Conference misery::feline_v1

First of all, Tom (before I say what I have to say next), I want to thank you
for taking this discussion of "killer" dogs to a new topic.  It was beginning
to have no place in topic 221, which was intended for me and others to share
grief over the loss of our pets, particularly cats (and which Linda was 
responding to in her original note, 221.19).

Frankly, I am a little shocked by the Rambo-like attitude exhibited in some of
the replies to Linda's account of her pet's tragic death.  I can certainly
understand the anger and rage, and I would feel the same towards the dog who
attacked any cat/bird/sheep/piglet/child/friend whom I love.  But the very
thing that makes us able to love our pets -- the fact that we are civilized
enough to want to take care of and learn from animals -- is the thing that
makes me recoil at this talk of guns, traps, and "taking a contract out" on
the dog who killed Linda's cat, and many other neighborhood animals as well, 
apparently.  (Of course, I recoil at capital punishment -- even the 
"lawful" kind -- for people too, so maybe it's just me and my particular 
political orientation.)

Unlike what Steve said in 221.23, I for one DO believe that this situation 
can and should be handled by the authorities.  If the town has a dog officer 
at all (which apparently it does), that person is there to ENFORCE some law, 
probably a leash law, or at the least an "animal nuisance" law.  If the town 
does NOT have a dog officer, then it does become a "regular" police 
responsibility.  As someone said, a dog who has attacked this many animals is 
certainly a threat to humans as well -- I just cannot believe that complaints 
of such seriousness would be shrugged off, at least not by any cops I know.  

We really need to hear from Linda again.  Did the other people who had 25 
rabbits (I think that's what she said) killed by this same dog ever complain
to anybody?  Apparently the dog has been a menace for some time -- have any
other steps ever been taken?  Have people confronted the owner each time an
incident like this has happened?  Has the dog officer been informed of the
owner's attitude in response to these many incidents?  Again, I have to say that
letting a dog run wild is AGAINST THE LAW in most towns!  A formal complaint
to the police is a formal complaint, and they have to act on it, especially if
there's more than one person complaining.

Let's hear more about the situation before advising anyone to go out and start
killing -- okay, folks?  And let's try to comfort Linda in her grief, not tell
her that she should go out and blast this dog off the face of the earth -- I 
really don't think that'll help her feel better, do you?

Mary Beth

re .1

Very fine sentiments.  But they don't solve the problem.
                                                  
Given that the dog in question has killed as often as it has, and nothing
has been done, leads me to believe that nothing WILL be done.  

Grieving over the loss of your cat, when you should be doing something to
prevent losing your other cats, is simply not constructive.  I fear I must
withhold my sympathy in this case, until the problem is eliminated. 

This may sound harsh.  I hope so.  That was the intent of my original entry.
Don't retreat, don't pen your cats up, don't let this outrage continue. If you
wish to pursue other, less violent means, by all means do so.  But do
something!  And if all else fails, kill the dog.
                                                                    
Yes, for the record, I support capital punishment, even in the case of humans.

- Chris

    It has been my experience that dogs are near-sacred, and unless
    you have something such as photos of the dog in the act, or he
    does it in front of a policeman, that you will have a hard time
    getting anything done about it.  Typically, the dog owner will
    be told to keep his dog penned up, and threatened with a small
    fine.  People who have killer dogs seem to be of two types: 
    1) (the vast majority) don't believe that it was really their dog
    that did it -- Spot wouldn't hurt a flea.  The people resent
    your accusations against their pet.
    2) (a very small minority) don't care if their dog kills other animals
    or dogs -- they may even get a kick out of it.
    
    	george

       The wonderful thing about a leash law is that you have to "prove"
    anything.  If they are out it's against the law and the animal can
    be rounded up and taken to the pound where the owner will bail him
    out at cost.  
    
       If there is a leash law in your area, start calling the authorities
    everytime you see the dog out.  Eventually, the owner will have to
    get tired of bailing him out and either confine him or give him
    to somebody else.
                                                               
    tlh
    
    

    The problem with leash laws, at least in Merrimack, is that they're
    only in effect from 9 to 5, Monday through Friday.  That's when
    the dog officer is around.  I know.  We tried to get the authorities
    to come get the two dogs that like to rampage through our yard on
    weekend nights and they said that we could catch the dogs and keep
    them until Monday.  Our two cats were going nuts with all the barking
    and running around that was going on.  So Jim's taken to keeping
    a small pile of small rocks and a big stick by the side door to
    chase them off with.  I was really upset the last time, because
    it sounded like they had some small animal back there, and I kept
    thinking it sounded like a cat.  I hope it was ok by the time Jim
    got there with the rocks.
    
    --Louise

    re .1, wetc:
    
    Please let's not misconstrue what I was alluding to in 221.23. 
    One of my neifghbors has two dogs that he lets run loose.  They
    do no damage except to ione's sleep (they're night howlers) and
    one's lawns.  They have been reported to the local poluice several
    times (after the owner has been spoken to), and they are leashed
    for a few days, then off they go again!
    
    Am I in favor of killing dogs?  No.
    
    However, my question remains: if the law is either impotent or
    uninvolved, what does one do about a killer dog?
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    
    P.S.:  The Have-A-Heart trap I mentioned earlier is designed to
    trap an animal _unhurt_.
    
    -SK
    

    Ever since I began reading this file, my primary emotions have
    consistently been interest, humor (even delight), sympathy - for
    the most part all positive feelings. This note has brought me to
    abject disgust.
    
    What began as a heartfelt expression of grief over a loss has become
    a sink hole for some of the most grotesque outpourings (with the
    exception of Mary Beth's lucid plea for balance and sanity in .1) of 
    misdirected vituperative *non-sense* it has been my displeasure
    to read through.
    
    Who ARE you people, that you feel righteous enough to espouse killing
    an animal whose only "crime" was to follow its instincts, ill (or
    un-)modified or controlled by their owners? THE ANIMAL IS NOT THE
    CRIMINAL IN THESE CASES! I take particular umbrage at reply .3 with
    the references to 'near sacred' dogs and 'two types of dog owners';
    what self-serving, one sided PAP! As for .5, take your pile of rocks
    and chuck them at the owners, the animals don't understand what
    you're doing. All you accomplish is to ease your conscience: you
    haven't stopped their activity, you've just convinced them to do
    it someplace other than your yard.
    
