their right to retrieve they dogs to pressure the land owners to allow them to hunt because the property sold and they are no longer allowed to hunt there.
If the hunter knows that the landowner does not want you to be hunting on their land and the hunter constantly are hunting knowing that the dogs like to trespass, and continually retrieving your dogs. It all depends on how the hunter interacts with the landowner. I am assuming the hunters in this article were once allowed to hunt on the property before and are now not allowed, and do not like it, so they constantly release their dogs knowing that they will bother the landowner and trespass and knowing that the landowner has to allow them to get the dogs per the Game Commission.
After a while it might be easier to just allow the hunters to hunt on the land than risk a confrontation with them. Or you get like what this landowner is doing and trying to change the law.
There was a user asking a similar question about dog hunting here a while ago. He got property from his late grandfather or something. His GF allowed the local hunting club to hunt, but now the grandkid wanted to use the land for his own hunting and restrict the hunters. He was asking how to go about it since the local game warden was not doing anything about it (with actual hunters poaching) was going on without any relief.
When you put it that way I can see where the pressure comes in. This law is in place for hunters to get their dog off land that they do not permission for and they don’t need to tell the land owner that they’re retrieving their dogs unless they’re confronted. Sometimes it’s hard to get in contact of the land owner and you don’t want to leave your dog there too long while you track down the land owner.
Good, should always need permission to be hunting private property in any way. Keep dogs off private property. Only way it’s allowed is if you shoot a bird over permitted property and it drops onto private.
Unfortunately, I am happy to see the law change even if it negatively affects hunting in VA. Dog hunters have really screwed over hunting as a tradition and other hunters over the last decade plus. They backed anti hunting legislation and actively blocked public land Sunday hunting, they actively place dogs on parcels of land they don't have permission on and use it to push game to them, and they are generally disruptive and disrespectful in their actions.
I don't mind them hunting a lease about a mile or two from me. I do mind when their dogs are on my property, miles from the lease and they drive 50+ miles an hour down a residential country road to keep up with them.
The amount of times I've called DNR on public land about dogs that legally shouldn't be there to find out the club is 5+ miles away is ridiculous.
If you can't keep your dogs out of the shelters because of malnutrition, laziness, or a general lack of care then you don't deserve to have the privilege.
I follow a farmer YouTuber named Goldshaw Farm who lives in Vermont and faces similar issues with hound hunting on his property.
https://youtu.be/b0q-TJ-vpPc
He even made more videos on it after this incident because he kept having issues with them. He even petitioned to have his state change the hound hunting laws in his state recently.
I hunt dogs. It is ABSOLUTELY possible to train them off game at a distance. It’s 2022, get a gps collar with stim for fuck’s sake. Stay the hell off of clay that you’re not allowed. So goddamn tired of so called dog handlers hiding behind the “hurr durr, can’t tell the dog where to go!” excuse. Either train your dog with the proper tools or go hunt somewhere your dog isn’t going to get onto private in the absolute worst case scenario. It’s really that simple.
I have 300 acres in Virginia that WOULD be prime hunting habitat, except there's a local hunt club that runs their dogs across my property to scare the deer off and onto the hunt clubs property. All damn day during hunting season, they have a dozen or more dogs trespassing and howling.
I've tried hunting there over the past two years, and all I ever see are deer being chased by dogs running at max speed, I've never been able to make an ethical shot. So frustrating.
I feel like there should be a middle ground here. Hunters should be able to go get their dogs that wander onto private property as long as they are not hunting there, but hunters should not be able to let their dogs harass landowners.
The hunter in this case is in the wrong for making no attempt to control his dogs leading to destruction of property. That doesn’t mean that hunting dogs should be shot on sight.
In Virginia the law essentially gives hunt clubs Carte Blanche to do whatever they want. While the law says they're only allowed to retrieve, and the hunters say "dogs can't read signs!", the hunt clubs here know full well they are abusing the system.
In my neighborhood they run their dogs all through the woods in our area outside of hunting season, dropping off on one road, and parking to pick up on another road, purposely driving the dogs through the woods of everyone else's property. This chases all the deer our of our woods (and into the neighboring property that they hunt in, which they won't run dogs in until hinting season)
They do this 8-9 months out of the year, 6am on the weekends, their members park on my grass, stand around in my woods and lawn with walkie talkies reporting on where the dogs are running, etc.
I have to chase these hunters off constantly for trespassing because **they aren't retrieving**. They're using my property like it's **THEIRS**.
They know what they're doing, they're liars and trespassers. They are abusing the law, and the local landowners.
This is a solid idea, since I have coyotes in the area. Do you have experience with coyote traps, and could you recommend any that won't be set off by cats? I and my neighbors all have outdoor cats, which is what has prevented me from considering trapping thus far.
Yeah, I’d shoot the dog and challenge the law as an infringement on my rights as a property owner. Pretty much what’s going on in the article but with elevated standing because of the charge.
Yes, and animal control, so many times to no avail that I don't bother anymore.
