# Kalkaska warning, dogs being shot



## unclecbass (Sep 29, 2005)

Warning, according to this mornings local news, two bird dogs have been shot and killed intentionally in Kalkaska County recently. Be advised and be careful, both dogs killed in the area of the Manistee river. Just want to make sure everyone knows and takes care.


----------



## Steelheadfred (May 4, 2004)

Not that this matters but the news I heard was the dogs were Coyote Hounds that were shot?


----------



## WestCoastHunter (Apr 3, 2008)

Every article on the web references hounds chasing a coyote. Whoever shot them knew what they had done, the dogs' tracking collars were apparently found buried.


----------



## BradU20 (Jan 17, 2005)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Sept. 28, 2009


CONTACTS: Lt. Creig Grey 989-275-5151 or Mary Dettloff 517-335-3014


DNR Investigates Shooting of Hunting Dogs in Kalkaska County

On Saturday, Department of Natural Resources conservation officers responded to a 911 call regarding two hunting dogs that were shot and killed on state-owned land in south Kalkaska County.

The officers were able to obtain confessions from individuals after an investigation. The investigation is still ongoing.

The hunter who reported his dogs shot and killed was legally using the dogs to hunt coyotes. Other houndsmen in the area, using hounds to hunt bear, assisted DNR conservation officers with descriptions of the suspects, as well as their vehicle.

Conservation officers conducted a search of the area and collected extensive evidence, in addition to the witness statements, said Lt. Creig Grey, DNR Law Enforcement supervisor in Roscommon. Grey said two follow-up interviews were conducted in southeast Michigan, which led to confessions by the suspects.

Once the DNR completes its investigation of the incident, it will be forwarded to the Kalkaska County Prosecutors Office for possible charges, Grey added.

Anyone with information about any conservation violation should call the DNRs Report All Poaching (RAP) line at 800-292-7800. Information can be left anonymously. Cash rewards are sometimes offered for information that leads to the arrest of violators. 

The DNR is committed to the conservation, protection, management, accessible use and enjoyment of the states natural resources for current and future generations.


----------



## foxriver6 (Oct 23, 2007)

http://www.record-eagle.com/local/local_story_272072117.html

DNR investigates hunting dog shootings
Two die in Kalkaska County
BY SHERI McWHIRTER
[email protected]
KALKASKA -- State authorities are investigating the shooting deaths of two hunting dogs owned by a Kalkaska man.
Jon Otto was hunting on state land in southeast Kalkaska County Saturday afternoon, listening as his seven hounds barked, bayed and chased coyotes through the woods. He heard two gunshots and thought another hunter nabbed the coyotes his dogs were chasing.
But Otto's dogs turned quiet and when he found them, two were dead. He called authorities and the incident is under state investigation.
"Dogs are protected. They are somebody's property," said Lt. Creig Grey, conservation officer with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
DNR officials will continue to probe the shooting and already have suspects.
Otto was able to provide a partial license plate and description of a truck he saw in the woods near the area where his dogs were killed, just south of CCC Bridge in the Pere Marquette State Forest.
A couple of bear hunters in the area who heard about the shooting on a two-way radio also spotted the truck. They supplied part of a license plate and authorities put it together with Otto's observation to track down the suspects, Grey said.
The bear hunters also snapped photographs of the truck and the driver, Grey said.
Authorities interviewed four men from southeast Michigan who were in the truck. At least some of them are suspects, Grey said.
It's unclear whether the shooting will warrant misdemeanor or felony criminal charges. That won't be known until the investigation is completed, said Kirk Metzger, chief assistant prosecutor in Kalkaska County.
"This is rare that somebody who is lawfully hunting with their dogs loses them in this manner," Metzger said.
Otto could not be reached for comment.
Anyone with information about the shooting is asked to call Michigan's poaching hot line at 1-800-292-7800. Tips can be made anonymously, Grey said.


----------



## lang49 (Aug 1, 2005)

Does anyone know how far the handler was from the dogs at the point the dogs were shot?

I'm not suggesting the shooting was legal as it clearly was not...Just curious about the proximity of the handler to the dogs.

-Thanks


----------



## folpak (Feb 6, 2008)

ya... they could have been some mean a** dogs with no owner present in the immediate area. If i was out in the woods and nobody else around to claim the dogs and they were acting like they were going to attack or something I would have shot em too but also should have stuck around for a police report if indeed it was a last resort and needed to shoot them.


----------



## Bonz 54 (Apr 17, 2005)

Folpak, I'd suggest that you better not shoot a dog in Michigan. The ONLY people that can legally shoot a dog in Michigan is a LEO. If YOU shoot a dog, you will be brought up on charges just like these maggots that shot these hounds. Something you apparently missed is that the dogs were wearing tracking collars and the shooters took them off and tried to hide them. They knew the dogs were being handled by a hunter, they were just too slow to get away. They also didn't take into account that there were other hunters in the area. I hope they slam the door on them long and hard.:rant: FRANK


----------



## Socks (Jan 8, 2007)

Folpak, I seriously doubt any decently trained hunting dog will act agressive towards someone when they're out doing their thing. Heck, my dog has a hard time hearing me when he's hunting, he probably wouldn't give two wags about someone else out there.