    The answer to this problem is a trend toward stricter regulation
    and harsher penalties for owners of animals that perpetrate violence
    on others; expend your energies toward that end, not the perpetuation
    of death on the animal who knows no better.
    
    	/Harry Sutton

re .7

True enough, a cat or dog that kills other animals is only following it's
instincts.  Please describe how this applies to the discussion?
                                                           
A dog or cat which destroys it's neighbors pets or livestock is perhaps not
criminal, but it IS destructive, and should be stopped.  There are many ways
to solve this problem.  Most of them will be ineffectual.  One way I know of
is certain. 

Further, I can solve the problem WITHOUT getting the town, state or federal
legislatures further involved, since the necessary laws almost certainly
exist. It seems preferable to me to solve it at that level.  It's sure
to be a faster solution, too.

- Chris

    re .7, .8:
    
    I don't believe those who suggest killing a killer dog are doing
    so for any reason other than to protect the lives of innocent animals.
     I do not suggest that is the onlty way to solve the problem; I
    did in my first note suggest a Have-A-Heart trap to catch the dog,
    please note.  I also asked what one does with the dog one has caught.
    
    There are two kind of dog owners with killers:  those who will not
    admit (possibly even to themselves) that their dog is a killer;
    and those who don't care that their dog is a killer.
    
    If the law enforcement arm of a locality doesn't consider a killer
    dog a dangerous problem, then there is a legitimate question: what
    to do?  This has been broken down to:
    
    a) Kill it.
    
    b) Keep complaining to the owner.
    
    c) Keep complaining to the authorities.
    
    d) Sue the owner.
    
    To do "d" suiccessfully, you'd have to hasve court-worthy evidence.
     This might require hiring a private detective or equivalent to
    gather such evidence.
    
    "B" and "c" under the arguments suggested above aren't going to
    do a thing.
    
    Another alternative is to steal the dog, bring him or her to a dog
    training school, and then once he or she graduates, find a new home
    for him or her.  Very expensive, and dog-stealing is a crime.
    
    Please: any other suggestions?  The status quo appears unacceptable,
    unless you are comfortable with the idea of a dog going around killing
    cats.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

What should be dona about marauding cats?  The ones who kill birds 
and/or raid nests or kill livestock (No, not cows... consider a 
pheasant farm.)?  Should we shoot them too?  If someone shoots your cat 
for hanging out around their birdfeeder, are you going to shrug it off, 
and say the cat deserved it?  If your cat regularly beats up my cat, can 
I take a chainsaw to your cat?

Killing pets doesn't make for good neighbors.  If someone lives close 
enough to you for their dog to rough up your cat, they live close enough 
to cut your tires, run over your kid and all the other things that *have 
happened* when fueds like that get started.

I don't have a good answer for people's annoying pets.  In some cases, 
I've used a BB pistol to teach the animal to avoid my property and go 
annoy someone else.  I understand the frustration, but if you kill 
someone else's pet, you're asking to escalate the conflict.

					>>>==>PStJTT

    >    I don't believe those who suggest killing a killer dog are doing
    >so for any reason other than to protect the lives of innocent animals.

    By taking the life of another 'innocent' animal.....
    
    >    There are two kind of dog owners with killers:  those who will not
    >admit (possibly even to themselves) that their dog is a killer;
    >and those who don't care that their dog is a killer.
     
    That's the second time that sentiment has been expressed, and the
    second time I've been grossly offended by it. I own two dogs in
    addition to my cat; the day someone comes to me and demonstrates
    that my dog has killed one of their pets, I will have the dog put
    down personally, and immediately. And before the groundswell of
    'Oh, sure! Demonstrate that!' begins, I challenge any of you to
    agree to destroy your beloved pet without irrefutable evidence.
    Before we get too carried away here, let me clarify one important
    point:
    
    I do not contest that a dog that has killed neighborhood pets must
    be destroyed. I simply argue that it must be done professionally,
    quickly and humanely, _AND_ it must be followed up by litigation
    against the owner responsible for the animal's behavior. The answer
    is not found in poisoned garbage, rock piles by the back door, or
    your skeet rifle.
    
    Also please consider that this is a chain: will we find a Bird Lovers
    file complaining about how to deal with killer cats?
    

    Ok, I'll clarify -- There are two kinds of dog owners with killer
    dogs who won't do anything about it.   The ones that will do
    something about it aren't the problem, obviously.
    
    		George

RE: "Still no justification":

Sure there is.  Defense of property, pure and simple.  Jeez, we're not talking
about setting up sonic alarms on your yard so you can get your jollies
shooting all the neighborhood pets when they walk across your yard, ya know.
We're talking about a case where an animal has repeatedly killed and not been
stopped. 

RE: Bad neighbors:
                                             
A neighbor who lets his dog kill your cats and livestock is not a good
neighbor anyway.  You have the right to defend your property.  Do so.

But be aware that circumstances alter cases. If your neighbor is a good joe,
and is trying to control the problem, you are probably not justified in
killing the dog on sight if it happens to slip off it's leash.  But if the
owner refuses to control the animal, I think you are well within your rights
if you kill the animal on your property. 

RE: Escalation:

An admittedly knotty problem.  Still, I'd rather risk escalation than be
certain of taking more abuse. 

Notice I'm talking about normal people here. I suppose I would reconsider if I
knew the owner of the dog had a history of mental problems and murder
convictions.  But in that case, I'd be moving anyway. Getting into a pissing
contest with a homicidal maniac isn't defense of your rights, it's suicidal. 
                                  
RE: Killer cats:
                                                          
ANY animal that causes damage to neighbors should be controlled.  If no means
of controlling the animal are available, or the owner of the animal refuses to
control it for whatever reason, the animal should be destroyed. 

Cats simply have less potential for being destructive than big dogs.  (For
that matter, I rarely hear about chihauhaus that have been put down because
they were killers...)  But if a cat is destructive, take steps to eliminate
the damage, same as with any other animal. 
             
RE: My last words on the subject:  (I heard that sigh of relief!)
                                                   
I probably shouldn't have blindly suggested killing the dog.  First thought in
my head, extrapolating from the given evidence, was that it would be
justified.  However, I really don't have enough facts.  I don't know if the
dog officer, if any, has been contacted.  I don't know if the neighbor has
tried to do anything about the problem.  I don't really know a whole lot about
it.  Given the actual evidence presented, almost any scenario can be
constructed.  I suppose it's even possible that the dog killed the cat in self
defense, but I tend to doubt it.
          
