A farmer is there to make money, and support himself and his family if he has one. And farmers support themselves growing crops and rearing livestock. I am good friends with a few farmers, and none of them like to shoot dogs. They sometimes have to, but only as a last resort. The last time any of them had to shoot a dog wa sover ten years ago, when a gang was walking about on private land setting their dogs on sheep and actually killing the sheep. In a case like this, there was no other option. The bad thing is not all farmers use shooting as a last resort. Some farmers shoot any dog that is off the lead, and this is wrong unless the dog is worrying livestock.
If your dog was shot when it wasn’t bothering any animals, then the farmer is in the wrong. But if your dog is shot while running around a field with livestock in, then it is your fault for having it off the lead. That’s why you should always have the dog on a lead unless on Forestry commission or woodland trust property that you know is open access. If you are near farmland, you should get it on a lead to be safe, as your dog may find a hole in a fence and chase farm animals.

As a serving soldier I am a trained user of firearms and I am bound by a strict code of conduct, continued extensive training and safety set up, and even in an operational environment, as you would expect i remain bound by this code of conduct. The UK civilian firearms user is largely an untrained individual, they are bound by a loose and out dated policy and they recieve no training legalised training in either firearms use or safety parameters, yet farmers freely carry and discharge firearms in public places, putting not only themselves at risk, but also the public. Bear in mind these few points:

1. What type of weapon system are they using to shoot these dogs, because different weapons have different ranges, spread and power.

2. Have the users of these weapons had any training, how accurate are their weapons and how well maintained are they (remember these simple things are not mandatory by law).

3. Have the users taken into account the environment around them and the target, people, other animals may be in the firing line, who is covering the safety of firing arcs and where is the fall of shot going, ie. where is the bullet/shot/round going once discharged. Munitions spent have different capabilities and are capable of continuing their route of travel having passed straight through the intended target. Factor in missed shots, shots aimed high to scare and even warning shots fired into the air will still travel back down to earth at a rate of velocity which can still kill.

Add to these worrying points the issue of land. What many consider to be public right of way or public areas can often be access land which is allowed to be grazed by livestock outside of a designated fenced area, this land does not belong to the livestock owner so surely they grase thier animals at accepted risk? I can fully understand defending, as a last resort, animals on thier own private fenced land but surley this can not be acceptable behavior on an area of land used by the public. This issue is as outdated and lapse as the current firarms law.

Farmers and dog owners should be able to co-exsist, but this clearly is not the case there seems to be a number of dangourously intimidating farmers out there and a equaul number of poor dog owners. However on the whole most dog owners will control thier dogs effectivly, but there may be an occasion, prehaps where unsighted, where dogs engage in a chase, people have to remember all dogs have a chase instinct but not all will chase to kill, they chase for the excitement of the chase. Surely killing a dog is a bit barbaric in this day and age, wouldn’t a financial remuniration be a more acceptable method. Clearly I am accutely aware of the legal upset/wranglings that can amount through the effect and inforcement of either method.

In summary, my points are merely for interest/awareness and in some cases up for debate and clarification, as i have said the laws and rules around this issue leave a lot to be desired and as with a lot of out dated laws can be subject to varied interpretation. All comments are welcome.