WTF Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 if i were in clarksons shoes i would obtain tons of cow shite from local farmers middens and have it spread it liberally around my own property for the purpose of encouraging the flora and fauna, about 3 inches deep on the paths should about sort it. and water it daily so as it don't dry out. even invite motorclists and 4x4's to rally around his property till it's chewed beyond the point of nosey walkers wanting to bother. even just plough the place, thats a bitch to walk on. use lots of horrible weed killers and slug pellets too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 I do not know why I bother replying but yes the odd sheep get into trouble every now and again. Generally not a group in one go. As for it not being illegal to kill anyone's dog I totally disagree. And your argument that it is as simple as arguing that if it is off the lead it could be construed that it is about to cause trouble I almost find it laughable if I did not think a) you believed it and b) you might actually have a go at it. You do not know about a brown lab in a reservoir do you? I really only posted first time round to correct your basic errors of fact where you stated it was illegal for a dog not to be on a lead if there are sheep around and it is legal to shoot any dog just in case anybody read and believed your posting as neither statement are true. It maybe due to "legalese bollocks" but that tends to set out what is legal and what is illegal in the British Isles Spare me the legalese bollocks. I've seen sheep get into trouble on cliffs, get trapped by the tide and one nearly took a mate of mine off Pavey Ark! No, they don't deliberately lemming-like go over cliffs but they do do it to themselves, don't they? [sigh]It's not illegal to kill a dog. You can kill anyone's dog you like. You have to do it humanely (subjective, I mean, who's going to ask the ex-dog?) and the owner can then take Civil Proceedings against you for destruction of their property. If the dog is "out of control" (subjective, I mean, who's going to ask the ex-dog?) then you have a defence if it is off the lead in the proximity of sheep and could therefore be construed as about to cause trouble. It really is that simple. You can quote what constitutes livestock, game, out of control etc etc for as long as you like and it won't make any difference. That's the thing that really used to annoy me about foxhunting. When the hounds are 2 - 3 years old they just kill them. Fair enough I have not been with you and I have no proof that you have seen nothing else. It is just from my experience I find it difficult to believe that you have seen not one drop of rubbish except that which is exclusively from agriculture. You talk tosh on other points I just believe you are talking tosh on this point. Either that or you are registered blind. I agree that there is "no excuse for scattering your crap far and wide" but the majority who yous the enjoy the countryside, especially the wilder parts are responsible, unfortunately there is a minority who are not. Some it is deliberately some accidently as I have at times had stuff blown out of my hand. You must also be unique in going where there are no smokers or if there are they take their fag butts home! To me the world has never been as simple as X being right and Y wrong however that appears to be your stance. Everything is black and white which is not how I experience the world. To me there are plenty of grey arears and points to agree with in those holding opposite points of view and points to disagree with who hold the same point of view. I stated that in my experience the crap I have seen is exclusively agricultural. What, are you saying I must have seen something else? Were you there at the same time or something? Having said that I avoid the "tourist honeypot" areas where I know there are litter problems from thoughtless jerks who care so little about the mess they make I wonder what their houses look like. I'm thinking here of Scafell, Kinder Downfall, The Ben and so on. Sure there's no agriculture there and they're owned by Trusts but even so there is no excuse for scattering your crap far and wide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Dear oh dear oh dear. You can take a horse to water etc etc. The Animals Act of 1971 allows the shooting of a loose dog that is worrying or about to worry livestock. Not black and white? I don't think so. Dogs are pack animals that instinctively hunt. Which is why the Countryside Code advises they should be on a lead near farm animals. It's not exactly rocket science. Google it all you like and you will no doubt find plenty of instances where dogs have been shot. Primarily because they are loose in a field of animals i.e. they may be about to worry livestock. That's all it takes. The only prosecutions you are liable to come across is if the clumsy bugger made a hash of it and didn't get a clean enough kill i.e. it was killed "inhumanely" or some such nonsense. End of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeky boy Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 if i were in clarksons shoes i would obtain tons of cow shite from local farmers middens and have it spread it liberally around my own property for the purpose of encouraging the flora and fauna, about 3 inches deep on the paths should about sort it. and water it daily so as it don't dry out. even invite motorclists and 4x4's to rally around his property till it's chewed beyond the point of nosey walkers wanting to bother. even just plough the place, thats a bitch to walk on. use lots of horrible weed killers and slug pellets too. If you live near the Meary Veg treatment plant the government will do this for you, only with human shite and to a depth of nearly a metre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keyboarder Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 they are not lemmings. They do not hurl themselves off cliffs or into the sea for no reason they don't deliberately lemming-like go over cliffs Lemmings are not suicidal. It was a figment of Walt Disney's imagination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanna Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Ive seen 3 fresh dead loughtons at the bottom of the cliffs on the Calf. Noone is there (excluding the wardens) what killed them?.. did someone have beef against the MNH.. no i dont think so. They are