I'm not really a rabid person. I don't walk around with an Uzi looking for
people or animals that violate my rights.  I prefer negotiation to armed
confrontation.  Cooperation is usually easier and always more effective. But
if negotiation fails, you have to be willing to defend yourself.  And you
are justified in doing so.

If you can't bring yourself to defend yourself, you can run, you can hide
or you can continue to let yourself be victimized.  Take your pick.  But
you really shouldn't expect much sympathy if you decide to continue to
be victimized.

- CW

RE:  .9:

>    d) Sue the owner.
>    
>    To do "d" suiccessfully, you'd have to hasve court-worthy evidence.
>     This might require hiring a private detective or equivalent to
>    gather such evidence.
    
I believe Steve is referring to one of my suggestions ("Take 'em to court!")
in one of my previous replies.  The above would be true if one is talking
about a "higher" court (i.e., civil or criminal).  I was more talking about
small claims court, where one does NOT have to have hard and fast evidence,
and where cases do NOT have to be proved "beyond a shadow of a doubt"  --
small claims court operates under different principles.  

In small claims court, the judge decides cases based on "preponderance of the 
evidence" which just means that in his opinion, one side's story, when 
compared with the other side's, contains more probability of truth.  And that 
doesn't sound as if it would be hard for Linda and the other victim neighbors 
to prove.  The judge takes into account witnesses' statements as to what 
they've seen, their credibility, consistency of facts, etc.  

You must sue for a money amount (up to $1500).  In this case, that could be
determined by various peoples' vet bills, cost of burying animals, damage to
property, etc., AND the judge can also take into account compensation for
"emotional distress" when he makes the award.

So, while you're not really getting rid of the dog (the dog officer would,
however, be a good witness about number of complaints, etc.), you're going
to hit the owner in the pocketbook if you win.  AND he'll have to pay court 
fees (which are in any case minimal for small claims court - that's the 
purpose of it).  Most people straighten up when it starts costing them money!

See how much you can find out by watching People's Court? ;-)  (I tape it
every day, and animal cases of just this type are on OFTEN.)  Hey, what can
it hurt to try?  At least taking some positive (and legal) action might be 
better than some of the other alternatives discussed here.

Mary Beth

    re .14:
    
    Regretfully, Small Claims Court works when it works.  In Massachusetts,
    too often a settlement is made in Small Claims Court, and the defendant
    (if found wanting) is assessed; however, he or she "forgets" to
    pay.  That is why I suggested a higher court, inferentially.
    
    Hope it's better in other states.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

        The bird-lovers conference is at VAXUUM::BIRDS, for those who
        are interested in how bird lovers feel about cats.  Most bird
        lovers recognize a difference between pet birds and wild birds.
        I think most of us would recognize a difference between feral
        cats and domesticated (pet) cats, although we would not want
        a dog killing either one.
        
        By the way, dogs that kill cats would also kill birds, and deer,
        and anything else they can catch, including other, small dogs. 
        
        Tom

    Complaining to the police or animal officer is not the extent of
    your rights.  Press charges!  The procedure may vary from state
    to state, but, if you have witnessed a crime (e.g., observed an
    unleashed dog), you can usually swear out a complaint, and the state's
    attorney has little choice but to prosecute.  Go to the police to
    do this and make it clear that you want to press charges.
    
    
    				-- edp

    re: .15
    
    a defendent that "forgets to pay", or do whatever the court ordered
    (like restraining an animal that may be deemed a public nucience)is
    in contempt of court, and as such, can be put in jail (that of course,
    can only happen if it is REPORTED, rather than suffering in silence).
    
    Maybe some people would take better care of their pets if pet's
    victums followed up with civil action, and didn't just give up when
    it seemed to do not good.
    
    Deb

    If I'm going to swear out a complaint, etc.,  do I need to catch
    the dog first so I can read his registration tag (assuming he has
    one) so that I can swear that there is no way it couln't have been
    someone else's dog?   This would be a practical impossibility in
    many cases, as dogs aren't stupid and generally have a pretty good
    idea when they are doing something you won't like.  Suggestions?
    Photograph the dog maybe?
    
    	George

    Several years ago I lived in a neighborhood with a dog that killed
    several small pets (both dogs and cats) and had even attacked several
    humans, small children and elderly persons.  There was no leash
    law in this area, though a group of neighbors were concerned about
    the situation.  On several occasions the victims or the parents
    or owners of victims would complain to the owners of the dog.  The
    reaction was of the "Spot wouldn't hurt a flea" variety.
    
    One day someone saw this dog corner my half bobcat named George.
    George let himself be cornered and ripped the dogs throat wide open.
    No more dog; no one was charged with animal abuse.  I wasn't too
    thrilled about George killing something but his normal reaction
    was to get away unless he was being threatened.  The woman who 
    saw this quietly spread the story.  Everyone's reaction was positive.
    
    Kathleen

    A few years ago I lost at least two cats that I know of for sure
    to killer dogs and probably one other cat that I never actually
    found his body.  I lived in Mass. then and the town (Chelmsford)
    had a leash law that was in effect only during the day but dogs
    could be turned loose at night until 7AM (I think it was from midnight
    to 7AM).  Although I had two dogs myself, I didn't let mine run
    loose as I cared too much for them.  
    
    At first I thought it was a fox or raccoon that might have killed
    two of my cats.  However, one night I actually caught them in the
    act of killing my beloved "Butch".  Butch was only 2 years old at
    the time; half Persian and a beautiful, loving cat that loved to
    put his big, black, silky front legs around my neck and cuddle.
    Butch was a hunter but it was always mice, moles, and once he caught
    a squirrel on our roof - he was also very quick.
    
    It was late at night when I was awakened by a horrible, blood-curdling
    scream (it was summer so the window was open in my room).  I ran
    to the window in time to see two dogs leaving the yard.  They had
    trapped my Butch in my large dog house.  He was probably sleeping
    in it when they got him.
    
    I ran out trying to find him in hopes he would be alright.  The
    dogs made their way out across our neighbor's yard up the street.
    One of them had dragged Butch to that yard and left him there; neck
    broken.  I did not recognize the dogs and knew they did not belong
    to anyone in our area; they were just roaming from another
    neighborhood.  I knew I'd never forget them though.  It was light
    enough due to a full moon and street light to make them out.
    
