No equal protection for pets

Status
Not open for further replies.

carebear

Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
4,373
Location
Anchorage, AK
Well sure, you can't use 'em for bait, but can't protect 'em?

http://www.startribune.com/stories/531/5709555.html

When Marv Sherva of Coon Rapids shot at a pack of wolves that attacked his hunting dog while he and the dog were hunting ruffed grouse recently near Hibbing, he succeeded in saving his dog -- but entered a legal gray area.

We told Sherva's tale in this space last Sunday. His 7-year-old Brittany, Buck, escaped the incident with 20 stitches. The dog was working ahead of Sherva when the wolves attacked. One veered toward Sherva, he reported.

Sherva said he fired his shotgun three times, likely hitting one wolf, but all ran off. Wolves are protected under the federal Endangered Species Act.

Last week, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service officials, who haven't investigated Sherva's case, emphasized that the law doesn't allow a person to shoot a wolf, even to protect property like a hunting dog.

A wolf can only be shot to protect human life.

"There is no provision in the act or the regulations that allows for citizens to take wolves to protect their property," said Pat Lund, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service resident agent. "You can certainly scare them off, as long as it doesn't result in physical harm of a threatened species."

The law states: "Any person may take a gray wolf in Minnesota in defense of his own life or the lives of others." Lund said enforcement officers and prosecutors can use their discretion when it comes to prosecuting cases, taking specific circumstances into consideration.

It appears unlikely that Sherva will get into hot water.

"If we don't know that one was injured or killed, it's not really a law enforcement issue that we could do much with," Lund said.

He said his office investigates five to 15 cases of wolf killings in Minnesota each year. Two cases involving possible prosecution are pending at the U.S. Attorney's Office.

Wolf attacks on dogs are not unheard of. "Every year there are a number of dogs taken [by wolves]," said Phil Delphey, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologist.
 
I dont see why its an issue in any case, as he was protecting himself and the dog. The dog was just a byproduct of his protection- or so he can claim.
 
As long as his pet isn't a lamb with blood smeared on it, I don't see a problem. Nothing wrong with checking into each case though, either, to make sure they aren't baiting.

And if it's a little yappy dog in the forest, I'd have to think about it...
 
"If we don't know that one was injured or killed, it's not really a law enforcement issue that we could do much with," Lund said.
I'm pretty sure that agent Lund just said Shoot Shovel, and Shut Up
 
Is he sure they were wolves? Maybe they were just feral domestic dogs - it's hard to tell the difference sometimes. Should be no law against shooting feral dogs in a rural area... ;)

The less said the better in these instances.

BTW, FYI - FMJ is pretty poor to shoot feral dogs with... it goes right through them and they usually just run off and die somewhere out of sight.:(
 
Or, like a gang of punks, were gonna get the dog regardless and were taunting/warning the hunter, "We're a protected species, what are ya gonna do? Shoot us?"
 
If someone's trying to injure or kill my pet, I've every reason to believe I'm next.
 
my dog's part of the family as far as i'm concerned, it'd be triple s for me
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top