Hot threads > [Soapbox]

nothing proves to confirm that dogs are the cause of an attack. they are a factor that can't be ignored looking at reported cases of attack.

i guess the only way to find out is to send enough dogs, people and people with dogs across random fields and observe what happens in all the variations.

if you think that dogs even remotely may be factor then be prepared. if you think dogs don't spook anything and the reaction to that be an agressive action then good luck.

It is complex, isn't it?  Dogs, people, cows, farmers, unclear rights of way...

If only we were in North Korea - I bet they don't have these kind of issues there.

Seriously though, I don't think there is a right or wrong answer.  Cows can't help how they react, dogs can't help how cows react to them.  Only humans, with their, erm, 'intelligence', can have a meaningful input to the situation.

"Only humans, with their, erm, 'intelligence', can have a meaningful input to the situation."

Yes, and they have to have something called the law to concentrate the minds of those of them who "own" animals.

We're still on about bloody dogs.

I'm not a fan of either dogs or cattle but the law appears equal handed to be me.

You can probably take your dog on a RoW (I don't think there's any law or case law that actually confirms this but it is implicit) although farmers can shoot them if they reasonably think they're about to damage their property, it is an offence to let them worry livestock, it is also actionable in a civil case if they do so and you probably should not only keep them not only under control but ensure that they don't stray one iota from the narrowly defined line of the RoW (since it has been defined that you can take a dog on a RoW, it certainly hasn't been defined whether they're capable of trespass, but if humans can't stray they I don't see why dogs should). On the whole dog owners are  being bloody minded and daft to insist on their rights. If cattle kill you because of your dog, your estate can sue the farmer, but what use is that to you dead?

Likewise farmers can keep cows and cows with calves or tempremental cows in fields with public access, but are liable for any damage they do even if dogs are present. Even the Countryside Alliance accepts this. So they're being equally bloody minded and daft to insist on their rights.

Just an update folks.

The NFU appears to be quite relaxed about this ruling and are of the opinion that it doesnt actually alter the legal position for farmers very much if at all....

The reason why the damages have been awarded is due to the particular circumstances involved.

The NFU has issued guidance to its members reiterating what was and is good practice - before and after this case.

Been married to an ex farmers daughter but being a born and bred townie I have a foot in each field but I am extremly careful when near cattle or horses and the gaffer agrees with me, as she has seen too many people being silly in  fields with livestock in them. What I would like to know is: is their any thing on the market like the dog scareres that  will do the same to cattle? and if ist available to Joe public.

Jules aka Bat Girl wrote (see)

When I was about 11 or 12 walking our family dog on a lead localy to where I lived I was chased by Cows with calfs and ended up climbing through a barbed wire fence into a field where stubble was on fire.

Parky Again wrote (see)

virtually all attacks on members of the public involve dogs i believe so i think using the emotional blackmail of children doesn't wash.

Stats please?

A few years back Trail magazine had a feature on breeds of cows which could not be kept in the same field as a RoW.  Anyone know when this was?

I am a member of the local council access forum, and blocked RoWs are a particular bugbear. One farmer regularly seals up the walkers access with barbed wire, and another recently blocked a RoW with an electric gate and CCTV. Another has blocked the route of a RoW over his land with electric cattle fencing.

Grendel. wrote (see)

Parky Again wrote (see)

virtually all attacks on members of the public involve dogs i believe so i think using the emotional blackmail of children doesn't wash.

A few years back Trail magazine had a feature on breeds of cows which could not be kept in the same field as a RoW.  Anyone know when this was?

Jules aka Bat Girl wrote (see)

When I was about 11 or 12 walking our family dog on a lead localy to where I lived I was chased by Cows with calfs and ended up climbing through a barbed wire fence into a field where stubble was on fire.

ooh, the memories   we used to play chicken in the burning stubble. .  then they banned the burning...

stats grendel? read the papers.

as i said, you either believe that a dog has no effect on the behaviour of any other animal, especially an animal with babies, or it does. make your own mind up.

i would have thought that it would be more pertinent to cite information that suggests that animals aren't spooked by dogs and perhaps notifying breeders and users of cattle, sheep and other herding dogs that they're doing it all wrong and they shouldn't really be shooting the wolves. (either the animal or the football team although opinion may be divided upon the latter)

> stats grendel? read the papers.

I think we can say that newspaper reports count as 'anecdotal evidence', not statistics.  I think you could only claim there is statistical evidence if you can provide a reference to a dispassionate analysis of a significant number of incidents.  Preferably not one performed by the NFU, the Ramblers, or The Dog-Walkers Association of Great Britain...

steroid use in catttle has been banned across europe since the 1980s....so tha answer is probably not.

I suspect...but have no proof of this at all...that part of the answer is due to the uptake in "Holstein" breeding acrossthe industry, again since the 1980s.  As a herdsman I found the traditional Friesan, whilst tempremental, predictable to handle, whereas the Holstein had the potential for vindictive aggression (and therefore less predictable).