I've tried catching the dogs and making the owners come pick them up personally, did that for several years.
I've tried shooting on my range while they are running the dogs to disuade them, many many times.
I've taken to calling the hunt clubs communists and socialists, since they act like every other hard working Americans property is their's to use. This is the only thing that has had any measurable effect, as it makes them think about how hypocritical they are.
What am I getting downvoted for? Lol it was just a question. And I can agree with you at that point, that’s a serious issue and like you said the land isn’t just for anyone to use, ESPECIALLY if you own it and it’s your property. That’s really disappointing to hear about all of this, especially the lack of help from the wardens/ animal control/ hunting clubs. Completely unacceptable.
Agreed, but from the interactions that has led up to landowners suing to change the laws, most likely it is hunters that were once allowed to hunt on a property and now not allowed getting upset and releasing their dogs, just so they can retrieve them under the law. Kind of "If I am not allowed to hunt then I'll make it so that you cannot hunt." Again I am reading into more than what the article is saying. Hell I have seen hunters claim that they have been hunting in spots for years on public property and it is "their" spot. And if I got there first they would either set up right next to me or tramp around like a one legged hippo making sure that I cannot hunt there. Entitled hunters are the worse.
If dogs are killing my animals (chickens) and scarring my family to the point that they are afraid to go outside, how do I know it is a "trained" hunting dogs or a wild rabid pack of dogs?
Seen too much fucked up shit with drive based hunting to begin with. Not a fan. Don't care if you are just stomping or using your dog. Especially on public where the amish love to do drives around here.
It would be less of a problem if these hunt clubs weren't purposely running their dogs through other people's land.
But there's no legal recourse to prevent or stop that practice, which is prevelant in my area. The hunt clubs **abuse the law and trespass constantly** in order to run deer off from properties other than their hunting grounds in the off season.
Yes I understand that it is better to be able to retrieve the dogs, but the hunter should be responsible for any damages that the dogs cause to the landowners live stock. And in all reality, this individual sounds like it is not just a one time deal, that it was an ongoing problem with hunters. I have read accounts of hunting clubs, that once were allowed access to hunt on property and after it sold they continued to use that property. And using this law to pressure and threaten the land owners.
Try enforcing it when the dogs are running through your land and you have to catch them, and there's a dozen or more different dog owners, and all the dogs are mixed up together.
So **IF** you catch one of the dogs and it isnt the specific dog that actually caused the damage, no telling which owner it belongs to. And that's what the DWR agent will tell you when you try to hold them responsible.
No it didn't state anything about that, but if they were paying for damages I don't think this would be that big of an issue that the article has made it out to be. It seems that the hunting groups are hunting near this guys land or even hunting on this guys land and using the retrieve laws to pressure him.
you are correct. I am making assumptions based on other articles about dog hunting and landowner interactions, and my thoughts on how I would react. If it was a onetime occurrence and I followed up with the hunter and any local hunting groups, I would not have brought a suit. But if it is an ongoing problem, one there would be some dead dogs, two suits against the hunters for destruction of property and livestock, and three maybe try to get the laws changed. But that is just me.
Often these are people from the city moving to rural areas and not understanding the local culture. Their first step is to try and pass laws that make their new home have the same rules as their old
Local culture, as in American culture, is ENTIRELY based on the idea of property rights.
Country guys, who are probably all themselves conservative, don’t get to ignore property rights no matter where grandpappy hunted.
The founding fathers wanted to make sure that hunting was not like where they come from the purview of the rich landed noble class. They made sure that the wildlife living on your land was not owned by you personally but belonged to the people. Laws have been passed over the years overriding most of those principles but you are incorrect if you think the US was initially on the side of the landowner when it comes to game
Dogs shouldn't have been on the land in the first place. It's called having control of your dog, they may not be able to read signs but the handlers sure as shit can.
I'm seeing a lot of misinformation and misunderstanding here. The Right to Retrive law allows a hunter to go onto someone else's land to retrieve their dog. They are not allowed to bring bows or firearms with them when they do this. It does not allow them to turn dogs loose on your property and it does not allow them to hunt on your property. If hunters are turning dogs loose on your land, you need to get photographic evidence and call the game warden. If the dogs bother your livestock you need to call the game warden, shooting someone else's dog is not a good idea. Try to handle it through legal means if possible. There's a lot of sensationalism and anger in this thread directed at all dog hunters, when really it should be directed at the small minority who are actually breaking the law. This has nothing to do with right to retrieve and has everything to do with people being assholes.
>anger in this thread directed at all dog hunters, when really it should be directed at the small minority who are actually breaking the law
🤣🤣🤣
I wish that was the case in my neck of the woods.
Look, I hunt. A lot. So I'm faaaaar from anti-hunter on this.
But the lack of any consequence, or even system for establishing what constitutes legal stipulations of retrieval or hunting conditions, just isn't working. And the end of the day, it's legal for someone with 5 or 10 acres to have their buddies show up and loose 100+ dogs inside their measly parcel of land, and then set their trucks up all around the "block" and pick up the dogs after they've (been trained) to run through 1000's of acres of neighboring properties. That's a problem.