    I picked up Butch's limp and lifeless body and carried him home.
    I was heartbroken.  His sister, Fluffy, and another cat I had at
    the time, Barney, had also met this fate I was sure.  They were
    the first to disappear and I had no idea what had happened to them
    until Butch was killed.
    
    I was so filled with rage that all I could think of was to "kill
    those two dogs".  For me to feel this way about any animal was very
    unusual as I love all animals and would not want to hurt any,  However,
    all I could think of was somehow to get hold of them and find out
    who their owner(s) was.  I felt something had to be done to stop
    this wave of killing.  
        
    One night I heard the dogs return again.  My brother had one of
    those old beebee guns in the backhall and I was still angry enough
    to go out and put a couple of beebees in it and go outside in the
    yard.  I could see the dogs (one was a husky type) and they stopped
    and stared at me.  The husky came towards me wagging it's tail and
    crouching down.  I aimed the gun at one of the dog's feet (figured
    that would be less likely to cause too much pain from a beebee but
    enough to send him home - told you I hate to hurt any).  When I
    pulled the trigger the damned beebee just fell out onto the ground.
    The dog had in the meantime rolled over on its back and it's tongue
    was hanging out as it grinned up at me.  I was so mad to think that
    happened (I can laugh about it now) and that the dog seemed to be
    laughing at me for my efforts.  Without thinking that the dog might
    be dangerous and bite, I reached down and grabbed it's collar and
    brought him inside my backhall so I could read his dog tags.  I
    called the police  and asked if they had a listing for the ID #.
    The dog came from Lowell, MA (just over the line from us) but other
    than that they couldn't help me.  By this time, my own two dogs
    were getting excited knowing a strange one was in their backhall
    so rather than wake up the whole house and neighborhood, I let the
    husky out to return home.  However, now I had his license # (for
    all the good it did me).
    
    The next night, the dogs returned  and actually killed a skunk.  
    Next morning I had to call the dog officer.  He was a kind and
    concerned man and said if I found out who owned the dogs to let him 
    know as "dogs that killed skunks would kill anything - even wolves in 
    the wild know better than to kill skunks".  He felt bad about my
    losing my cats to those dogs.  
    
    Well, I guess the owners of the dogs didn't like them coming home 
    smelling like skunks as I never saw nor heard from those two dogs again.

        
    

    Re .19:
    
    > If I'm going to swear out a complaint, etc.,  do I need to catch
    > the dog first so I can read his registration tag (assuming he has
    > one) so that I can swear that there is no way it couln't have been
    > someone else's dog?
    
    If you are certain in your own mind that you know which dog it is,
    you can swear to it.  Having seen the dog attacking animals multiple
    times would help, and a photograph would be even better.  If the
    dog is a problem and the owners will not cooperate, I would say
    swear out a complaint as soon as you are sure you know which dog
    it is.
    
    
    				-- edp

    If you want to be civil, you might start by apologizing to all the
    people you have called sick and disgusting.
    
    Earl Wajenberg

    re: .23, .25:
    
    Fine, but some of the hidden and not-so-hidden issues here are,
    what do you do when the police don't seem to care much & the owner
    doesn't seem to care much, etc.?  Buy a cat a week?

    re .27:
    
    I believe the previous note to yours questioned what to do when
    neither the owner nor the authorities (local police) pay attention
    to the complaints and the cat owner is aware whose dog is doing
    the killing.
    
    Basically, we get back to two points:
    
    1) Ignore the problem and either
       a) resign yourself to losing cats on a frequent basis,
       b) keep your cats indoors all the time [what I do anyway], or
       c) give up having cats.
    
    2) Do something about it, which could consist of:
       a) Capturing the offending dog,
       b) Killing the offending dog either in person or through some
          agency such as having a lion as your next pet cat, or
       c) Taking legal steps.
    
    On the second alternative, if the dog can be captured and then the
    owner dealt with, good.  If not,
    
    Taking legal steps might work, but mighht not; if the finances of
    the cat owner can stand it, there may still be such a court delay
    that the dog will kill several other cats before the case even comes
    to trial.   Finally, even if there is a judgement against the dog
    owner, he or she may choose to ignore any restraining order and
    let the dog continue to run loose.  Then you're back to square 1.
    
    The people who may seem excessively bloodthirsty are probably in
    some cases people whose cats have been killed and whose complaints
    have been stymied by "the insolence of office and the law's delay."
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

    re: .27, .29:
    
    I think the difference of opinion is due more to the differing mental
    images we are creating of the problem under discussion.  My image is
    one of someone who has tried *everything*, while yours seems to be of
    someone who hasn't. 
    
    I agree that someone should try all the legal and neighborly remedies
    first.  But if things don't improve then..?  After all the
    proselytizations about how wonderful it is to work within the rules,
    there is still the "bottom line" that everyone has a breaking point.
    There is a point where you will go out and fix the situation by
    whatever means necessary.  It isn't nice?  Gee, too bad. 
    
    I completely reject any parallels with "taking the law into your own
    hand" w.r.t. killing a suspected murderer.  That is tantamount to
    giving dogs due process under the law.  Uh uh.  They are animals.
    (Sorry all you excessive dog lovers out there, I love my dog too, but
    let us face facts.) 

    I thankfully have never faced such a "wit's end" situation.  But I
    think you should have a little more compassion to someone who has tried
    all the remedies and has not received satisfaction.  If someone
    confided in me that they didn't know what to do and so they maximally
    demoted the dog, I would try not to judge. 
    
    
    jdr

    re .30, .31:
    
    Suppose you capture the dog and are willing to take it to a vet
    and have him or her administer doses of prolactin, for example?
     The dog then will love and try to "mother" everything, probably
    including previous items of prey.  That's another solution.
    
    re .30:  "just an animal" can be applied to cats, too.  The dog
    owner might say, "What's all the fuss about?  Your cat was just
    an animal."  The argument's a two-edged sword.
    
    re .31:  Many of us do _not_ urge canicide; .30's point is what
    happens when you reach an end point?  the question is valid.  Some
    towns, for instance, don't have volunteer animal rescue leagues;
    others have "dog officers" whose duties seem to be taken very lightly.
    I advocate keeping cats indoors whenever possible, but suppose your
    precious kitty happens to get oput (my Karamaneh _always_ wants
    to, though I don't let her) -- then what?  There is a parallel to
    the terrorism issue here: do you avoid travel because there are
    terrorists?  The same's true here.  If there is a "terrorist" dog
    who kills pets and livestock _and you've run up against a dead end_,
    what's the next step?
    