just stupid and were going for some nice grass when they slipped. There is no big conspiracy like Clarkson wants everyone to believe. I like the path where it is.. Its just the t0sspot solicitors/advisors telling rich people to try and con joe public that does my nut in Ps. Im pretty sure the land was owned by the Great Meadow bloke (Not the NLB) before it was sold to Clarkson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Congratulations that is what I wrote! You appear to believe that by definition that any dog not on a lead is "about to worry" and therefore can be shot. I do not. Yes plenty of dogs have been shot because they are loose in a field. Some may be about to worry other may not. But the point is they are not under control. You started off by saying it was illegal for a dog not to be on a lead in a filed when Sheep are present. It is not. You also said it was legal to shoot such a dog. Again it is not. I am glad you now appear to have come around to the fact that they have to be loose and out of control. Prosecutions are rare as farmers are generaly reluctant to shoot dogs unless they are worrying. Some farmers take a harder line than others but they are also realistic enough to realise that often there is a nice bit of compensation to be earned from the owners if they give the dog a second chance. also it is a pain to have to report, get questioned etc etc and farmers generally have better things to do with their time. If they all took your original stance of shooting any dog not on a lead even if under total control and that it was legal to do so then we would see a load more of prosecutions. As for dogs being pack animals I am not sure what that has got to do with anything. It is how they are trained and as a lad there was a simple way of dealing with any local dog that worried sheep. We did not shoot then but dealt with them it the classic way of one dog, one ram, one length of bailer twine. A few minutes of having seven bells kicked it out of it by the ram was enough to teach vitually any dog not to gp near a sheep again. It may not be the case but you come across very much as an individual who may spend alot of time reading up or rambling in the countryside but not one who has actually spent much time at the sharp end. There is huge difference between the twee middle class view of the country side as put across by Country file etc what actually goes on at the grass routes by actually actually grafting to earn a living from the land in all hours. Try it and learn some first hand knowledge. Dear oh dear oh dear. You can take a horse to water etc etc. The Animals Act of 1971 allows the shooting of a loose dog that is worrying or about to worry livestock. Not black and white? I don't think so. Dogs are pack animals that instinctively hunt. Which is why the Countryside Code advises they should be on a lead near farm animals. It's not exactly rocket science. Google it all you like and you will no doubt find plenty of instances where dogs have been shot. Primarily because they are loose in a field of animals i.e. they may be about to worry livestock. That's all it takes. The only prosecutions you are liable to come across is if the clumsy bugger made a hash of it and didn't get a clean enough kill i.e. it was killed "inhumanely" or some such nonsense. End of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frances Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Ps. Im pretty sure the land was owned by the Great Meadow bloke (Not the NLB) before it was sold to Clarkson. you are probably correct here as the Northern Commissioners of Lights would only have bought what they needed (and presumeably agreed access, though in the case of Maughold they neglected this minor matter until forced to negociate) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronague Ram Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Dear oh dear oh dear. You can take a horse to water etc etc. The Animals Act of 1971 allows the shooting of a loose dog that is worrying or about to worry livestock. Just to be clear, you are quoting UK Legislation - The 'local' legislation relevant to this case is The Dogs Act 1990 in which defences to killing dogs is covered in Section 18. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 I think the acts are similar but both say in effect to have a defence for shooting there should have been no other reasonable means of ending or preventing the worrying. I think the IoM act says stopping rather than ending Anyway it is rather off thread as it does not really relate to JC. I only got involved as I thought PK was making completely false statements, which could mislead others which should be corrected. I rather wish I had not know as it has only got into a bit of a petty squabble but having read all the both acts I remain certain PK was and remains wrong. Finally before I stop posting on this thread which will now hopefully go back to Clarkson and Prowl can I just declare an interest. I hate dogs as pets. I really can not see what anybody sees in having such a smelly animal around the house and whose disgusting smelly shit you have to pick up everywhere you go. Itt gets me annoyed when I want to go for a walk and you spend all the time trying to avoid dog shit. Has anybody tried walking along side the river at the back of Poulson Park. It is basically Dog Turd city out there. Nearly as bad as Marine Drive. I am sure people drive up there to let their dogs have a shit before driving home again. Dear oh dear oh dear. You can take a horse to water etc etc. The Animals Act of 1971 allows the shooting of a loose dog that is worrying or about to worry livestock. Just to be clear, you are quoting UK Legislation - The 'local' legislation relevant to this case is The Dogs Act 1990 in which defences to killing dogs is covered in Section 18. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overdose Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Ps. Im pretty sure the land was owned by the Great Meadow bloke (Not the NLB) before it was sold to Clarkson. Yes, it belonged to Simon Wrigall of Great Meadow although I've got a nigalling feeling he sold it to someone else before Clarkson bought it, could be worng though. Will ask my old man when I return to the IoM as he spent a good 15 years working for Simon renovating his properties (Langness too), so he's bound to know some sort of history on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.