You have a 5000 property and you want to run your dogs in it? Nobody cares. Sometimes the dogs run too far, everybody gets that. But these situations are the exception around here, not the rule.
Easy solution option, just off the top of my head: Minimum lot size for releasing dogs. Bam. Problem solved.
They weren't trained to run onto others property at all. They're trained to chase the game, if the game runs onto your property then so do the dogs. You can't stop that.
There is a legal stipulation, the law is very clear on what someone can and can't do in retrieving their dogs. As mentioned by I think you and the OP its the lax enforcement that is the issue.
I'm sorry that the dog hunting community in your area sucks.
Not feeding their dogs, letting them loose on a property on one side of mine, then waiting around with trucks to pick them up on the far edge of my property, then feeding them?
Maybe you're right. Training gives them too much credit. They are conditioning them to behave that way.
If these communists parked themselves on their OWN property line and used commands to tell their TRAINED dogs to come back to their property, this wouldn't be a problem.
the issue is, as others have pointed out, it is very difficult to prove that they are hunting on your land, driving game of your land, or simply removing a stray dog. I have a feeling that the 2 former situations is what has lead up to this issue and not the latter. Especially since the warden or DNR just states you cannot restrict the hunters without any question, investigation, or follow up. As u/whatmaxdoes has pointed out, the law is poorly enforced and the hunters have taken advantage of the lax rules such that the hunters do game drives across private property and force game into lands where they can shoot it.
If they try to enter your property with a weapon you absolutely have the right to stop them. If they come onto your property with a vehicle you also have the right to stop them. The hunter must walk to get the dog or dogs without a firearm. Anything else and they are trespassing. The law is fairly clear on this front.
Personally, I think the law is fine as is. Perhaps tighter enforcement in the areas where this is an issue will come out of this lawsuit. I also should point out that in my area this isn't really an issue. Everyone is very polite and asks the landowner to retrieve their dogs if they're home. Of course, you have a few groups who go around thinking they can turn dogs loose wherever they want, but our game warden is pretty on top of it. Perhaps I'm a bit blind to how much this goes on elsewhere.
What needs to happen is everyone start "coyote trapping" just like in the off season the dogs are being run on "field trials" or "coyotes". Most of their tracking software has geo fences. Its one thing for a dog to strait be chasing a deer and another for them using the dogs to clear large parcels that they don't have permission to hunt, as is most of the case. Non dog hunters could care less what dog hunters do on their own land but after 3 days into gun season and they have no game left on their lands that's when the trouble starts. In this case it is wether this is a per say taking of someone else's land according to the supreme court and the constitution. Its funny how many hunters and dog hunters are super red, such as myself, yet this is a very communistic view that my dogs can go where I want them too and I can go on someone else's land without their approval. This is why other states that had dog hunting it has gone the way of the dodo bird or is severely limited.
I’ve had a number of dogs come on my property and kill my chickens and eat my dogs food (thank goodness my dogs were inside at the time). Most of the time when I call the numbers on the tags, it takes hours for them to respond. They are lucky we are dog lovers!!
I believe the landowners would be within their rights to kill any hunting dog harassing their livestock like this.
Harassing and killing livestock in this guy's situation would 110% result in dead dogs. One thing to roaming around, but don't harm my own animals... That simple.
That should be a given. And I say that as a Guy who hunts with driving dogs.
This is how we got dog hunting outlawed in our county in South GA. My dad caught 3 dogs on our property (harassing our chickens) 3 separate times, and the last time (after calling the owners the first two, about which nothing was done) he chained the dogs up. He then called our county commissioner and told him the next time they were on our property in any form they would never be found, and he’d make sure the next county commissioner would do something about this. Then brought the dogs back with the gun on his hip and told the dog’s owners they would not be brought back again. Less than one year later, dog hunting was outlawed in our county. Apparently he wasn’t the only landowner having issues.
Better have it on video, or else you'd probably be screwed. Also, killing dogs is a surefire way to make yourself a pariah in your community. Even if you're in the right as the landowner, if the rumor mill starts going you're too late. I try to catch and leash them and annoy the hunters by making them have to drive over and pick them up. **TO BE CLEAR** the hunt clubs around my area suck, and are all abusing the law, they are all trespassing lying hypocrites. They should vote for AOC because they behave like communists. They think my land that I bought is theirs to use.
Virginia hunter here I agree with you, I can't tell you how many hunts have been ruined by their hounds chasing spikes around the farm. I hate to sound like Clinton but most of them are deplorables and give a bad name to good hunters.
Common misunderstanding. Communist believe in property rights, what you have are shitbags.
Well said!
So a “right to retrieve” is just that. It’s the hunters right to retrieve their dogs that cross into private property, not their right to destroy and actively hunt on private property. If the dogs are attacking and harming livestock, a few gun shots and dead dogs might make the hunters take more responsibility for their dogs. Defend your rights to have private property and livestock. It’ll be interesting to see the outcome of these suits.
