Dog killed sheep

[gottobehavemyself]

I know how awful this is, trust me. I also know that it's not his fault - he should never have been in the position to kill the sheep.

My in laws' 18 month old german pointer got into the farmers' field and killed two sheep. He's previously killed a peacock. Is there any coming back from this? Can this be trained out of them?

He's partially trained for day to day stuff but still a real handful and unpredictable with regards to his recall. They've had dogs for years, trained big and similarly bred dogs from puppies but they have struggled with this one from day one. I think they've underestimated the breed in terms of size and strength, and over estimated their own ability, given their age and other commitments.

Really I want to know if this can be sorted out or if he needs to be euthanised. I (know nothing about dogs) suggested he's never off the lead and wears a muzzle in the short term while they figure out what to do. Anyone with any experience of a similar situation? Any helpful advice or stories welcome

Off the top of my head - secure fields with proper livestock fencing, indoor arenas to do things like agility, using a 50/100m long line to let them run in "safe" open spaces, or sports like CaniCross or BikeJor - which are both great for high energy dogs who have poor recall or high prey drives.

I don't disagree, these are all great. But they don't prepare you for when you're out for a walk and come across livestock escaped from a field. The reality is that this dog cannot be off its lead again unless the owners get some help from a trainer who is well versed in dealing with these issues. Because it has now killed and probably began eating sheep, if it so much as smells a sheep a mile off it will be gone.

And lots of dogs live perfectly happy lives on leads except for in controlled situations. It's not the nightmare some people are so keen to make it out to be.

@whataboutsecondbreakfast true, if people are willing to keep it up and make sure their dog never slips a lead etc then fair enough. But this is a GSP, it probably is a nightmare for the dog to be kept on a line constantly.

Why is it so dreadful to do live stock aversion training with an e-collar responsibly to prevent this dog from harming more live stock and likely itself? Dogs aren't toddlers, they will go through barbed wire and massive cover to get to prey, especially ones that have blood thirst, they are not humans and we should respect that they are predators living in our houses. Great pets, but they are predators.

I just wouldn't feel comfortable putting my dog through that and would never, ever advocate for it either. I don't believe we should be using aversive training on dogs - humans should be better than that.

I also don't believe that you can eCollar train a dog and have it be a guaranteed success. I've read lots of stories of dogs in the states who are eCollar trained and have ignored the shocks because their prey drive is so powerful. So why put your dog through something painful and aversive when it may not even fix the problem?

Because it is not that simple. A dog high on adrenalin chasing sheep would often work through the e collar.

The dog would have to always be wearing the ecollar and owner ready to use it. In the OP example I doubt the owner would have finger on the remote when in a "safe" field.

Ecollars can also increase general anxiety in dogs and that would make them more likely to chase and act on predatory motor patterns eg chase

The dog with our sheep riped its own stomach on the barbed wire fence but still came back to chase the sheep when it was recovered.

So pain was inflicted on the dog and it did not work same principle as ecollars

@whataboutsecondbreakfast when you were a teenager did you do absolutely everything your parents wanted you to do only because they were really nice to you when you made a good choice? Probably not. There was probably a consequence for misbehaving. I agree that reward based training adds and enhances behaviour, but it does not rectify poor behaviour. That's why many people will find that their dog walks brilliantly on a lead when it has a rasher of bacon held above its nose but can't do it when faced with a distraction of higher value.
Any tool can be misused, e collars can be and are misused, but not by all and they can be an extremely effective training tool for live stock and prey chasers, they can be a life line for dogs like that.

I'd rather keep my dog on a lead for life than ever use an eCollar on him. I don't do punishment based training no matter what the reason.

You're not going to persuade me otherwise I'm afraid.

The dog would have to always be wearing the ecollar and owner ready to use it. In the OP example I doubt the owner would have finger on the remote when in a "safe" field.

@ShouldIknowthisalready the same applies to holding the end of a 3000m long line, will they really always have that dog under control of a lead? Unlikely.
There is more to e-collar training than letting the dog off to chase sheep and dialling it up to 100 but okay..

Could you link to the studies/evidence please?
ta

@FurAndFeathers to which part? Ta

This is a useful article outlining many reasons why this thread will go on forever and ever, until it is recognised that every case is unique.... leerburg.com/pdf/theoryofmotivation.pdf

Thanks @Lisette3 very useful.

Ecollars are illegal in Wales and Scotland . The final stages of them becoming illegal in England was shelved in the recent parliamentary changes but due to go to House of Lords

So pity the sheep in Wales and Scotland if ecollars are the only way to prevent sheep deaths. Welsh and Scottish dog owners may have to resort to using a lead

@ShouldIknowthisalready they are not banned in Scotland. So pity you, for your incompetence in finding out facts.

www.farminguk.com/news/amp/dog-attacks-on-sheep-due-to-failed-e-collar-training-ban_60113.html

This article quotes data from a national police report.