Lang49, doesn't matter how far they were. On top of that from what I know hounds like this range far. When I'm upland hunting a big field my dog can get out about 100 yards or so. It's all relative.


----------



## Rootsy (Nov 1, 2006)

Bonz 54 said:


> The ONLY people that can legally shoot a dog in Michigan is a LEO.



Actually that is not correct. If a dog is actively doing damage to livestock a farmer is well within his rights to dispatch that dog if caught in the act.


----------



## PahtridgeHunter (Sep 1, 2004)

folpak said:


> ya... they could have been some mean a** dogs with no owner present in the immediate area. If i was out in the woods and nobody else around to claim the dogs and they were acting like they were going to attack or something I would have shot em too but also should have stuck around for a police report if indeed it was a last resort and needed to shoot them.


Idiocy. You will be met with some serious opposition to your comment here. I suggest you review the laws regarding shooting dogs in Michigan.:nono:


----------



## rmd24 (Jul 3, 2008)

folpak said:


> ya... they could have been some mean a** dogs with no owner present in the immediate area. If i was out in the woods and nobody else around to claim the dogs and they were acting like they were going to attack or something I would have shot em too but also should have stuck around for a police report if indeed it was a last resort and needed to shoot them.


Is your last name Vick?

Hope no one shoots you if your owner is present in the immediate area:rant:


----------



## Bonz 54 (Apr 17, 2005)

OK Rootsy, I'll give you that, but that Farmer better have wittnesses. They don't and probably wont take his word for it. FRANK


----------



## WestCoastHunter (Apr 3, 2008)

Bonz 54 said:


> OK Rootsy, I'll give you that, but that Farmer better have wittnesses. They don't and probably wont take his word for it. FRANK


Like all crimes, just because you get away with it in criminal court doesn't mean you will in civil court. That's the problem for someone who shoots someone's hunting dog, especially if the dog cost some coin to buy and train. 

Think twice, maybe even three times, before pulling the trigger.


----------



## Bonz 54 (Apr 17, 2005)




----------



## lang49 (Aug 1, 2005)

Socks said:


> Lang49, doesn't matter how far they were. On top of that from what I know hounds like this range far. When I'm upland hunting a big field my dog can get out about 100 yards or so. It's all relative.


 
Yes it does! The law indicates that you need to accompany your dog. 100 yards obviously is considered accompanying the dog. You can't tell me that a handler has any level of control when his dog is 3/4 of a mile away from him (not that they necessarily were in this case).


*DOG LAW OF 1919 (EXCERPT)*
*Act 339 of 1919*

*287.262 Dogs; licensing, tags, leashes.* 

Sec. 2.

It shall be unlawful for any person to...

or for any owner to allow any dog, except working dogs such as leader dogs, guard dogs, farm dogs, hunting dogs, and other such dogs, *when accompanied by their owner or his authorized agent*, while actively engaged in activities for which such dogs are trained, *to stray* unless held properly in leash.


----------



## Rugerdog (Sep 19, 2005)

I love dogs. I love my dogs, I love your dogs. I haven't met a dog I didn't like. I also understand the laws.

That said, if while hunting, I was attacked by a random dog, I would do everything in my power not to shoot it. If it came down to it though...I mean, wow. What a pickle. 

I'm going to stop hunting with a gun, so I don't have to make that choice.


----------



## BradU20 (Jan 17, 2005)

lang49 said:


> Yes it does! The law indicates that you need to accompany your dog. 100 yards obviously is considered accompanying the dog. You can't tell me that a handler has any level of control when his dog is 3/4 of a mile away from him (not that they necessarily were in this case).


Can you please show me in bold where it says exactly how far I can be away and still be accompanying my dogs.... 
It doesn't say 100 yards is OK and 3/4 mile is not. You just inserted some distances that _you _think is acceptable. 

It is legal to run hounds on bear, fox, coyote, raccoons in MI.
It is not legal for you to shoot those hounds because you feel that they are not being accompanied by their handler.


----------



## Buddwiser (Dec 14, 2003)

Read the law quote again and try to comprehend what it says. Key word in the quote is "except" and then is followed by a list of the dogs exempt
from the written law which includes hunting dogs and then says........"WHILE ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN ACTIVITIES FOR WHICH IT IS TRAINED"....No where does it give a distance figure.


----------



## snowman11 (Nov 21, 2006)

Bonz 54 said:


> Folpak, I'd suggest that you better not shoot a dog in Michigan. The ONLY people that can legally shoot a dog in Michigan is a LEO. If YOU shoot a dog, you will be brought up on charges just like these maggots that shot these hounds. Something you apparently missed is that the dogs were wearing tracking collars and the shooters took them off and tried to hide them. They knew the dogs were being handled by a hunter, they were just too slow to get away. They also didn't take into account that there were other hunters in the area. I hope they slam the door on them long and hard.:rant: FRANK


While you are correct, it would also be correct to say that it is no more illegal to shoot a dog than it is to shoot a person when an immediate threat to your personal safety is involved. I've been around some mean dogs, and with that experience, I wouldn't hesitate for a second to protect myself and my family...but there are also proper steps to be taken following the incident which were obviously ignored in this situation (not only that, but you sure as hell better be able to back up your statement with a very good description of the happenings at the scene). If I walk in to a police station and say I just shot two dogs that were attacking me, this is the location of the dogs, etc...I am going to be questioned, but no charges are going to be filed against me assuming that my story is on the up and up. 