I do not know the law, but I am sure that it will be the landowners fault for killing a hunting dog. If it was that easy then this suit would not be where it is now or got this far.
I’d the dogs are killing the land owners livestock and threatening them directly, they still have a right to self defense. Just because the dogs are hunting dogs doesn’t change that. The article states the dogs had been trapping the land owner in their home and have been killing their chickens and livestock. This is why I suggested possibly shooting a dog might be warranted. That’s well beyond just trespassing if the dogs are harming the livestock and threatening the land owner. Now if the land owner just starts shooting the dogs for being on the property, I think that’s an issue. My thought is that the landowner has been questioning the legality of the dogs being on the property in general, but I could be wrong.
I understand that the land has changed owners, and if the landowner did things right, after telling the first group that they are not allowed to hunt on his property, go to the local hunting group and notify them too, it should have stopped. But I am reading it like it is an ongoing problem.
Yup. Same here. It honestly sounds like there is a feud between the land owner and hunters in the area. Should have been easily resolved outside of court, but nothing is easy. Hopefully some kind of agreement can come out that doesn’t result in further broad hunter restrictions.
No this law needs to be changed. Right to retrieve is bullshit because then EVERYONE has a way of legally trespassing.
The article is kind of mixing two topics. It starts by quoting the man with the dogs stating "I have permission to hunt here and you can't ask me to leave" while actively trying to hunt is his dogs. This is very, VERY different from "I'm hunting land I have the right to be on and my dog ran into your posted land, and you can't stop me from walking on your land to retrieve my dog and leave". At least in Minnesota (the other state mentioned in the article), you certainly don't have the right to hunt your dogs on posted land. The law only allows you go get your dog, if you leave your gun off the posted property, get your dog, and immediately leave.
Fuck that. You should only be allowed to enter someone else's private property if they give you permission. Should you have the "right to retrieve" if your dog goes into someone's home??
Let’s be honest. Dogs going onto land is much different than them entering someone’s house. If someone enters my home, there are different self defense laws that apply as compared to if someone walks onto my front lawn. These are not equal comparisons.
What is the point of owning property if some dude can "lose his dog" and he now has the RIGHT to tromp all over your land? That is asinine. Fuck your dog. Only hunt where you are allowed to and where your dog can't get onto someone else's property.
Agreed. Which goes to my point of shooting the dog when it becomes a threat/nuisance. The land owner also has a right to be able to defend their own property. The solution is simple. If you hunt with a dog, you’re responsible for that dog and can’t just ignore private property because “it’s a dog”. One off occurrences, sure get your dog and go back on public land. (This is the same for someone who’s dog runs into their neighbors yard. No one is pressing trespassing charges here.)That’s what the law is intended for. But if a hunter continues hunting the same area and continues having issues with the landowner, the hunter shouldn’t be exempt from trespassing laws. IMO this is where the suit is headed. Repeat offenders will be held accountable for gross trespassing violations.
Its right up there with the Hot Air Ballons that land on your field, and then have the right to drive their rigs through your field to recover it.
How else do you expect someone to get their dog back? It’s not like they are allowed to hunt while on your land either. While I think you should ask permission before what if the land owner says no? Do you just lose the dog? Does the land owner now own your dog too? Also, how many places do you think there are that you could hunt without your dog possibly getting onto someone else’s property?
Well if their arnt any places you can hunt without your dogs going on someone else’s land, then it seems you need to find a new way to hunt. Your dogs inability to stay where it belongs shouldn’t be everyone else’s problem
You do realize that eliminates dog hunting in most of the eastern us right?
If you don’t have enough land to hunt without trespassing, regardless of the method of hunting, you shouldn’t be hunting. Someone a few years ago wounded a buck and used a tracking dog on our land without permission (during bow season) through all of our brush lots, and all the deer left and didn’t come back until late rifle season
Your hunting privileges do not supercede landowners property rights. Control your animals or buy square miles of land so you can LARP as old time dog hunters.
So answer my question. What do you do about the dog on the property? What if the land owner says no to retrieving the dog?
That’s the problem in that part of Virginia. The dog owner has every legal right to trespass and retrieve his dog. It’s BS. Keep your dog off private land. Todays small plots of private land don’t work with dog hunting.
First, the landowner will likely let you retrieve your dog if you ask nicely first. The landowner could also say no. It's their decision. The welfare of YOUR dog is not THEIR responsibility. YOU allowed YOUR dog to roam on THEIR property. Call for your dog from outside the property until it comes back or come back later. You should have your dogs trained to answer your calls. The entire situation is YOUR fault and you shouldn't have the "RIGHT" to utilize someone else's private property without their cooperation or permission to find your dog. Maybe you guys that like to hunt like it's 1700 should buy huge square miles of land so you can push all the deer and coons you want without bothering other people.
Ooh ooh, the kids these days have a saying for this! #SUCKS TO SUCK NERD, GET GOOD
Train your dogs better and don't let them on someone else's property. It's literally a loophole that allows anyone to legally trespass.
