An Exceptional Dog

at

Screen Shot 2015-04-12 at 23.21.32
Anthony writes:

Welcome to Wicklow – sign by a farmer placed on coilte land, on the Wicklow Way saying who is welcome on national parks and wildlife (ie public) land (brockagh mountain) and threatening to shoot ur dog. Mine DNGAF as u can see.

51 thoughts on “An Exceptional Dog

  1. Derek

    You’re as bad as the people in the Phoenix Park who let their dogs run into the specifically fenced and sign posted bird nesting areas. There is a point to the sign being placed there, hope you kept the dog leashed.

    1. Mister Mister

      You tool.

      Those signs are put up by the OPW who look after the Phoenix Park.
      That sign is put up by someone on public land who has no right to it.

      1. Nigel

        So you’re mad because the sign is unauthorised or unofficial, rather than at the content? Fair enough, I suppose.

    2. pissedasanewt

      Or as bad as the people who wander up to the deer to take pictures of them. Get as close as possible until the deer start to move away because of fear. Then start throwing carrots and other bits of waste veg as them despite the no feeding signs. I saw somebody with a loaf of bread there trying to feed them. They are deer.. not ducks!!

  2. Tibor

    Remember, these are the the same farmers who shoot/ poison protected bird species “just because…” so expecting any level of sense with regards to their big proud ignorant signs is a tall order.

    While I don’t think that every dog owner should have their dog off the lead, I’m completely against farmers deciding that they can enforce their personal preference by killing any animal they have elected to have an imaginary grievence with; keeping in mind that the sign doesn’t even say that the dog needs to be off the lead for this guy to shoot it, just that the land is not for dogs.

    1. Weedless

      The sign says any dog worrying sheep will be shot. If a dog is managing to worry sheep while on a leash then the owner is in no position to own a dog.

    2. Joe the Lion

      It’s not really working like that. Sheep can become concerned even at the sight of a dog so whether it’s on a lead is a big factor in the mountains. As the others said even in “Coillte” land there are pockets of privately held holdings and also, some farmers have grazing rights on commonage. I live near there, I love my dog and also sheep and I think it’s a case of using a bit of common sense for all concerned.

  3. Donal

    Keep your dog on a leash and everyone will be happy. You should not be letting dogs off a leash in a public area. The National Park is in existence to protect wildlife and landscape, it is not a back garden for you to let your dog run havoc. Lambing season is upon us over the last few months and a dog can seriously stress out a sheep which may cause the loss of a lamb or number of lambs which will affect the farmer’s livelihood. In worse case your dog may kill the sheep. You may see the dog as a harmless pet but remember the dog is naturally a hunter and especially if it is a city dog it may not be use to the country side and may let its natural instincts take over when it sees sheep. No name calling or whistling will stop a dog if this is the case.

    It is best to keep it on a leash and then everyone can enjoy the Wicklow Way and the farmers can continue grazing the lands like they have for years.

    1. Jess

      Of course you can let off dogs in a public area.

      Jaysus that ad from the 80s really did a number on a generations idea of dog behaviour

  4. Randy Ewing

    As a dog owner people who let their dog off leads seem to be the ones who dont pick up the poo !

    Their dogs runs off ahead, they come around the corner and their dog is standing beside a steaming pile and they dont pick it up ‘cos it might not be theirs’ !

    Super annoying, leads are the law, their are enough lesh off areas in parks to keep your dog happy.

    1. Bubbles

      Leads are not the law. The law states that animals must be kept under “effective control.” If your dog is worrying sheep it’s obviously not under effective control, but it doesn’t follow that the only way to control a dog is with a leash.
      The wording of the law could be turned around to give a headache to farmers who graze Coillte lands. Their sheep are not under effective control either…

  5. Vote Rep #1

    I did not know that it being coilte land meant that you could allow your dog to hassle pregnant sheep and lambs during lambing season. Are you also the type that allows their dog to run after the deer in the phoenix park during fowling season? I know they have lots of signs warning people not to but its public land so by your superb logic, you can do what you want.

    1. Mister Mister

      Do you have issues with comprehension ? Where did the guy said anything about him having a right to let his dog chase after sheep or do what he wants ?

      1. Vote Rep #1

        The bit where he said that he and his dog didn’t give a fup to the request to keep away from the sheep?