I don't think folpak was suggesting shooting dogs that appeared to be stray, although I may be misreading his words as well.


----------



## Frantz (Dec 9, 2003)

Jesus Christ so if a dog is attacking or someone is in fear of their life they cannot shoot the dog? Talk about idiocy. You have every right to protect your self from harm, if that is case. Obviously, the evidence thus far SUGGESTS that they were shot without justification and that is why they do the INVESTIGATION part. Just because you love dogs, you know your dogs and it is OK for you to let them out of control under the premise of hunting, does not mean that someone cannot protect themselves from them, again if that is the case. You dog guys really need to get a grip on this. A guys says he would protect himself and you go all ape shhhhhh on him letting him know that his life is worthless in comparison to the dogs.


----------



## DarrenDuckMan (Aug 26, 2009)

FieldWalker said:


> Hello...
> 
> I just wanted to participate in this thread before it got locked.


Me too! Although it is an interesting discussion.


----------



## Frantz (Dec 9, 2003)

It would be a way better discussion if it were an actual discussion and not a pissing match to show who has bigger balls.


----------



## Buddwiser (Dec 14, 2003)

FieldWalker said:


> Hello...
> 
> I just wanted to participate in this thread before it got locked.


Rabble rouser.


----------



## bassdisaster (Jun 21, 2007)

Ohio_92 said:


> Interesting...JFYI some people might be coming after you, oh, and not with their fists:evilsmile
> 
> P.S. If you kill someone that shoots your dog, is that considered a "crime of passion"?


Id call it premeditated MURDER!
Revenge is not LEGAL in any case, if your dog got shot, best call the authorities, not go after the suspect on your own! 
Oh and NO dog will ever be worth more than a Person, Never will be, and as a few others have stated, I would not hesitate to defend myself if YOUR dog attacked me, If that happens you can expect a dead dog!
Any dog trained to chase BEAR, Attack BEAR, would attack an person, said person has the Right to defend them selves!

BD


----------



## timberdoodle528 (Nov 25, 2003)

Wow- this got off topic quickly.

The dogs were running a yote - the handler could hear the dogs, the dogs were shot, the jerk actually tried to burry the tracking collars. He knew he was going to be in trouble. If the dogs were attacking him why would he try to run and hide the collars? 

I'll throw my .02 into the side discussion on being attacked by some dogs while out in the woods. Uhhh YEAH I'd shoot, probably a warning shot first - but after that I'd be aiming. I'm not going to get mauled by some dog and not try to defend myself. But what are the chances of that even happening? Slim to none. Chances of some idiot seeing hounds tracking something through the woods and assuming they're running deer and assuming they have the right to shoot them dead??? Happens every year.

I hope the shooter/s get what they have coming to them. They need to make an example of them. Maybe it'll make some people think twice before pulling the trigger on a hound.


----------



## timberdoodle528 (Nov 25, 2003)

bassdisaster said:


> Any dog trained to chase BEAR, Attack BEAR, would attack an person, said person has the Right to defend them selves!
> 
> BD



Wait - are you stating that bear dogs attack people?


----------



## snowman11 (Nov 21, 2006)

bassdisaster said:


> Any dog trained to chase BEAR, Attack BEAR, would attack an person, said person has the Right to defend them selves!


That's a pretty big jump isn't it? 

Any dog in general could attack a person in the right circumstance, but making the argument that a dog properly trained to chase and attack a bear is more likely is pretty far fetched. 

Now, my key word is properly, which is the reason that if I were to shoot a dog to defend my own safety, I'd turn myself in at the local PD...I wouldn't wait around for the hunter carrying a gun to find us. Too many emotions at that point, I've seen things get carried away in a professional setting when ones dog is involved...I don't want to be in the middle of the woods and have that happen.


----------



## snowman11 (Nov 21, 2006)

timberdoodle528 said:


> Chances of some idiot seeing hounds tracking something through the woods and assuming they're running deer and assuming they have the right to shoot them dead??? Happens every year.


Well said.


----------



## FieldWalker (Oct 21, 2003)

Buddwiser said:


> Rabble rouser.


Me?? Never...


----------



## dogwhistle (Oct 31, 2004)

in my experience this type of case will be settled with a plea bargain, suspended sentence, fine and court costs and restitution.


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

lang49 said:


> Yes it does! The law indicates that you need to accompany your dog. 100 yards obviously is considered accompanying the dog. You can't tell me that a handler has any level of control when his dog is 3/4 of a mile away from him (not that they necessarily were in this case).
> 
> 
> *DOG LAW OF 1919 (EXCERPT)*
> ...


I think you better learn more about hunting dogs before you go spouting this crap. My dogs can and do range out up to 400 yards or more when hunting. They are under control and regularly check in with me during their run.

Guys who run hounds will have their dogs range out much further than 400 yards. Those dogs are trained and are being tracked by it's owner.