    A tough question, surely worth more than an "Off 'em/Don't you dare!"
    level of discussion.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

	Not to digress too far from the topic but I resent the implication that 
I don't love my cats because I let them free. The indoor/outdoor controversy 
could be debated for ever and it's a pretty harsh statement to tell someone 
they don't "love" their cat because they let it out. It could be countered 
that people who keep their cats indoors all the time don't "love" them either. 
It comes down to a matter of choice, and for the record I feel that making a 
cat "agoraphobic" is less than truly caring for the cats wants.

	The only reason I could see for killing the dog is if it has 
threatened human life. One shouldn't be taking the law into their own hands, 
but if I felt that myself or some person was *seriously* threatened by this 
dog I would do something, but this is an extreme circumstance I doubt I'll 
ever be in. Stating that a cat-killing-dog will naturally kill people is 
getting a little carried away, would a mouse-killing-cat be a threat to 
people? I'm sure some dogs don't intentionally kill the cat, they are just 
playing (very similar to cats that play with mice). If I had a dog that got 
out and killed a neighbors cat I would be very sorry, but if the next time my 
dog got out the neighbor killed it, you can be sure I would take legal action.


/harry

    re .35:
    You state that if you had a dog that got out and killed a neighbor's
    cay you'd be "very sorry."  The question is, would you take any
    further action?  Suppose your dog killed a second?  A Third?  A
    fourth?  Besides being "very soprry," what, if anything, would you
    do?
    
    And if you did nothing, what would you expect the owner of the cat(s)
    to do?
    
    I think thast is the question we're addressing.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

	What I meant to convey is that after the cat is dead there isn't much
you can do. Sometimes these types of things can happen by accident, dogs can
break out, even without the owners knowledge. I believe people have a right to
defend their life and property, but waiting at the window with a 22 for Old
Yeller to cross the property line is barbaric. The tone of some notes in this 
file is getting beyond defense of property, it's gone to avenging a cats death 
by wasting a dog. How about killing the real culprit, the owner?? I mean if 
you just kill the dog he may get another one and the cycle could go on and on 
(okay, I'm getting a little carried away!).

	Don't we have courts and laws and all that good stuff?? If they aren't 
being effective here's your chance to do something for the community, take 
initiative. No one says it's going to be easy, but if someone pioneers such 
legislation it'll be easier for other pet owners to find recourse through the 
law.

	And along the line of logic that a cat-killing-dog will kill people, 
wouldn't a dog-killing-person be a danger to people also??? I was a pretty 
sadistic kid when I was young, so I guess I'm lucky some pet-owner didn't blow 
me away when I bothered their animals.


	Enough flaming for now, I'll have to drop into CANINE to find out if 
someone sells bullet proof vests for dogs in case I ever get one.

/harry

    re .38, .37, .36, earlier:
    
    I think we've reacched a point of recursion.  We're talking about
    what's already been said.
    
    Unless someone can come up with something creative and different,
    I agree with .38: there's no reason to add more responses.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

        Maybe someone could come up with a cat collar that has dog
    repellant in it. Sorry steve, I couldn't resist - you said you wanted
    something different.
        Seriously, I agree. Seems this subject has been beat and
    regurgitated enough.
    
     Tom
     
    (Just wanted to let you know I was here)
    

    I am writing on someone else's file but I am the original person
    whose cat was killed by the neighbor's dog.  I have never done
    anything "in revenge" against this dog except to call the dog
    officer and let him know exactly how many animals this same dog
    has killed.  There have been approximately 20 rabbits (some mine,
    some my neighbors), 4 chickens, again mine (the dog tore down the
    fence to get them), the aforementioned cat, and previous to that,
    four of my other cats, one in which the dog actually nosed open
    the dog to my home and took a kitten off the floor. So... so much
    for keeping my animals in side since this creature seems to go
    through fences, houses etc. 

    My vet's response to this delima was that the dog should be
    distroyed and I agree, though I'm not sure I could actually carry
    it out myself with a gun.  I would, though, believe you me if I
    caught the dog tearing one of my animals apart. 

    One fact I did learn though, is that if I had reported my chickens
    killed the dog would have been removed by the dog officer, no
    questions asked, and instantly distroyed.  This is because it is
    o.k. for a dog to kill your pets but it is not o.k. for a dog to
    kill food-producing animals which my chickens were.  My solution?
    I just bought three more chickens to replace the dead ones.  Next
    time the dog visits and gets my chickens, I will report it to the
    dog officer.
    
    Linda McCormack
    DELNI::L_MCCORMACK 

 

    In many locations, *ANY* animals you keep on your property are
    considered to be livestock, which you have the right to protect,
    not just food producing types.
    
    Edd

    I KNOW THAT YOU ALL HAVE AGREED THAT THIS SUBJECT HAS BEEN BEATEN
    TO DEATH (ABSOLUTELY NO PUN INTENDED) BUT I HAVE TO VOICE MY AGREEMENT
    WITH SEVERAL POINTS MADE BY PHILBROOK.
    
    I TOO KEEP MY CATS INSIDE NOW.  HOW MANY CATS DOES ONE HAVE TO LOSE
    BEFORE ONE TAKES ACTION TO PROTECT THEM?  POSITIVE ACTION MUST BE
    TAKEN TO PROTECT THE CATS WHILE THE OWNER PURSUE'S OTHER MEANS OF
    CORRECTING THE PROBLEM.
       
    HOW CAN WE AS CAT OWNERS ARGUE THAT DOGS SHOULD BE TIED UP OR
    RESTRAINED WHEN WE ALLOW OUR CATS TO BLATANTLY RUN AROUND LOOSE
    OUTSIDE?
    
