How Far Are You Willing to Go?

Your point escapes me.

 
Point being, are you a survivalist who lives of the land, or do you just hunt for sport and fun?

ORIGINAL: snownose

If you really feel this way then we are from 2 different planets.

 
Steady now.  []
 

 but how can you raise a dog, bond with it and then just shoot it?

 
I wouldn't do that except in a very extreme circumstance.  Now if you want to ask how I think the guys I was talking about were able to do that, you need to ask me that.
 

My point is, if you provide well for a dog, then at say 2 years old, you determine that he won't suit your needs, so you shoot him, haven't you then been responsible to him for his life?

 
I took this statement as a personal opinion, if you don't feel that way then I appologize for assuming so.
 
So, I will ask, how do you feel about a person just shooting a dog after 2 years of not performing correctly?
 

ORIGINAL: snownose
Point being, are you a survivalist who lives of the land, or do you just hunt for sport and fun?

 
We all live off the land, don't we?  Some of us are just so squeemish that we have to let others do the messy or hard work for us.  But to answer your question, no, yes and yes.

We all live off the land, don't we? Some of us are just so squeemish that we have to let others do the messy or hard work for us. But to answer your question, no, yes and yes.

 
Ok, at least you are brutally honest, I'll give you credit for that.
 
I think I should bow out of this conversation, I work with rescue groups, I have picked up strays, I am a vegetarian (I don't let other people do the dirty work for me, I just don't the meat[]), and I have a hard time understanding hurting animals for sport and fun. I guess I am just too passionate when it comes to animals.
 

ORIGINAL: snownose
So, I will ask, how do you feel about a person just shooting a dog after 2 years of not performing correctly?

Let me redefine the circumstances for you here.

1.  It took two years to determine whether or not a dog would be a good hunter.
2.  This was a business.
3.  The dogs had been raised in an environment from which it was their experience that they would never make good pets.

In the case that a dog like this washes out of its intended function as a hunter, would I have a problem shooting it?  Pass the ammunition.

ORIGINAL: snownose
I think I should bow out of this conversation,

 
No need to do that, but if you want to debate hunting, perhaps you should start another thread in NDR.  I would be happy to engage you there.
 
I will even give you some food for thought before you decide.  Who do you think has done more to benefit wildlife, hunters or vegetarians?

ORIGINAL: probe1957

Let me redefine the circumstances for you here.

1.  It took two years to determine whether or not a dog would be a good hunter.
2.  This was a business.
3.  The dogs had been raised in an environment from which it was their experience that they would never make good pets.

In the case that a dog like this washes out of its intended function as a hunter, would I have a problem shooting it?  Pass the ammunition.

 
Wait, wait, i am confused here too, would you shoot a dog yes or not? regadless in what situation, not need to explain, just a simple yes or no

ORIGINAL: espencer
Wait, wait, i am confused here too, would you shoot a dog yes or not? regadless in what situation, not need to explain, just a simple yes or no

 
It isn't as simple as yes or no.  Would I shoot a dog for pooping in my yard?  No.  Would I shoot a dog for harrassing my livestock?  Yes.

ORIGINAL: probe1957
It isn't as simple as yes or no.  Would I shoot a dog for pooping in my yard?  No.  Would I shoot a dog for harrassing my livestock?  Yes.

 
Ok give me an example of  "harrassing my livestock" just to avoid misunderstandings
 
And when you say "In the case that a dog like this washes out of its intended function as a hunter, would I have a problem shooting it?  Pass the ammunition." does that mean you would shoot a dog for not being a good hunter? 

espencer....harrassing livestock is usually defined by law as chasing or attempting to chase, livestock owned by another, on their property...resulting in stress or injury to said livestock.
 
This injury and stress is open to interpretation somewhat. On a warm day sheep/whatever may be stressed to the point that they collapse by a relatively short chase...stress can cause mommas to abort calves or lambs...chasing can result in a livestock animal falling, or breaking or otherwise injuring its legs...requiring it be destroyed and causing it to suffer pain. The dog need not actually touch the animals to cause stress and/or injury.

I knew a couple who very irresponsible with all of their animals. All of the dogs and horses had experienced preventable injuries and health conditions over the years. Yet, they claimed to be animal "lovers".

Two of their huge dogs were allowed to roam all over neighborhood and they received frequent calls about these two dogs. They did not change their ways and thought dogs should be "free".

They eventually moved further out into the country and the dogs were shot by a farmer for chasing his livestock. The woman was arrested for attacking the farmer. The farmer was found to be within his rights in shooting these dogs by the courts.

It really bothers me when these situations (which can be prevented) end up in a dog's death due to owner carelessness.

Oh ok thanks for let me know exactly what "harrassing my livestock" is []

I think the more disturbing to think about question is, is it okay to euthanize a dog just for being a failed hunter?
 
I think we can all agree that a dog who is allowed to harass stock should at least be taken from the owners and rehomed if not necissarily shot on sight (that's a judgement call--would you shoot a dog harassing your stock if it ran right up to you all friendly-like?).
 
I don't know whether Marlowe was a dumped wash-out or just a hunter gone accidentally stray. He makes a wonderful pet, though he was quite clearly kennel-raised, not pet-raised (judging by the fact that at age 2 he was not house-trained, nor did he know any obedience commands). I definately don't like to think that if he was a wash-out that someone was just like "Pfft. He's worthless. Get rid of him. Next." Because to me, he's not worthless.
 
I recently talked to someone who just adopted a field pointer. You just have to know that your dogs are working/field dogs and take it from there, which we chatted about a little. To expect them to be like pet-raised dogs right off the bat is silly, but just because some people make that mistake doesn't mean all these dogs should be written off immediately. At least take them to a shelter and give them a chance.
 
[sm=soap%20box.gif]

Well i dont think a dog should be putting down just because he has irresponsable owners, even when is harrasing my livestock, i mean, nothing that a couple hits with a stick (IF he seems very agressive) cant resolve, at least the dog would still be alive, if the dog goes away by just screaming and moving the big stick in the air then that would be better

After that a good talk with the owners would do, if not then a good law suit but at least the poor dog will still be alive, no need to kill him from the beginning