Further more, I've never come across a hunting dog in the woods that I was even remotely afraid of at anytime. 

It boggles the mind what people come up with to try to justify a clearly premeditated and illegal action!!!! :rant:


----------



## WeimsRus (Oct 30, 2007)

While protecting yourself is your right against a human or animal, the decision in the end is the court's hands to determine if you had the right to use deadly force. A dog attacking you has to be close enough to you to attack and growling and other actions at a distance would not be considered enough reason to use deadly force. It would be considered similar to me threating you but not actually laying a hand on you, then you shoot me. In my experiance a well placed kick by a hunting boot will stop most domestic dog attacks, so will a gun stock blow on the nose. I have no sympathy for someone who decides to shoot someone elses dog. The fact that these people made the effort to hide the collars tells me this was not a justifiable shooting. If it was, why try and hide the evidance and flee the scene. Hope it is a felony they are charged and convicted of, so they can never own or possess a firearm again.


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

Frantz said:


> Jesus Christ so if a dog is attacking or someone is in fear of their life they cannot shoot the dog? Talk about idiocy. You have every right to protect your self from harm, if that is case. Obviously, the evidence thus far SUGGESTS that they were shot without justification and that is why they do the INVESTIGATION part. Just because you love dogs, you know your dogs and it is OK for you to let them out of control under the premise of hunting, does not mean that someone cannot protect themselves from them, again if that is the case. You dog guys really need to get a grip on this. A guys says he would protect himself and you go all ape shhhhhh on him letting him know that his life is worthless in comparison to the dogs.


Your analogy has nothing to do with the case in question. Apples and oranges!


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

bassdisaster said:


> Any dog trained to chase BEAR, Attack BEAR, would attack an person, said person has the Right to defend them selves!
> 
> BD


Really?! Care to offer some real evidence to back up your statement?  Your statement is ignorant at best.


----------



## FindTheBird (Dec 18, 2004)

midwestfisherman said:


> Really?! Care to offer some real evidence to back up your statement?  Your statement is ignorant at best.


The man-eating hunting dog conspiracy theory is laughable at best. Me thinks these guys have heard way too many inner-city pitbull stories!

I never like to say "never", but when hunting, and especially when on game, the last thing on a hunting dog's mind is attacking a human--I think I'd believe the Martians had landed before I'd give any credence to that...


----------



## Linda G. (Mar 28, 2002)

or whatever his name is needs to spend some time around those big bad bear hounds. They're the sweetest dogs ever-I would walk up to one any day of the week...whereas, I'd think twice about walking up to a chihuahua.

I've never seen a bear/coyote/cat dog that had any kind of temper issues, and I've seen a lot of them. They all love people.


----------



## mark.n.chip (Jun 16, 2007)

my experience in law enforcement has taught me much about human emotions. everyone that hunts with dogs will side one way thats a given, mee too. but it has been commonly known by law enforcement that if a dog has a tracking/training/astro collar on their dog and that dog is in pursuit of game or actively looking that dog is considered to be under control. i can not believe that those dogs were agreesive towards anyone, hunting dogs are by and large more friendly then my next door niehbor.


----------



## TrekJeff (Sep 7, 2007)

Bottom line is, you shoot a dog, you commit a crime unless you are a farmer or an LEO.


----------



## hack77 (Aug 25, 2009)

The MDNR looks like they are all over this, and the moron(s) that did this heinous act will pay, and pay hard. A "farmer" in Grand Traverse County recently was convicted of shooting someone else's dog and tried to justify it as he feared for his livestock. The judge didnt buy it and he is serving time in addition to being fined pretty good. I believe it was a felony.


----------



## Frantz (Dec 9, 2003)

TrekJeff said:


> Bottom line is, you shoot a dog, you commit a crime unless you are a farmer or an LEO.


So human life has no value?

I understand that those of you who have and know dogs know their temperament and know so much, but what about those who are not around dogs, those who have had a bad experience with dogs, they can obviously never fear for their safety as the dog is always good?

http://www.newser.com/story/66034/pig-hunting-dog-pack-mauls-nz-jogger.html

http://newsok.com/article/3275873?topten_check=yes

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2216083.ece

I could post a hundred more, bu the point being made is that just because a dog is good and well behaved to you, does not mean it is the same with others, especially when out of your immediate care.


----------



## FieldWalker (Oct 21, 2003)

Frantz said:


> So human life has no value?


Frantz... thanks for posting those links... I think I see the light. 

I think you'd enjoy this forum http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=30


----------



## Ohio_92 (Aug 24, 2009)

bassdisaster said:


> Id call it premeditated MURDER!
> *Revenge is not LEGAL in any case*, if your dog got shot, best call the authorities, not go after the suspect on your own!
> *Oh and NO dog will ever be worth more than a Person*, Never will be, and as a few others have stated, I would not hesitate to defend myself if YOUR dog attacked me, If that happens you can expect a dead dog!
> Any dog trained to chase BEAR, Attack BEAR, would attack an person, said person has the Right to defend them selves!
> ...