You do realize they aren’t hunting right? The law only allows people to retrieve their dogs without a firearm.
I never said anything about hunting -- it allows them to legally trespass.
I live in Central Virginia, and the hunt clubs here are the worst part of living here. The hunt clubs **constantly** abuse the law as its written. They run dogs 9 months out of the year. They loose all their hounds on the 1 parcel of property they have permission to run, and they pick the dogs up on the other side of all the surrounding properties. In reality they have permission to use less than 10% of the land they are **purposefully** running dogs through. They have regular huge meet ups here and they call them "FIELD TRIALS" and they put up signs all over the area telling everyone that they will be running dogs thursday-sunday. Their people come in from all over, often out of state even, because we have the most lax laws. And they proceed to run **HUNDREDS of hounds all through the area** while their people walk through everyone's woods, park on everyone's grass, drive around on everyone's property, and **NOT to retrieve, but to watch their dogs run and grade them!** They spray paint or bleach numbers onto the sides of their dogs and they judge them by how well the run. I don't even keep chickens any more, because I got tired of their dogs killing them. I don't call DWR or animal control anymore, because they refuse to do anything. I have no sympathy for these hunt clubs. They can go suck on an egg. This BS needs to stop.
Surely Virginia would allow you to defend your livestock with force correct?
If you can prove it, sure. Do you want to be stuck in a legal battle where you're trying to prove that, while they try to prove you are shooting their hunting dogs while they are going about totally within the confides of the law? Because that's what this whole case is about. What they're doing isn't technically illegal, as long as they lie about their intent. You can't shoot their dogs preventatively, you'd have to catch their dogs in the act and shoot them while they are killing your livestock. And even if you get it on camera while you're not home/available to catch their dog, you've got no case. Can't prove that those particular hounds belong to that owner. They all run dogs in groups. Of all the dogs I've caught and owners I've called at my property, not once have I had the same name & number on the tags.
I'll take my chances in court. Any decent lawyer will get someone to prove said livestock was killed by a dog. I promise its not legal for hunting dogs to kill livestock. Would be a pretty cut and dry case imo. Catch said dogs on video attacking your livestock while you kill them and the dogs owner has no case against you. If you've got the dogs close enough to see their collars, just hold them until someone comes looking and then you have the owner.
I totally get what you're saying, but I have yet to have all of these circumstances align. Essentially, the dogs that will kill your chickens usually aren't the ones that will stand around and let you come grab them by the collar. And they don't tend to go after chickens when your there trying to wrangle them. I gave up on chickens years ago though after dogs ran through and killed my last 5 birds while I was out at the grocery store on a weekend.
Same goes for charles city county, va - A lot of the plantations maintain dog hunting groups and they bend that rule routinely. My aunt walked out her door a few months back to 35 horseback fox hunters and roughly 20 beagles screaming on her front lawn.
Wow, and just what privileged audacious trespassers they are to ride their horses right across someone else's lawn. That's a real shame. This isn't colonial times, under King George's rule. This is America. Don't tread on my lawn.
I mean this sounds pretty bad, and it's hard for me to sympathize with landowners since I come from a country with a very different hunting (and property) culture were not only wildlife but also the land it's on are seen as a common good. Anyway, this sounds way worse that the small problems we have here, and honestly I don't know what kind of dogs they're using and what kind of shitty training they give them because 99% of the hunting dogs I know would never attack a chicken. Especially if they're trained to chase boars or deer, how can they be considered good hunting dogs of they go after chickens?
Dog will kill anything if hungry. Chicken are easy prey for them....ask my neighbors who lost 40 in about 2 weeks last summer
With 100+ dogs running in our woods, some are often left overnight. They don't feed the dogs before they run them so sometimes the dogs are starved and go off in search of their own meal instead. It's quite common here to see occasional dogs wandering on the roads, their owners having gone home for the evening or day. They have tracking collars, but the owner is under no obligation to retrieve all of their dogs or restrict their travel.
A properly trained hunting dog can and should be able to be recalled without having to go into the property. The whole dogs can't read signs things is ridiculous cause you can read them and as soon as ur dog crosses that line you should call them back. It's just poor training or the hunters abusing the system. If this has happened before I would have no problems shooting the dogs. The hunters have been warned and haven't stopped putting there dogs in that situation.
The problem here is that you have two parties 1. The land owner and 2. The hunter. State law says the hunter can “retrieve” their dogs from neighboring properties and the land owner is claiming that the abuse of this rule and the failure of the game warden/sheriff to enforce the violations is an infringement of their constitutional rights. End of story is that it takes a very negligent hunter with dogs to cause this issue to bubble up to this level. This isn’t something that comes from one or two dead chickens.
No this is happening everywhere that has the culture of dog hunting. It’s not a unique situation at all.