    ALOT OF YOU HAVE EXPRESSED CONCERN OVER THE FACT THAT ANIMAL CONTROL
    IS RELUCTANT TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE DOGS IN QUESTION.  WHY NOT
    TRY ASKING YOUR NEIGHBORS TO SIGN A PETITION AND TESTIFY AS WITNESSES.
    IF ENOUGH PEOPLE BOMBARD THE AUTHORITIES WITH COMPLAINTS SOME ACTION
    HAS TO BE TAKEN.  SMALL CLAIM COURT IS AN OPTION THAT HASN'T BEEN
    DISCUSSED.  IT COSTS ONLY ABOUT $30.00 TO FILE IN OUR AREA, YOU
    PRESENT YOUR CASE AND A JUDGE DECIDES THE OUTCOME.  IF THE OWNER
    DOESN'T SHOW UP THE CASE IS AUTOMATICALLY IN YOUR FAVOR.  
    
    NOW DON'T START SCREAMING ABOUT INFORCING THE OUTCOME.  IT IS TIME
    TO STOP TALKING AND START ACTING.  GO THROUGH THIS FIRST AND THEN
    WRITE US BACK IF IT DOESN'T WORK FOR YOU.  THE IDEA OF THIS FILE
    IS BRAINSTORMING, NOT NAME CALLING, ARGUING WITH EACH OTHER AND
    ALLOWING OUR EMOTIONS TO RULE OUR BRAINS.
    
    JO ANN
    

    
       I just wanted to add my $00.02
    
       This is the way I deal with cat killing dogs.
    
       First I keep my cat inside. Then I go to the owner of the dog
       and tell him of the leash law and also tell him/her to keep his dog
       off of my property. I tell him/her that if the dog keeps returning
       to my yard to terrorize my cat and relieve itself on my lawn,
       that I will kill it the first chance I get.
    
       This way it is fair... They get a warning... If they don't listen
       it will be too late. 
    
    
       I have never had to do this yet.
    
    PC
    
        P.S.   I am sorry if this offends anyone.

    PC,
    
    I for one am very glad that you have never resorted to dog-killing.
    That would put you in the same catagory as the cat killing dogs.
    Please try to find alternate solutions to the problem.
    
    Also... how do you keep your cat from using your neighbors yards
    as a litter box? 
    
    JoAnn

    
       Actually that is just a scare tactic. 
    
       I really can't control where my cat goes when he is outside.
    Lately, in the winter, I keep him inside. The only problem with
    that is that he likes to tell me, "OUT!" alot.
    
    PC

    re:.47 and others
      No one here has adressed the point that Mike Philbrick made about
    keeping your cat inside.  Why should your cat have free roam of
    the neighborhood?  The average cat kills alot more then the average
    dog.  How many mice, chipmunks, birds etc has your cat brought home?
    Does this give me the right to break out the 12 ga. next time I
    see Tabby cutting across my back yard?  Alls fair in love and war?
    Before you tell me that it is instinct for a cat to hunt, remember
    that instinct is also the reason that a dog will chase cats.  I
    agree that "killer dogs" are a nuisence.  But the problem lies with
    the owner, not the animal.  How many of you who advocate nuking
    the dog would agree to let me serve "hot lead to go" to your cat
    if I catch him stalking birds on my lawn?  There are two sides to
    every street.

    re:.48
    
    Maybe I didn't stress it as strongly as you did, but keeping the
    cats indoors was the point I was trying to make in my notes and
    questions in my previous replies.
    
    I tried to bring the conversation back to the main point and I didn't
    succeed.  You have succeeded.  Now we can sit back and wait for
    all heck to break loose.
    
    Jo Ann 

    I agree with .48 and .49 - keep your cat in unless you can keep
    it off of other people's property.  There are a few cats in our
    neighborhood that are a real pain in the neck.  They open trash
    on trash day, they use newly plowed (and seeded!!!) gardens as
    cat boxes, and they sit by the bird feeder.  They've killed a few
    rodents and two birds in our yard.  They also make it somewhat
    difficult for us to take our cats out, since we don't want our
    cats in contact with cats whose medical status we don't know.
    There is one whose problem is, along with trash and gardens, that
    he is VERRY friendly and is a whole male who STINKS.  You can't
    do anything without him in your way, and it's quite unpleasant.
    He almost tripped our neighbor by weaving around his legs while
    he was trying to go down his side steps!  I've been close to
    accidents, also - the cat is really obnoxious.
    
    I love cats (most of them).  I enjoy seeing other people's cats.
    I don't enjoy seeing them in my yard, and I try to keep my cats
    at home.
    
    Now, if the problem is roaming dogs moving in on cats who are in
    their own yards, I can agree with some of the sentiments expressed
    here.  There are a few dogs in our neighborhood whose owners
    deserve to be caged!  And I've found the police/animal control/
    humane society to be totally unresponsive to complaints -  you
    have to catch the dog for them!
    
    --Louise

    Warning!  Flames breaking out!
    
    I am getting really tired of hearing people in this file constantly
    telling other people to keep their cats indoors.  If this is what
    you want to do with your cats, then you do it with your cats.  If
    you want to discuss it, do so in the topic set up for that purpose.
    This is a subject of individual choice, and I get the impression
    that some people are trying to push their will on other people.
    
    This topic is about dogs who kill cats, and what to do about them.
    It is not about dogs who do not attack cats.  It is not about cats
    who catch mice.
    
    I've had my say.  Thank you.
    
    Flame off.
                             Carol

    Carol,
      I'm getting REALLY tired of a bunch of self proclaimed Rambo's
    advocating shooting dogs.  If you want to let your cat run loose,
    then do so, but be prepared to except the inevitable when it gets
    munched on by Rover or squashed in the road.  What gives your cat
    the right to run loose while at the same time I should keep my dog
    tied up?  By letting your cat run loose your shirking your
    responsibilities.  Cats (and dogs) that run loose are nothing but
    problems.  They get hit by cars, get in fights, produce unwanted
    offspring, get into garbage cans, etc.  Blaming the dog that kills
    the cat isn't going to solve the problem.  The blame lies with the
    owner of BOTH animals.  Neither should be running loose.  Do I have
    the right to terminate any cat I find killing birds or chipmunks
    on my property?  What's the difference between that and a dog that
    kills cats?
    
    Jeff

    WELL!!! Now that *that's* off our collective chests....
    

    Enough already.  Jeff, I think you've gone a bit too far.  This
    is not intended as a flame, more of a fire hose.  Please consider
    the following points:
    
    - Carol never advocated shooting dogs.
    
    - It is not inevitable that an outdoor cat will get "munched on
      by Rover or squashed in the road".  The cat I had as a kid was
      an indoor/outdoor type, lived for 14 years and died a natural
      death at home.  My current cats are also indoor/outdoor and although
      I've had them for only 3 years, have never come to any harm.
    