Again, I will say that you could be walking your dog where you believe there to be no sheep, it doesn't mean you will not come across live stock. Simply using a lead to walk past a field of sheep really is not sufficient in this case. Also, I'm sure dogs who have killed and eaten sheep, like the one the OP is referring too, will probably seek out livestock seeing as it know what a bit of mutton tastes like.

they can be an extremely effective training tool for live stock and prey chasers, they can be a life line for dogs like that.

this part please

Can anyone link to the data?

that article appears compelling but doesn’t actually state whether there’s been an increase in dogs being shot since the ban. Only that Welsh dogs are more likely than English dogs to worry sheep and be killed.

we’d need to see the actual stats over time to ascertain whether that was also the case before the ban, or not

Again, I will say that you could be walking your dog where you believe there to be no sheep, it doesn't mean you will not come across live stock. Simply using a lead to walk past a field of sheep really is not sufficient in this case.

So you keep the dog on lead at all times then 🤷🏻‍♀️ it's really not the massive imposition that you're trying to make it out to be.

I've only got a small dog now but I know for sure if he was off the lead he would chase sheep not attack them hopefully but certainly scare them and no doubt cause abortions so in rural settings he's never allowed off the lead end of...

Ok condoned by Scottish Government and legal situation withheld due to legal technicality with wording of the law so watch this space.

However the thread has gone so off thread. The issue with the dogs that attack sheep are that the owners have not taking basic precautions. These same owners are highly unlikely to train their dogs with an ecollar. (even if they did work)

From the report it states Human control not that the dogs were on a lead.

Being a sheep farmer myself all the attacks on my flock of which there are a lot - the dogs have never been on lead. The owner have not dropped the lead or the dog get away from the lead they have not been on a lead at all.

Politely asking @ferociouslychristmas you do seem to have very strong views on the subject what is your specific interest in the topic? Promoting ecollars or do you have sheep you are protecting?

I thought that data seemed unlikely @ferociouslychristmas and it is indeed bollocks. <a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.npcc.police.uk/Publication/livestock%2520worrying.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiH8__co6L8AhVGhFwKHSulB-I4ChAWegQIIRAB&usg=AOvVaw3dNsp1yLMVKAjXKKdVHoou" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">This reportwhich it is based on points out the police don't consistently record livestock worrying incidents across the country so the fact high levels are recorded in North Wales is more likely to be due to local priorities in recording certain offences than an actual fourfold increase in livestock worrying in North Wales over an area with an equivalent sheep population in England. I would hazard a guess Westminster records drive by mobile phone snatching more rigorously than North Wales for similar reasons. I work in forensic mental health, you would be stunned at how inconsistently crime data is recorded nationally. Which makes measuring the effectiveness of interventions for crime prevention incredibly difficult. There may be a case for e-collars (if it exists at all it is restricted to a very very small number of cases where limited use may keep a dog safe IF used by highly trained professionals ONLY). But you can't make it on the basis of that data.

So you keep the dog on lead at all times then 🤷🏻‍♀️ it's really not the massive imposition that you're trying to make it out to be.
That really depends on the dog. I have two high-drive gundogs. They'd lose their minds if never let off lead.

That's pretty bloody aversive.

Then you use secure dog fields or you walk them where you know 100% there is no livestock anywhere in the vicinity.

I walk an ex-gun dog who stays on the lead all the time as she can't be trusted not to run off after birds 🤷🏻‍♀️

She runs Cani-cross 3-4 times a week with her owner, does daily scent work in the house and is a very happy girl with an excellent life. When she walks with me, she walks quite happily on a lead and I do plenty of scent work and such with her.

It's not aversive to walk a dog on a lead to keep them safe when you can fulfil their needs in other ways. Dogs don't need daily off-lead walks to be happy and fulfilled.

Yes, ideally that's what they should get but life isn't perfect 🤷🏻‍♀️ much better a safe, happy life on a lead than an off-lead life that ends in disaster for both the owners and other people.

It's also muddling up what aversive means with inhumane, which for a psychologist, albeit a human one, is annoying. An aversive is a direct stimulus which triggers a negative response. I think most owners do use sharp tones of voice and tugs on the lead sometimes to communicate a behaviour is undesired, so most dogs are aware of aversives. The article linked to by @Lisette3 is really good on why getting into the rights and wrongs of all this is pointless as all dogs are different. Preventing a dog from having adequate exercise isn't a negative stimulus per se as the dog cannot possibly link the effect (walking on lead) to the cause (chasing sheep). It may be an inhumane way to keep a dog with high exercise needs. I am conflicted as I can absolutely see a pointer needs exercise but let's get real the owners here don't sound like they are going to take up canicross. And if there is a really active rural dog sports home out there looking for a rescue why would they want one with a history of savaging sheep? I do canicross with my dog and have had rescues but that's a big project. But I have not seen any evidence that e-collars provide a robust solution either and the danger is if they are oversold stupid owners still won't keep their dogs adequately secure at home or walk them on lead near livestock so the tragedy could repeat itself.