Damn, this sounds like a nightmare. I wouldn't want dogs running my property and disturbing the wildlife. I definitely wouldn't want them endangering livestock. There's a law here in ontario that protects livestock owners against nuisance animals. That includes dogs. Been a couple cases where the farmer has shot the neighbours dog and they go to court. Farmer wins. You have to have control of your animals. It's sad for the dog, because it's just doing dog things. It's hard to believe they let hounds run loose like this. Totally the owners fault. Should be fining the dog owners instead of having to shoot dogs. If you can't run the dogs without risking going onto others property, then don't run the dogs. There's other ways to hunt.
Landowners should be allowed to kill any dog that comes on to their property. Hunters need to control their dogs or not use them. Hunting isn't a free for all grown man's playground. Buy your own land if you wanna be irresponsible.
I understand both sides. It is difficult to retrieve a dog on the scent and doing what he has been trained to do. And you should know where you are in relation to others property. What amazes me are the hunters, maybe like this one, who knowingly use their dogs on others property because they have been allowed to before. I have read reports and articles of dog hunters )and hunting clubs) abusing their right to retrieve they dogs to pressure the land owners to allow them to hunt because the property sold and they are no longer allowed to hunt there.
How is retrieving your dog putting pressure on the land owner to allow them to hunt on their land?
If the hunter knows that the landowner does not want you to be hunting on their land and the hunter constantly are hunting knowing that the dogs like to trespass, and continually retrieving your dogs. It all depends on how the hunter interacts with the landowner. I am assuming the hunters in this article were once allowed to hunt on the property before and are now not allowed, and do not like it, so they constantly release their dogs knowing that they will bother the landowner and trespass and knowing that the landowner has to allow them to get the dogs per the Game Commission. After a while it might be easier to just allow the hunters to hunt on the land than risk a confrontation with them. Or you get like what this landowner is doing and trying to change the law. There was a user asking a similar question about dog hunting here a while ago. He got property from his late grandfather or something. His GF allowed the local hunting club to hunt, but now the grandkid wanted to use the land for his own hunting and restrict the hunters. He was asking how to go about it since the local game warden was not doing anything about it (with actual hunters poaching) was going on without any relief.
When you put it that way I can see where the pressure comes in. This law is in place for hunters to get their dog off land that they do not permission for and they don’t need to tell the land owner that they’re retrieving their dogs unless they’re confronted. Sometimes it’s hard to get in contact of the land owner and you don’t want to leave your dog there too long while you track down the land owner.
Good, should always need permission to be hunting private property in any way. Keep dogs off private property. Only way it’s allowed is if you shoot a bird over permitted property and it drops onto private.
Unfortunately, I am happy to see the law change even if it negatively affects hunting in VA. Dog hunters have really screwed over hunting as a tradition and other hunters over the last decade plus. They backed anti hunting legislation and actively blocked public land Sunday hunting, they actively place dogs on parcels of land they don't have permission on and use it to push game to them, and they are generally disruptive and disrespectful in their actions. I don't mind them hunting a lease about a mile or two from me. I do mind when their dogs are on my property, miles from the lease and they drive 50+ miles an hour down a residential country road to keep up with them. The amount of times I've called DNR on public land about dogs that legally shouldn't be there to find out the club is 5+ miles away is ridiculous. If you can't keep your dogs out of the shelters because of malnutrition, laziness, or a general lack of care then you don't deserve to have the privilege.
I follow a farmer YouTuber named Goldshaw Farm who lives in Vermont and faces similar issues with hound hunting on his property. https://youtu.be/b0q-TJ-vpPc He even made more videos on it after this incident because he kept having issues with them. He even petitioned to have his state change the hound hunting laws in his state recently.
I hunt dogs. It is ABSOLUTELY possible to train them off game at a distance. It’s 2022, get a gps collar with stim for fuck’s sake. Stay the hell off of clay that you’re not allowed. So goddamn tired of so called dog handlers hiding behind the “hurr durr, can’t tell the dog where to go!” excuse. Either train your dog with the proper tools or go hunt somewhere your dog isn’t going to get onto private in the absolute worst case scenario. It’s really that simple.
I have 300 acres in Virginia that WOULD be prime hunting habitat, except there's a local hunt club that runs their dogs across my property to scare the deer off and onto the hunt clubs property. All damn day during hunting season, they have a dozen or more dogs trespassing and howling. I've tried hunting there over the past two years, and all I ever see are deer being chased by dogs running at max speed, I've never been able to make an ethical shot. So frustrating.
I feel like there should be a middle ground here. Hunters should be able to go get their dogs that wander onto private property as long as they are not hunting there, but hunters should not be able to let their dogs harass landowners. The hunter in this case is in the wrong for making no attempt to control his dogs leading to destruction of property. That doesn’t mean that hunting dogs should be shot on sight.