Good point...but remember schit happens:coolgleam:coolgleam

2nd statement-You obviously haven't met some people:lol::evil::16suspect


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

Frantz said:


> So human life has no value?
> 
> I understand that those of you who have and know dogs know their temperament and know so much, but what about those who are not around dogs, those who have had a bad experience with dogs, they can obviously never fear for their safety as the dog is always good?
> 
> ...


Wow...how do people get sooooo far off the point of this thread?????


----------



## WeimsRus (Oct 30, 2007)

Frantz said:


> So human life has no value?
> 
> I understand that those of you who have and know dogs know their temperament and know so much, but what about those who are not around dogs, those who have had a bad experience with dogs, they can obviously never fear for their safety as the dog is always good?
> 
> ...





Ohio_92 said:


> Good point...but remember schit happens:coolgleam:coolgleam
> 
> 2nd statement-You obviously haven't met some people:lol::evil::16suspect


The more people I meet, the better I like my dogs. This does not mean I am going to shoot people, but it would be nice, because I fear or do not like them. Get real people this was, most likely, done by some people just two tracking and looking for something to kill for whatever thrill it gives them.


----------



## TrekJeff (Sep 7, 2007)

Frantz said:


> So human life has no value?
> 
> I understand that those of you who have and know dogs know their temperament and know so much, but what about those who are not around dogs, those who have had a bad experience with dogs, they can obviously never fear for their safety as the dog is always good?
> 
> ...



Human life trumps any aspect...the topic was shooting hunting dogs that are working game. Your post is another of many examples on here that steer away from the main topic. These were not dogs attacking a child,raiding a chicken coop, ripping on cattle. They were running yotes and the idiots that shot them knew what they were doing. I hope they get the max allowed under the law.


----------



## Frantz (Dec 9, 2003)

Yes it steered away. 

1. Someone posted beware, dogs shot.

2. Someone posted, I think they were running yotes.

3. Someone posted, I don't know, if some men dog came to me in the woods I would shoot it to protect myself.

4. Someone goes off on the if you shoot my dog you die tangent.

5. Hate posts flare.

6. Someone lets us all know that only cops can shoot dogs.

7. More hate posts.

8. Someone (me) tries to make the rationalization that perhaps these people did fear for their lives.

9. We are made well aware of the fact that a hunting dog would never attack a person, they are fun loving face lickers.

10. Someone again tries to state hey, not everyone knows how great these dogs are, some people are cat people.

11. People who would justify shooting a dog, even to protect themselves are just plain evil and idiots.

12. Again made aware of the fact that the possibility of it being self defense is not humanly possible and off topic as we all know that a dog working game could NEVER possibly get off that game and on to other game or o to people.

I am not condoning the shooting of dogs, I am simply stating that maybe, just maybe these individuals, or other individuals might actually have a reason to shoot one, yet instantly they are guilty and in the wrong, slam dunk, case closed.


----------



## Frantz (Dec 9, 2003)

FieldWalker said:


> Frantz... thanks for posting those links... I think I see the light.
> 
> I think you'd enjoy this forum http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=30


Real Classy


----------



## WeimsRus (Oct 30, 2007)

Wiped the post because it is a waste of time to even try to explain what it means to bury a animal taken before it should have been because someone thought they had the right to shoot it. 

If you are the owners of these dogs, I am sorry for your loss.


----------



## rmd24 (Jul 3, 2008)

Frantz said:


> Real Classy


It wouldn't call it classy....i would call it freakin hilarious!


----------



## bassdisaster (Jun 21, 2007)

I never said a BEAR dog WILL attack a person, mort like is capable! but IF your dog attacked me, not growled at me, not looked at me with intent, I said ATTACKED ME, a dog that chases bear certainly wont be afraid of me now will he?
If you have dog's in the feild that could or would attack a person, who's fault is that? certainly not the person who may or not be attacked by said dog while leagally hunting.
Has little to nothing to do with the case in Question, but the point remains, no dog is worth a HUMAN life!
Any dog handler who cant or wont understand that point should not be allowed to even be a handler!


----------



## PWOG (Jun 24, 2007)

the dummies buried the collars after shooting the dogs that isn't a rationale of people defending themselves in the woods.


----------



## Frantz (Dec 9, 2003)

People run after an accident, good honest people, it is called fear. in the heat of a crisis they do not know how to react to the situation so they panic and then later confess to their wrong doing. Temporary lapse in judgment under extreme duress. I supposed an armed standoff with the dog guys would have been a much smarter way for them to go, I mean 2 guys with guns on one side and god knows how many angry dog runners on the other, I can see where that is a more logical choice I guess.

I feel sorry for these dog owners as well and never said otherwise, yet am the villain and mocked because some here cannot grasp the concept of 

1. Innocent until proven guilty and

2. Not everyone has an unbiased lack of fear for dogs.

I have dogs as well and have had since I was a child, but that does not mean that I expect every person to fully be at ease when they approach them.


----------



## milmo1 (Nov 9, 2005)

Frantz said:


> some people are cat people.


I'd say _that's_ punishable by death! :evilsmile


----------



## TrekJeff (Sep 7, 2007)

Frantz said:


> People run after an accident, good honest people, it is called fear. in the heat of a crisis they do not know how to react to the situation so they panic and then later confess to their wrong doing. Temporary lapse in judgment under extreme duress. I supposed an armed standoff with the dog guys would have been a much smarter way for them to go, I mean 2 guys with guns on one side and god knows how many angry dog runners on the other, I can see where that is a more logical choice I guess.