    - Many cats that run loose are never a problem (some are, true enough).
    
    - No, you do not have the right to terminate a cat you find killing
      birds or chipmunks on your property.  The difference between that
      and a dog that kills cats is that the cat is somebody's property
      and they have probably invested a good deal of money and love
      in it (if no one owned the cat and it got killed by a dog then
      no one would miss it and there wouldn't be any problem would there?).
    
    Also, I don't know about the laws in your area, but where I come
    from it is *ILLEGAL* to let a dog run loose.  There is no such law
    for cats, only that they be licensed.
    
    I do agree Jeff, that the problem IS with the owners.  I love cats,
    I don't like dogs, but if a cat in the neighborhood was causing
    a problem I would see to it that something was done about it (in
    one instance I have, it resulted in the cat being destroyed by the
    owners).  If my cats were reported to be a problem I would keep
    them in, no doubt about it.
    
    Perhaps my attitude is a bit optimistic, but I have never had a
    problem that couldn't be resolved by working with the animal's owner.
    I'm knocking on wood now, because this summer people will be moving
    in next door, and they own a Rotwieler and a Doberman.  From what
    I've seen, they let them run loose (they are in the process of building
    a house).  Should be interesting.
    
    -- Craig

    Thank you Craig.  I do feel likewise.  
    
    I am a responsible owner.  My cats are all neutered and have tags
    and I have spoken with my neighbors to ensure that if there is EVER
    a problem with my animals to let me know.  My neighbors (several
    of them) have praised my cats several times and when I have the
    cats indoors then the neighbors come over and ask me where they
    are, telling me they miss them.
    
    In addition, my cats have been in my own yard when TWO dogs came
    in and attacked them.  These dogs had a yard with an open gate area
    and were allowed to run free.  If my cats were running over and
    attacking their dogs then I would confine my cats.  I expect dog
    owners to be as considerate.
    
                 Carol

    Your missing the point.  I'm not advocating killing any cats.  I'm
    just trying to point out how lucicrous it is to advocate killing
    dogs.  Several people in this note have done just that.  I didn't
    mean to suggest that Carol advocates killing dogs either.  I think
    that your point that it is alright for cats to kill wildlife because
    no one owns them is a bit foolish.  Many people get much enjoyment
    out of watching songbirds and other wildlife.  You say that its not
    inevitable that cats get hit or killed.  This is true, few things
    in life are inevitable, but your greatly increasing the odds by
    letting them run loose.  If people kept there cats and dogs inside
    then there wouldn't be a problem of dogs killing cats and cats killing
    birds.   I think that when a problem does exist it should be worked
    out by verbal means rather then capital punishment.

re:  the last 50 or so...

Take it from someone who spouted off earlier... Generalizing in this note is
pointless.  Let's talk cases, eh?  There are specific legal, moral and ethical
considerations to be made in any case where you are talking about the life of
any domesticated animal, be it a dog, cat, horse or trained earthworm.  You
cannot simply make blanket pronouncements and leave it at that. 

In general, dogs are property in the eyes of the law.  Cats may or may not be.
Morally and ethically, you may be inclined to treat domesticated animals as
"retarded children", or you may think of them as property.  (It is important to
realized that BOTH of these ethical positions are equally valid, but in court
only the legal position counts.  You should be aware of what YOUR local laws
are - and be willing to abide by the decisions of the local judiciary - before
you take any action, no matter how morally justified.) 

Differences matter - very much.  

If there is a feral animal on your property, no matter what type, unowned by
anyone, you are legally justified to kill it as long as it is not a member of
an endangered or protected species for which you do not have a legal hunting
license.  Moral justification depends upon WHY you are killing it.  Most moral
codes would allow you to poison moles in your lawn or mice in your basement,
for instance. 

If there is a dog killing your cat, on your property, as you watch, you would
be legally and morally justified to stop the dog by any means necessary,
including killing the dog.  (My only Ramboesque statement of the day - if the
dog is a known troublemaker, all the more reason to make the solution to THE
PARTICULAR SCENARIO OUTLINED IN THIS PARAGRAPH permanent.  Note, however, that
if you could protect the cat without killing the dog, you are probably on shaky
legal and ethical ground to kill the dog anyway.) 

If your cat is on another's property, you probably have no legal or moral right
to kill or otherwise injure the dog, particularly if the dog is on its master's
property.  You can and should use any other means at your disposal to protect
your cat, short of damaging another person's property or getting yourself
mauled or killed. 
                                           
If you observe a neighborhood dog kill your cat, but it escapes from your
property, you have no legal justification to track down the dog and kill it, 
as you are not acting in the immediate defense of your property.  You probably
DO have recourse to some means of attempting to get the dog destroyed as a
dangerous animal, depending upon the solidity of your evidence, the local
laws, and your ability to identify the dog.

If you THINK a particular dog killed your cat, you have no basis in which to
act - period.  The most you can do is ask the owner of the suspected dog to
control its behavior and keep it off your property.  (Try to be tactful.)
           
If you have repeatedly complained about a destructive dog, done everything
reasonable to get the owner to control the animal, and the dog still terrorizes
or kills your animals on your property, I personally would have no ethical or
moral problems with you warning the neighbor that the next time you see the dog
on your property you will kill it - and then following through on the threat.
Your legal position would probably be shakier than your moral position,
depending on your local laws.  (Putting out poison that may harm other animals
is not an acceptable means of defending your property, and is often times
explicitly illegal.  Make your action specific - and don't miss.) 
                                         
- Chris

    Re: .57
      
    Chris,
      You make some good points.  I agree with most everything you are
    saying, givin the particular scenarios. As you stated, cats in some
    locals are treated different then dogs.  They can be thought
    of more as a feral animal, rather then a domestic one, and can 
    consequently be treated as such.  Would you agree that since
    all songbirds are protected species (ie: cannot be legally hunted),
    that the landowner has the moral (and perhaps legal) right to protect
    them from domestic or feral animals which are threatening them?  Suppose
    a neighbors cat or dog is continualy killing birds (which are
    protected)on my property and the owner has ignored all attempts
    on my part to fix the problem.  The law has been of no help either
    for what ever reason you want to give.  What would be my alternatives
    and where would I stand morally and legally if I chose to defend
    my property in a lethal manner?
    