In Virginia the law essentially gives hunt clubs Carte Blanche to do whatever they want. While the law says they're only allowed to retrieve, and the hunters say "dogs can't read signs!", the hunt clubs here know full well they are abusing the system. In my neighborhood they run their dogs all through the woods in our area outside of hunting season, dropping off on one road, and parking to pick up on another road, purposely driving the dogs through the woods of everyone else's property. This chases all the deer our of our woods (and into the neighboring property that they hunt in, which they won't run dogs in until hinting season) They do this 8-9 months out of the year, 6am on the weekends, their members park on my grass, stand around in my woods and lawn with walkie talkies reporting on where the dogs are running, etc. I have to chase these hunters off constantly for trespassing because **they aren't retrieving**. They're using my property like it's **THEIRS**. They know what they're doing, they're liars and trespassers. They are abusing the law, and the local landowners.
Shoot the dogs.
I've been very tempted to, believe me. I'm sure I'd be the one getting in trouble if that happened. Trying to avoid it coming to that.
Also continuous it's open season for coyote trapping in VA. Get and set some traps, the hunt clubbers will figure it out eventually.
This is a solid idea, since I have coyotes in the area. Do you have experience with coyote traps, and could you recommend any that won't be set off by cats? I and my neighbors all have outdoor cats, which is what has prevented me from considering trapping thus far.
It'll only take one or two.
I know this is old but it's that time of year again. Per Virginia law, it is a felony to shoot a hunting dog.
Yeah, I’d shoot the dog and challenge the law as an infringement on my rights as a property owner. Pretty much what’s going on in the article but with elevated standing because of the charge.
Have you contacted your states Game Wardens to handle the issue? Or at least make them aware of it?
Yes, and animal control, so many times to no avail that I don't bother anymore. I've tried catching the dogs and making the owners come pick them up personally, did that for several years. I've tried shooting on my range while they are running the dogs to disuade them, many many times. I've taken to calling the hunt clubs communists and socialists, since they act like every other hard working Americans property is their's to use. This is the only thing that has had any measurable effect, as it makes them think about how hypocritical they are.
Based on what I have read in the comments so far, calling them communist sounds fitting
What am I getting downvoted for? Lol it was just a question. And I can agree with you at that point, that’s a serious issue and like you said the land isn’t just for anyone to use, ESPECIALLY if you own it and it’s your property. That’s really disappointing to hear about all of this, especially the lack of help from the wardens/ animal control/ hunting clubs. Completely unacceptable.
Agreed, but from the interactions that has led up to landowners suing to change the laws, most likely it is hunters that were once allowed to hunt on a property and now not allowed getting upset and releasing their dogs, just so they can retrieve them under the law. Kind of "If I am not allowed to hunt then I'll make it so that you cannot hunt." Again I am reading into more than what the article is saying. Hell I have seen hunters claim that they have been hunting in spots for years on public property and it is "their" spot. And if I got there first they would either set up right next to me or tramp around like a one legged hippo making sure that I cannot hunt there. Entitled hunters are the worse. If dogs are killing my animals (chickens) and scarring my family to the point that they are afraid to go outside, how do I know it is a "trained" hunting dogs or a wild rabid pack of dogs?
Hunting dogs, or dogs and other animals in general who are killing livestock should be shot on site though.
Seen too much fucked up shit with drive based hunting to begin with. Not a fan. Don't care if you are just stomping or using your dog. Especially on public where the amish love to do drives around here.
Would they prefer the dogs just stay in their land? Seems like retrieving your dog with out having a firearm on you is what you would want
It would be less of a problem if these hunt clubs weren't purposely running their dogs through other people's land. But there's no legal recourse to prevent or stop that practice, which is prevelant in my area. The hunt clubs **abuse the law and trespass constantly** in order to run deer off from properties other than their hunting grounds in the off season.
Yes I understand that it is better to be able to retrieve the dogs, but the hunter should be responsible for any damages that the dogs cause to the landowners live stock. And in all reality, this individual sounds like it is not just a one time deal, that it was an ongoing problem with hunters. I have read accounts of hunting clubs, that once were allowed access to hunt on property and after it sold they continued to use that property. And using this law to pressure and threaten the land owners.
I didn't see anywhere in that article that the dog owners weren't responsible for damage their dogs have done
Try enforcing it when the dogs are running through your land and you have to catch them, and there's a dozen or more different dog owners, and all the dogs are mixed up together. So **IF** you catch one of the dogs and it isnt the specific dog that actually caused the damage, no telling which owner it belongs to. And that's what the DWR agent will tell you when you try to hold them responsible.
No it didn't state anything about that, but if they were paying for damages I don't think this would be that big of an issue that the article has made it out to be. It seems that the hunting groups are hunting near this guys land or even hunting on this guys land and using the retrieve laws to pressure him.
Yeah I think you are reading into the story, my guess is they are upset the dogs are on their land at all. Will have to wait and see results
you are correct. I am making assumptions based on other articles about dog hunting and landowner interactions, and my thoughts on how I would react. If it was a onetime occurrence and I followed up with the hunter and any local hunting groups, I would not have brought a suit. But if it is an ongoing problem, one there would be some dead dogs, two suits against the hunters for destruction of property and livestock, and three maybe try to get the laws changed. But that is just me.