Again this is an assumption that they were being attacked by the dogs..and JUST for fun lets say they were in a terrified emotional state...were the dogs peppered with shot or were the shots well placed...peppered =terrified or just plain sick people, well placed = intent and lack of fear. AND that they were so fearfull of the hunters to follow they still took the time to remove the collars and then take the time to bury the collars...yep, sounds like panic thinking rather than logical to run and save thier hind ends from what may be following. If they were fearful and dispatched the dogs because of life threatening situations, they why would they go and take the time to do what they did after the dogs were killed...ok, back to the topic.

And yes, I'm a dog lover...If anyone would ever do this to my dog, they better not take the time to take off the collar.


----------



## mcanes1 (Jan 22, 2003)

Even though this makes for interesting reading. Too bad we don't wait until the trial is over to comment on it. Assumptions, here say. just leads to ficticous reading.
Let me just say I am a dog lover and have 3 hunting dogs. But, I have had problems with strays. Once I let the police handle it, the second, I "stung" the dog in the butt at a non lethal distance. The dog lived but never came back.
My first experience, I was raising quail for training. I came home to find a neighbor dog finishing off the last of the birds. I could have shoot it, but I decided to let the police handle it. When we went to the neighbors he denied that it was his dog that did it. He claimed the dog was always under control. Even though the dog was constantly seen running thru the neighborhood. So I showed the owner and the officer a chunk of hair that his dog left when it broke thru the fence , perfect match. I told him I wanted $100 for the bird loss or I would see him in court. Never got a answer or a dime from the jerk. The cop and I agreed that it wouldn't be worth the court cost. Afterwards, the cop told me I should have just shot it.
My other experience, a different neighbor dog, had killed some of our ducks and chickens and was witnessed to be chasing some of our calves. So we went to the neighbor and asked him to chain his dog. His reply "dogs will be dogs". A week later I caught the dog chasing the calves again. So I got my 12 gauge (if I wanted to kill it I would have grabbed my 30/30) when it was out about 75 to 80 yards I aimed at it's butt and pulled the trigger. The dog yelped and ran off. It never came back again. And no I didn't kill it. I saw many times in it's rightful yard. To bad the dumb***** owner didn't keep it under control so the dog didn't have to be hurt.


----------



## GhettoSportsman (Sep 30, 2009)

There's a lot of emotion here and maybe I should stay out of this thread but I would like to share an experience I had in the same area where this happened a few years ago.

A very dear friend and I were out chasing birds very close to the area where this occurred. We had my friends German shorthair bustin the brush for us two old farts!

After maybe two hours of beating the brush we started back towards our truck along the small two track that ran through this small piece of state land. We heard a pickup approaching and it parked about 75 yards ahead of us on the two track. A guy and his wife got out with two of the biggest and meanest looking Rottweilers I had ever seen! One was on a leash the other wasn't! The dogs saw us and immediately came at us!! Hackles up, snarling with blood in their eyes!! The one that was on the leash dragged that woman about 15 yards before she let go!! 

Our poor dog ran behind us and was shaking with fear!!! They continued straight at us with the owners screaming at them with no response!! It appeared to me that we would have no choice but to defend ourselves!! I have to tell ya I was scared!!

When these charging Rottweilers got to within 15 yards I have to admit I was ready to shoot but my friend never raised his shotgun! It was in the ready position (as well as mine) but he never raised it. You could see from the path of the charging dogs that they were after our dog and he decided to wait and see if they were going to draw blood! 

I was really amazed that my friends poor shorthair didn't have a heart attack!!! She was shaking with fear and had no where to go to escape these two!! They charged past us (within inches) and straight to our dog.

WELL, the butt sniffin started, alittle show of dominance (without a fight) and all got pretty quiet!! About then the owners of the other dogs ran up and thanked us for not shooting them (the dogs)!!!! They grabbed the dogs and got back in their truck and left!!! We headed back for our truck with a great need to change our shorts!!!!!

I truly believed we were in immanent danger and if I'd have been alone I probably would have shot but I decided to follow my friends lead and things turned out with no life lost!!!!! I'm very glad, although I'd have no problem defending myself, you still have to live with it afterward!!!


Just my two cents!!!


----------



## Frantz (Dec 9, 2003)

See, one person rational, knowing dogs and another maybe knowing them a little less and on the ready. 

I do not mean to start pissing matches, it just ends up that way. Mcane has it dead on, nobody knows everything about this and it would be a better discussion after the trial.

I am sorry if I pissed anyone off, not my intent, I am also sorry that some, who I have for years held a high opinion of, had to resort to childish link posting.


----------



## Mickey Finn (Jan 21, 2005)

FieldWalker said:


> Hello...
> 
> I just wanted to participate in this thread before it got locked.


I just want to get the last word in.:coolgleam


----------



## TrekJeff (Sep 7, 2007)

word


----------



## WestCoastHunter (Apr 3, 2008)

WHOA! :lol:


----------



## FieldWalker (Oct 21, 2003)

Frantz said:


> I am sorry if I pissed anyone off, not my intent, I am also sorry that some, who I have for years held a high opinion of, had to resort to childish link posting.