    Jeff  
       

    In English law, wildlife is considered the property of the 
    landowner. Hence, the Lord of the land has the right to hunt on
    his own property and to prosecute uninvited hunters for theft of
    his personal wildlife property. As an asside, much of what we know
    today about wildlife habitat requirements was learned because
    neighboring landowners worked to attract game by providing better
    habitat than the guy next door.
    
    While you may be inclined to protect the songbirds and other wildlife
    on your property, the English system does not apply in the US. Wildlife
    is public and not the physical property of the landowner. Therefore,
    you may not claim damages for wild animals molested on your land.
    
    Now let's talk about about natural selection (ie. of the fittest).
    A healthy, wary, wild animal is far less likely to be taken down
    by a predator (eg. cat, dog) than a less fit animal. If the less
    fit of the species reproduce successfully, "hybrid vigor" is reduced
    in the offspring. In short, don't waste your tears on a dead
    hummingbird. Since few housecats are effecient hunters, only the
    least fit are apt to be taken.
    
    None of this has anything to do with cat killing dogs or domestic
    or wild animals poisoned or otherwise destroyed by irresponsible
    people. 
    
    

    re: .58 .59
    	I recall reading a New Jersey newspaper article not too long
    ago which discussed the case of a man who shot a neighbors cat in
    his yard in order to protect the birds there.  In N.J. it seems,
    it is legal for a GAME WARDEN to do away with any animal (domestic
    included) that he/she feels is a threat to any protected species
    of wildlife (MANY birds are in N.J.!).  The cat's owner took him
    to court intending to sue him for killing her pet, but alas the
    law was upheld, and he was not punished.  I remember now that the
    reason that this case was being re-publicized was that one of the
    state politicians had proposed taking that law off the books in
    order to protect peolples pets who (apparently) do not do sufficient
    harm to wildlife to warrent their destruction for it.  
    	
    	As for laws about keeping your animals confined - many cities
    do have leash laws for cats as well as dogs.  The town I live in
    not only requires that any pet be leashed while out of doors, it
    also requires that a person have no more than 4 pets.  These laws
    are instituted so that there is a way of legally dealing with offenders
    who are not responsible with their animals.  If your area does not
    have such laws then you must work within the confines of the laws
    that do exist, which, unfortunately often means that you have no
    recourse if someone else's pet does damage to your property or your
    pets.  Oh, well....
    
    Have a Happy New Year everyone!!!! HUG YOUR CATS TODAY!!!!!
    
    Molly

    Missed a small but important point - 
    	
    	The guy in .60 who killed his neighbors cat, was a game warden....
    

I probably should have put a disclaimer on .57.  I am not a lawyer (thank
goodness!) so anybody actually using my opinions in court for any reason
whatsoever is probably deserving of what they get.  I'm not going to take any
of the responsibility or share in the consequences of such actions.  

I can't emphasize it enough.  CHECK OUT YOUR LOCAL LAWS. 

Having said that: 
                                                        
re .58
                                                                 
I think .59 has most of the answers, but to be a bit more specific.  

I have no idea what the legal rights and responsibilities of a citizen are if
they see a member of a protected or endangered species illegaly killed by a
human, let alone by a domestic animal.  I doubt you are empowered to protect
the protected species through the use of lethal force.
                                                                          
Thus, songbirds not being your property, and without the bird's protected
status giving you any other privileges, I don't think you have the legal right
to destroy any animal, either cat or dog, killing birds on your property - but
you probably do have some recourse through the local animal control laws. 

Ethically, I don't know.  Kinda depends upon where you place cats or dogs with
respect to song birds on the moral scale, I guess.  The animal is guilty of
trespass, at the least.  If you feel strongly enough that the animal is
destructive and a nuisance which is not being controlled despite your best
efforts talking to the owners and the local animal control office, I suppose
it might fall under the same kind of moral guidelines as any other destructive
animal.  Warn the owner, and shoot to kill.

But you really have no legal justification for this, so don't be surprised if
you are treated as a greater criminal than the negligent pet owner.  

- Chris

    Personally, I don't hate dogs nearly as much as dog OWNERS.  Of course,
    there are exceptions, but my experience has been that the typical
    dog-owner's attitude seems to be that dog-ownership is like baseball,
    apple  pie, mom, etc., and the 'fido's' convenience far outweight that
    of their neighbors, much less their neighbor's cat.  I've lived next
    door to someone who comes home at 11:30 at night, ties her yapping
    sheltie outside, and leaves her there until she goes to sleep at 1:30
    or so.  It's not too bad in the winder, but in the summer, when the
    windows are open, it awful.  After speaking to her numerous times, I
    finally resorted to calling the police, and then the animal-control
    authorities.  Needless to say, this has resulted in tension that is
    unfortunate between neighbors.  The point I'm driving at is that if
    this kind of person has so little regard for their neighbors, how can
    you expect them to care about their cats?  (By the way, in the last
    several years, I've lived next to 3 people who did the exact same
    thing).  Fortunately, the poor little beast vanished off the face of
    the earth not to long ago ;-)

RE:  Note 227.63 by ASHBY::BEFUMO -< Strange things may happen to nasty dogs! >-

I don't think it's right to say things like "the typical dog-owner's
attitude" ... because I think you will find many people with many
attitudes and what you're saying is extremely unfair to responsible
dog owners.  Your note is quite inflammatory in this regard.  

I also think you want to be very careful about implying that dogs who
misbehave manage to disappear.  It's unfortunate, but notes written in
NOTESfiles have managed to be given to non-DEC people who might not
understand exactly what you meant by that and you might find unexpected
results.

Pam
co-moderator of FELINE

    re: dogs - Lets face it, if someone is a responsible dog owner
    you probably won't have any idea that they have a dog.  I know
    there are several dogs on our street, but all but 1 family keep
    their dogs tied up so I have no idea how many there actually are.
    That one family has ignored repeated requests to keep their dog
    tied.  Their solution seems to be to wait until late at night to
    let the dog out.  Oh well, my cats won't be out on their leashes
    at that hour so I guess this will have to do.  I consider myself
    lucky that the number of problem dogs is so low.  
      It really is a sin that the animals usually are the ones who
    suffer for the ignorance of the owners.  Like cats, dogs can be
    trained to be "good neighbors".  Keep this in mind.
      Nancy DC