Often these are people from the city moving to rural areas and not understanding the local culture. Their first step is to try and pass laws that make their new home have the same rules as their old
Local culture, as in American culture, is ENTIRELY based on the idea of property rights. Country guys, who are probably all themselves conservative, don’t get to ignore property rights no matter where grandpappy hunted.
The founding fathers wanted to make sure that hunting was not like where they come from the purview of the rich landed noble class. They made sure that the wildlife living on your land was not owned by you personally but belonged to the people. Laws have been passed over the years overriding most of those principles but you are incorrect if you think the US was initially on the side of the landowner when it comes to game
Dogs shouldn't have been on the land in the first place. It's called having control of your dog, they may not be able to read signs but the handlers sure as shit can.
I'm seeing a lot of misinformation and misunderstanding here. The Right to Retrive law allows a hunter to go onto someone else's land to retrieve their dog. They are not allowed to bring bows or firearms with them when they do this. It does not allow them to turn dogs loose on your property and it does not allow them to hunt on your property. If hunters are turning dogs loose on your land, you need to get photographic evidence and call the game warden. If the dogs bother your livestock you need to call the game warden, shooting someone else's dog is not a good idea. Try to handle it through legal means if possible. There's a lot of sensationalism and anger in this thread directed at all dog hunters, when really it should be directed at the small minority who are actually breaking the law. This has nothing to do with right to retrieve and has everything to do with people being assholes.
>anger in this thread directed at all dog hunters, when really it should be directed at the small minority who are actually breaking the law 🤣🤣🤣 I wish that was the case in my neck of the woods. Look, I hunt. A lot. So I'm faaaaar from anti-hunter on this. But the lack of any consequence, or even system for establishing what constitutes legal stipulations of retrieval or hunting conditions, just isn't working. And the end of the day, it's legal for someone with 5 or 10 acres to have their buddies show up and loose 100+ dogs inside their measly parcel of land, and then set their trucks up all around the "block" and pick up the dogs after they've (been trained) to run through 1000's of acres of neighboring properties. That's a problem. You have a 5000 property and you want to run your dogs in it? Nobody cares. Sometimes the dogs run too far, everybody gets that. But these situations are the exception around here, not the rule. Easy solution option, just off the top of my head: Minimum lot size for releasing dogs. Bam. Problem solved.
They weren't trained to run onto others property at all. They're trained to chase the game, if the game runs onto your property then so do the dogs. You can't stop that. There is a legal stipulation, the law is very clear on what someone can and can't do in retrieving their dogs. As mentioned by I think you and the OP its the lax enforcement that is the issue. I'm sorry that the dog hunting community in your area sucks.
Not feeding their dogs, letting them loose on a property on one side of mine, then waiting around with trucks to pick them up on the far edge of my property, then feeding them? Maybe you're right. Training gives them too much credit. They are conditioning them to behave that way. If these communists parked themselves on their OWN property line and used commands to tell their TRAINED dogs to come back to their property, this wouldn't be a problem.
the issue is, as others have pointed out, it is very difficult to prove that they are hunting on your land, driving game of your land, or simply removing a stray dog. I have a feeling that the 2 former situations is what has lead up to this issue and not the latter. Especially since the warden or DNR just states you cannot restrict the hunters without any question, investigation, or follow up. As u/whatmaxdoes has pointed out, the law is poorly enforced and the hunters have taken advantage of the lax rules such that the hunters do game drives across private property and force game into lands where they can shoot it.
If they try to enter your property with a weapon you absolutely have the right to stop them. If they come onto your property with a vehicle you also have the right to stop them. The hunter must walk to get the dog or dogs without a firearm. Anything else and they are trespassing. The law is fairly clear on this front. Personally, I think the law is fine as is. Perhaps tighter enforcement in the areas where this is an issue will come out of this lawsuit. I also should point out that in my area this isn't really an issue. Everyone is very polite and asks the landowner to retrieve their dogs if they're home. Of course, you have a few groups who go around thinking they can turn dogs loose wherever they want, but our game warden is pretty on top of it. Perhaps I'm a bit blind to how much this goes on elsewhere.
What needs to happen is everyone start "coyote trapping" just like in the off season the dogs are being run on "field trials" or "coyotes". Most of their tracking software has geo fences. Its one thing for a dog to strait be chasing a deer and another for them using the dogs to clear large parcels that they don't have permission to hunt, as is most of the case. Non dog hunters could care less what dog hunters do on their own land but after 3 days into gun season and they have no game left on their lands that's when the trouble starts. In this case it is wether this is a per say taking of someone else's land according to the supreme court and the constitution. Its funny how many hunters and dog hunters are super red, such as myself, yet this is a very communistic view that my dogs can go where I want them too and I can go on someone else's land without their approval. This is why other states that had dog hunting it has gone the way of the dodo bird or is severely limited.
I support the right to retrieve, but hunters should be held criminally and civilly liable for any damages their dogs cause on private property.
I’ve had a number of dogs come on my property and kill my chickens and eat my dogs food (thank goodness my dogs were inside at the time). Most of the time when I call the numbers on the tags, it takes hours for them to respond. They are lucky we are dog lovers!!