In my defense... my posts on this topic have been strictly for entertainment value... 

For those of us who have been coming here for years... we know the cycle of posts as well as the cycle of new members and strong opinions... it seems like after a few years, most of us just stop really participating in these "no win" posts... Every now and then, I just can't help but participate in threads that are surely heading down that road towards Joel's "lock thread" icon.


----------



## Unregistered4 (Dec 11, 2004)

I don't know???

I believed this topic had plenty of room for thoughtful comments and enlighten discussion...



Call me a dreamer...or just plan stupid...lol

Brian.


----------



## Jumpshootin' (Jul 6, 2000)

folpak said:


> ya... they could have been some mean a** dogs with no owner present in the immediate area. If i was out in the woods and nobody else around to claim the dogs and they were acting like they were going to attack or something I would have shot em too but also should have stuck around for a police report if indeed it was a last resort and needed to shoot them.


Hounds are about the least aggressive towards humans than any breed. The rare ones that are usually get detroyed by the owner well before they could harm someone.


----------



## MERGANZER (Aug 24, 2006)

I was thinking of going hunting this weekend but forget that idea. I had no idea there were that many man eating hounds running the woods nowadays. Its just not safe to be out there anymore. Stay inside people they are killers every last one of them and they have a taste for human flesh.

Ganzer


----------



## Bobby (Dec 21, 2002)

OK :evil:




Unregistered4 said:


> ...............Call me ............just plan stupid...lol
> 
> Brian.


----------



## sgc (Oct 21, 2007)

One thing its important to know, because there is a misconception about this: - its illegal to shoot a dog chasing deer! This will cost you big time if caught. I remember being told as a kid when I first started hunting that you could shoot a dog running a deer. This is not so! It is illegal! If you shoot a mans hound, expect to get sued and expect to lose.


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

Bobby said:


> OK :evil:


:lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## I'm with Brandy (Aug 5, 2007)

bassdisaster said:


> Id call it premeditated MURDER!
> Revenge is not LEGAL in any case, if your dog got shot, best call the authorities, not go after the suspect on your own!
> Oh and NO dog will ever be worth more than a Person, Never will be, and as a few others have stated, I would not hesitate to defend myself if YOUR dog attacked me, If that happens you can expect a dead dog!
> Any dog trained to chase BEAR, Attack BEAR, would attack an person, said person has the Right to defend them selves!
> ...


You think because a dog is trained to chase bear it will chase and attack people? Your kidding right? What evidence do you have to support that comment. Thanks for the laugh. I can't wait to share this one. ROFL:lol::lol::lol:

When in the UP a few years ago on a hike near Rainbow Bridge with my kids we ran across a guy training his hounds on bears. All the dogs attacked my kids. Jumped on them licked them it was horrible dog saliva everywhere. One of the dogs was so excited it rolled over and peed on itself. It was very scary.:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## bassdisaster (Jun 21, 2007)

I'm with Brandy said:


> You think because a dog is trained to chase bear it will chase and attack people? Your kidding right? What evidence do you have to support that comment. Thanks for the laugh. I can't wait to share this one. ROFL:lol::lol::lol:
> 
> When in the UP a few years ago on a hike near Rainbow Bridge with my kids we ran across a guy training his hounds on bears. All the dogs attacked my kids. Jumped on them licked them it was horrible dog saliva everywhere. One of the dogs was so excited it rolled over and peed on itself. It was very scary.:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


You really should read all the post's befor you decide to comment EH!
Never heard of any dog no where EVER atticking people, nope just dosent happen EVER! sheesh WAKE UP!

BD


----------



## hunting fool (Mar 9, 2009)

just wondering not saying this happened but what if the guys that shot these dogs saw the coyote running through the woods raised there guns saw what they thought was more coyote's and shot when getting close to there kill realized these were dogs got scared took off the collars and tried to hide them i dont know just wondering some people dont always think before they shoot just my 2 cents


----------



## BradU20 (Jan 17, 2005)

hunting fool said:


> just wondering not saying this happened but what if the guys that shot these dogs saw the coyote running through the woods raised there guns saw what they thought was more coyote's and shot when getting close to there kill realized these were dogs got scared took off the collars and tried to hide them i dont know just wondering some people dont always think before they shoot just my 2 cents


Why would this change anything?


----------



## festeraeb (Sep 4, 2005)

I think it would be a different charge. Just like an accidental shooting of a person in a hunting situation would not be 1st degree murder but the shooter in both cases would be charged with some sort of charge. I agree there are cases like the rottie case stated above that it is with in your legal rights to shoot a dog. If the rotties had attacked the shorthair I believe the hunters would have the right to protect their dog or their selves. However, the facts so far released in this case appears that it was either an intentional or accidental shooting of hounds. By accidental I mean mistaken for game. After which they tried to cover it up. I am assuming they weren't smart enough to turn off the collars that they buried as the hunter found them. I am guessing with what has been released so far these people deserve to be charged with something.