          1. Vote Rep #1

            Maybe if that was not what you meant, you should have phrased it a bit better since that is what the vast majority of people took from it. Just a thought.

  6. Anomanomanom

    So could I shoot the farmer because I don’t like the fact the sign might stress me out.

  7. CousinJack

    This has been legally correct for about 200 years! Farmers can shot dogs on their land (they don’t have to be worrying sheep just in the same field as any livestock)
    Perhaps the length that such laws have been required indicates that some dog owners have never been responsible

    1. Mister Mister

      Again, someone with comprehension issues. It’s not their land, according the the guy it’s on NPWS land. I don’t think the NPWS has been around as long as you’re implying.

      1. Clampers Outside!

        There’s bits of private land in there too remember and farmers have permission to use the NPWS and have a right to protect their sheep with an Ed 209 in a tutu if that’s what they so desire.

        1. Mister Mister

          I fully agree that they have a right to protect their livestock. But that sign is ridiculously aggressive, and only serves to rile people up.

          1. CapallDubh

            It’s possibly quite aggressive because that farmer has had sheep worried by livestock before. Imagine your dog had its innards ripped out by another dog while it was still alive – that’s what has probably happened to this farmer’s sheep in the past. I think you’d be pretty aggressive after that! Unfortunately there are a minority of dogowners who continue to ignore the dangers of walking their dogs offleash through sheep when its lambing season. Don’t be riled up by the sign – be riled up that’s its necessary to grab the attention of irresponsible dogowners.

  8. Weedless

    Farmers still use that land for grazing and are entitled to shoot any dog worrying sheep. Also don’t forget the parts of the Wicklow Way that cut through private land that the same farmers you’re complaining about happily allow people to use.
    Then there’s the idiots who allow their dogs to chase deer and shit all over the place introducing who knows what parasites that aren’t typical to the animals of the area.

  9. rotide

    “ur”, “DNGAF”.

    You’re not sending us a text message Anthony. Will you be more formal when you submit the article about your shot dog?

  10. Gavin

    What if you have complete control of over your dog and are responsible owner who walks your dog of the leash. ( and picks up it sh*t) Agree that if its worrying sheep the farmer has a right to shoot it, but dont agree that everyone should always walk their dog on a leash, some dogs need to be of leash to fully exercise them. But if you cant have it return on command you should have it on a leash.

    1. TheMightyOne

      farmer isn’t going to shoot a dog who is politely walking beside its owner.

      I love dogs but would shoot one that was worrying my fathers sheep, it’s really horrible seeing miscarriages and still births afterwards and really depressing for the farmer.

      and in response to another post above, most farmers actually enjoy seeing animals being reintroduced as they love nature

  11. shitferbrains

    A study in England and Wales discovered that the majority of dogs worrying sheep were farmers dogs not secured at night. Like, what do farmers think ? That town dogs meet up at the GPO and agree to toddle off for a ten mile jaunt into the countryside ?

    1. Mister Mister

      Do you not remember that scary animated ad from the early 80s on that? I think they got the last 65 to Blessington and bathed in the lakes afterwards to wash the blood away.

    2. B Hewson

      I read a study from Scotland and the Faroe Islands which contradicts this. Kill the feral mutts.

  12. ahjayzis

    Fermer Joe didn’t shtay behind on de ferm ind mirry his sister jest so ye cishy slickers could worry his auld sheep so he did nosh now, so he didn’t.

  13. Mr. T.

    Any gobshite who is too stupid to control their dog can take responsibility for someone shooting it.

    Some half witted fools treat their dogs like they are people and assume they have the rights of humans. They f*cking well don’t and if a dog is a threat to valuable livestock or people, one has a right to defend themselves by killing the dog.

    1. TheMightyOne

      spot on.

      it’s akin to letting your child play in the traffic. except it isn’t a child, it’s a dog

    2. ahjayzis

      Any cabbage-stinking, social welfare-leeching yokel who shoots my Jake will have his house and outbuildings razed to the ground, his fields burned and salted and his sister-wife sold to the nuns. The mean kind of nuns.

      Fair warning! ;)

  14. Truth in the News

    The Farmer has right to protect his livestock, in this instance he owns the
    parcel of land where the sheep are grazing and a dog in a public place must be
    restrained and if his/her owner allows it to enter private property without permission
    its trespass which is now a criminal offence rather than civil tort originally.

Comments are closed.