Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ShootingEgg

Dog mistaken as fox

Recommended Posts

My old boss on Skye brought in a famous terrier once to assist in the clearing of a difficult den site. Saw ears appearing and he shot the head off the fox with his trusty .243, turned out to be said famous terrier. Costly mistake in identity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Walker570 said:

and.....it tars us all with the same brush, remember that.  I have been at this game for many many years and some comments on here make me shudder. Identify your target and ANY doubt do not shoot.  Do not shoot unless the shot is 100% safe as well.

Sorry but Im with Walker570 on this. Even if the dog was in the bushs next to the path he still shot in the direction of the path. Only takes a second to look at the target to identify it. My thoughts are a spaniel moves a bit differently to a fox so you'd think there would be a few clues to pick up on before pulling the trigger. He also cant have killed the dog cleanly as its says it later at the vets which poses questions about his ability to kill cleanly. 

I was lamping rabbits once and some eyes in the torch did not seem right. We got closer only to find it was the neighbours cat. I did not shoot.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scully said:

Awful story. As a beater many moons ago, a standing gun once raised his gun to my red grizzle Border as she broke from some bracken about 40 yds in front of him. Thankfully he properly identified her for what she was. 

Hence why no ground game (for beaters safety as well), but especially no foxes on a driven day should be standard across every shoot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, snow white said:

He is at fault if you can’t identify your target 100% don’t shoot.

He had to be close enough with a shotgun to properly identify it.

:good:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's all this he shot next to a footpath. He is legally allowed to stand on the footpath bridal way and shoot. So long as your not disturbing others on said path. If he was 50 foot from the center of path legal to carry on shooting. So unless the law has changed recently the lad as far as I can tell hasn't broken the law. Probably why no arrest made.

If the dogs in the field running along the bushes and live stock in the field he is within his rights to shoot it. That may not be the case here. But as others have said two sides to every story.

Very sad for the owner. Don't think the chap who shot it will feel great either. 

None of were there and can say if the shot was safe or not.  Some paths and bridal ways are old railway lines and way above adjacent fields with bushes tend of feet below on either side. This would make shooting into the ground at bushes safe shooting.

Hopefully more info will be made public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, figgy said:

 

If the dogs in the field running along the bushes and in the is within his rights to shoot it.  Not so.

None of were there and can say if the shot was safe or not. Nothing to do with safe shot or otherwise, he failed to recognise it was a dog. 

Some paths and bridal ways are old railway lines and way above adjacent fields with bushes tend of feet below on either side. This would make shooting into the ground at bushes safe shooting. Unless of course there is a dog or person in the bushes you didn't notice.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, figgy said:

 

If the dogs in the field running along the bushes and live stock in the field he is within his rights to shoot it.

 

you are not allowed to shoot a dog just because it's in a field with animals!

 

The civil law

If a dog belonging to somewhere else enters a farmer’s land, it amounts to trespass. That said, responding by shooting and injuring or even killing a trespassing dog amounts to a civil wrong, which, in turn, could mean the farmer is liable to the dog owner. The key issue is whether the injuring act is a legitimate act or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stonepark said:

Hence why no ground game (for beaters safety as well), but especially no foxes on a driven day should be standard across every shoot.

Depends where you go really, I suppose. I've seen a lot of foxes shot on driven bird days; on some it can be 'only if it's safe' and on another 'none whatsoever'. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the replies defending him are unbelievable, there are no conclusions to jump to, he f'd up. At best he is an overly keen idiot at worst he is a dangerous liability who was lucky to not shoot the owner of said dog at the same time. Being young etc is no defence, you shoot at a fox when it trots past you in the middle of field, or when its 150 yards away sitting in a lamp. Not when it is a vaguely ginger blur in a hedge bottom, next to a footpath. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

half 8 at night????   No idea what he was shooting at  lads a fud -period.Could have been anything he let got at--or anyone for that matter!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, bishop said:

half 8 at night????   No idea what he was shooting at  lads a fud -period.Could have been anything he let got at--or anyone for that matter!

Incident was about 7pm, incident was report to police at 8.30pm , presumably after vets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

None of us were there, none of us know the circumstances of the shooting, too many people are jumping up to say he is at fault before any investigation has even been started, let alone a conclusion reached.

I was not there, I do not know what happened and I am unable to condem becauase I know too little.

 

But you all carry on demonising the shooter with the sparse details that have come to light, I will wait until we know more details.

I see your point, perhaps the real facts are that the shooter actually shot a dog that was chasing livestock rather than sniffing around..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the peeps saying "2 sides too a story" are thinking we only have the "owners" side and said dog could have been worrying livestock. Hence he thought it could have been a fox. 

But he still should have had a solid id on the target. 

Wonder why he didn't hang around. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, manthing said:

I think the peeps saying "2 sides too a story" are thinking we only have the "owners" side and said dog could have been worrying livestock. Hence he thought it could have been a fox. 

But he still should have had a solid id on the target. 

Wonder why he didn't hang around. 

There is no evidence of any livestock, people suggesting this are merely speculating and in any event shooting a dog not actively chasing licestock is still an offence.

Correct

Didn't know what to do, panicked? Didn't know to call the police?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, manthing said:

Until more comes out everyone is speculating. 

This. Its an editorial. We do not know the facts. It could be the case that the cgap shot his own dog for all we know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why didnt shooting egg wait untill we got all sides of the story before PW judge and jury gave there verdict 

Edited by Rim Fire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know nothing of this except for the brief article linked.

Seeing as a shotgun was used I guess the distance wasn't massive, but the story is very sparse on info.

Easy to jump to virtually any conclusion you like, even the brother of the owner shot it himself by mistake and is making up the rest of the story, just saying!!!!!!!

Sorry for the dog!!

:hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, oldypigeonpopper said:

hello, a shotgun !!!!!!!!  young lad !!!!!!! 

That doesn't give us a lot to go on but I assume because he was under a certain age he's Guilty ma Lord !!!!!!!

 

22 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

TWO SIDES to EVERY story!!!!!!!!!

There always is and the PW Judge & Jury have all the facts..NOT

Are we not "Innocent until found Guilty" in the UK....   A verdict arrived at through facts not News coverage, Tickles me that a News paper/Channel coverage of something on here is often dismissed out of hand a rubbish but on this occasion the Lad is hung based soley on that previously condemed medium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Snoozer said:

That doesn't give us a lot to go on but I assume because he was under a certain age he's Guilty ma Lord !!!!!!!

 

There always is and the PW Judge & Jury have all the facts..NOT

Are we not "Innocent until found Guilty" in the UK....   A verdict arrived at through facts not News coverage, Tickles me that a News paper/Channel coverage of something on here is often dismissed out of hand a rubbish but on this occasion the Lad is hung based soley on that previously condemed medium.

hello, it has all the hall marks of the dog and owner being in the right place at the wrong time, lad using a 410 with his black lab on a bridle path, early evening, yes your right there is only so much information to go on from the BBC and local news,  , but then if your not sure what you see dont shoot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...