UPHunter08

Usually, they take the dog to the pound, and the owner pays if he wants it back. You shouldn't have to pay a dime if you're calling them to remove the animal from your land.

As for everyone shooting dogs...I sure hope your pet never gets loose if everyone is that trigger happy out in the woods. Occasionally, my bird dog gets twisted around and I have to double back to retrieve her. If some dumb redneck shoots her, he is going to be out a lot of cash.

Habitual, diseased, wild dogs, I can understand. But if you're shooting someone's pet that just got loose once or twice...you're not the ethical hunter that you claim to be IMO when there are other ethical options out there. I've taken care of numerous stray dogs and have yet had to shoot one.

kevin1

When I see a stray dog on my land it normally doesn't come back after I've given it a "warning shot" into the ground near it, those that do tend to stick around. I don't sympathize with dipsheits who let their dogs or cats run loose, there are laws about that and if you don't abide by them as I do then you took a risk and lost. Cats are terrors on small game and songbirds, and dogs aren't much better. Control your pet or lose it, it doesn't matter if it's to me or the dogcatcher, it's still youir fault for letting it run loose.

early in

If they don't have a collar (irresponsible owner who SHOULDN'T own a dog) and they're chasing deer, they catch an arrow (it's legal here)! Real simple.

UPHunter08

Yep, I don't disagree that owners should control their pets. However there are better ways to control them than by shooting on sight...especially if it's a one-time event (first time the animal got loose). Even the best owner can have a pet get loose or lost (e.g. while hunting). They're not all 'dipsheits'...however shooting someone's pet the first time it gets loose is a surefire way to turn several more people off against hunting. The anti-hunters already have a lot of propaganda in their arsenal; don't give them yet another reason to lobby against hunting.

As I've said earlier, I am also against pets running loose. I've trapped several of them and turned them into animal control. Problem solved. The animal is under control of the authorities, away from the negligent owner, and I'm not guilty of shooting someone's pet (a criminal offense in many areas if you're caught). Finally, and probably best of all IMO, I haven't given the antis another reason to brand hunters as being Neanderthal rednecks.

ahunter55

If no one claimes them, collar or not & animal control doesn't come for them-as someone said S, S, S.

sconnyhunter

UPHUNTER, I'm with you on not shooting on sight.

However, it is reasonably easy to tell if a dog runs loose a lot, versus one that does not. Your hunting dog will likely not be aggressive towards another person, while a commonly loose dog likely will be.
I shoot cats, if I find them while out hunting as I don't hunt near towns or homes. Dogs, I give a second chance to as long as they are not acting aggressively. I found a springer one weekend while duck hunting with friends that just wanted attention, (no collar and no other people anywhere near us) wound up taking her home with me.

UPHunter08

Yeah, I'm in total agreement with you, and this is essentially what I said in my first post in this thread. Also agree with you on cats, as they shouldn't be running wild in the woods...and I've caught a couple of the neighbor's that they let run loose and turned them into animal control.

I'm differentiating between actual, wild dogs, and a pet that got loose. What I took exception to was the attitude displayed by some that they'd shoot a dog even if they knew it was someone's pet that got loose. That's just assinine.

nomorewolves

Dogs need to be under control of the owner at all times. Many states have leash laws. First call animial control....still a problem... SSS Good luck

Lanse couche couche

I'm not sure what the laws are in Illinois.

I do know that lots of people are confused about their own state laws and think that they can legally shoot a dog for being on their property or chasing deer. Often they are wrong.

As a general rule of thumb, if dogs are on your property and are posing a direct threat to humans or livestock, then there is generally no problem with shooting them. Beyond those scenarios it gets very iffy. Always best to consult the local authorities and find out what you can actually get away with. Thirty acres is not a lot of ground for hiding multiple dog graves and all you need is one local prosecutor who is a member of the Humane Society to make your life interesting. Always best to do your homework before pulling the trigger.

kevin1

Had you read my post more losely you'd have noticed that I didn't say anything about shooting them on sight, the warning shot is into the ground near them, not in them. They tend to grasp where they're not welcome quickly that way, so repeat offenses are fewer. Last year I refrained from shooting a dog that chased a buck right through my ground blind as I was sitting in it, it looked familiar and had a collar. I later discovered that it belonged to a friend down the street, it didn't normally roam so I wasn't used to seeing it outside their property. I advised my friend to keep the dog on their peoperty, especially during hunting season, since most of our neighbors aren't as selective as I am when it comes to strays. Abandoned strays also have the problem of going feral, a huge problem in rural areas. Ferals are a definite safety problem, especially when they pack up. I've been treed by a dog pack before, ethics go out the window in that situation.