----------



## Bobby (Dec 21, 2002)

hunting fool said:


> just wondering not saying this happened but what if the guys that shot these dogs saw the coyote running through the woods raised there guns saw what they thought was more coyote's and shot when getting close to there kill realized these were dogs got scared took off the collars and tried to hide them *i dont know just wondering some people dont always think before they shoot *just my 2 cents


Still guilty


----------



## NATTY BUMPO (May 12, 2001)

festeraeb said:


> . However, the facts so far released in this case appears that it was either an intentional or accidental shooting of hounds. By accidental I mean mistaken for game. After which they tried to cover it up. I am assuming they weren't smart enough to turn off the collars that they buried as the hunter found them.


If you can't tell the difference between a 'yote and a foxhound, you don't belong in the woods with a gun. 

And if I was King, the shooter and his accomplasses (sic.) would never hold a hunting licience in Michigan, ever again. This case has gone to the prosecutor, we'll wait to see what the charges will be.

NB


----------



## TC-fisherman (Feb 15, 2003)

Three charged in hunting dog deaths

KALKASKA -- Authorities charged three downstate men in the shooting death of a local man's hunting dogs.

David Carwile, 18, and Stephen Carwile, 51, both of Swartz Creek, and Brandon Miller, 18, of Oxford were arraigned Tuesday in Kalkaska County.

David Carwile is charged with two counts of killing or torturing an animal, the use of a firearm during a felony and conspiracy to obstruct justice. His father, Stephen Carwile, is charged with two counts of being an accessory after the fact to a felony and conspiracy to obstruct justice. Miller is charged with one count of killing or torturing and animal, use of a firearm during a felony and conspiracy to obstruct justice.

Kalkaska resident Jon Otto was hunting on state land in southeast Kalkaska County in September when two of his hounds were shot. Kalkaska County Prosecutor Brian Donnelly said investigators believe David Carwile and Miller shot the dogs, and Stephen Carwile helped them try to cover it up.

Otto encountered the men shortly after the shooting, but they denied shooting the dogs. Otto's friend took a picture of the license plate on the group's truck, and authorities tracked the men down.


----------



## Shotgun Kennel (Feb 9, 2007)

NATTY BUMPO said:


> If you can't tell the difference between a 'yote and a foxhound, you don't belong in the woods with a gun.
> 
> And if I was King, the shooter and his accomplasses (sic.) would never hold a hunting licience in Michigan, ever again. This case has gone to the prosecutor, we'll wait to see what the charges will be.
> 
> NB


 
Amen!!!!!!


----------



## 2ESRGR8 (Dec 16, 2004)

Thanks for the follow-up TC, I was wondering what the outcome of this was.


----------



## predatordave (Feb 24, 2003)

yes thank you for the outcome. i hope everybody on the site reads the outcome. now i wonder how much they will have to pay to the owner of the dogs after the civil suit. pulling the trigger did not just cost them money and time. they are now felons and have ruined their own lives. 

it is sad to see such young men ruin their future in such a stupid manner. but the father should have gotten more than just accessory in my eyes. if he didnt do it he should have made the young men fess up on the spot and do the right thing. way to set an example dad 


later, dave


----------



## kek25 (Jul 9, 2005)

It's not over yet. According to the post, they've just been charged. Long way to go.


----------



## WeimsRus (Oct 30, 2007)

predatordave said:


> yes thank you for the outcome. i hope everybody on the site reads the outcome. now i wonder how much they will have to pay to the owner of the dogs after the civil suit. pulling the trigger did not just cost them money and time. they are now felons and have ruined their own lives.
> 
> it is sad to see such young men ruin their future in such a stupid manner. but the father should have gotten more than just accessory in my eyes. if he didnt do it he should have made the young men fess up on the spot and do the right thing. way to set an example dad
> 
> ...


Myself Dave, hate to see a felony conviction on people this young. Dad, IMHO, should get more than a slap on the wrist. The up side is these two, if convicted, loose their second amendment rights this puts all our dogs in a safer position. The Father should have taught his son better when instructing him on the proper use of firearms.


----------



## Merimac (Jan 17, 2006)

Joe McCarl and I were hunting earlier this fall and we were tracked down by a bear hound. Dog was happy to see us. He turned out to be a crappy bird dog. As we finished our run we were greeted by his owner tracker in hand.

I know if some one shot my bird dog I would be pretty upset.


----------



## Fox (Nov 21, 2007)

To throw another spin on this:
Reading threw the posts there's alot of questions and concerns being voicedabout bird dogs and hounds. Personally, as sportsmen we should be appalled that "one of our own" committed such an act. I know, I'll probably get some flakby calling them oneof our own, but face it to the generally public, any one that goes into the woods or field to hunt represents everyone of us; for better or worse. The forces that oppose our beloved sports feast on these types of incidents. 
Fox


----------



## milmo1 (Nov 9, 2005)

Fox said:


> to the generally public, any one that goes into the woods or field to hunt represents everyone of us; for better or worse. The forces that oppose our beloved sports feast on these types of incidents.
> Fox


Unfortunate, but true. 

I hope these three get the hammer dropped on 'em. We shouldn't tolerate this trash within our ranks.


----------



## Ohio_92 (Aug 24, 2009)

I think a public execution would be suitable...:evilsmile


----------

