34 Farm Raised Deer Killedby Dogs

[BuckUp]

34 Farm raised Deer Killed By Dogshttp://www.wgem.com/Images/video.gif (javascript:vidUp('/Streamer/stream.php?url=/Video/playlist.php?ID=23410')) http://www.wgem.com/Images/deaddeerpictureforinternet.jpgThree dogs, all pit bull mixes, managed to kill and maul more than 30 deer in a pen.
The question now is, should the dogs' owner be held responsible for what happened?

Less than a month ago, this farm was filled with 36 deer.
Now all that's left are a frantic buck and doe. Farm Owner says, "I was just shocked it looked like a massacre."
Joe Leonardi: "I opened up the garage door and saw some white bellies, out in my deer pen and realized that a few of them were dead."
Dee Leonardi: "I just kept looking thinking okay, there is a few dead, there's a few dead, and then there were more and more and more, it was just devastating to see all of them. "
Three neighboring dogs, all pitbull mixes, got into the pen at night and killed 34 of the 36 deer.
Capt. Jimmy Shinn:"It was pretty devastating really once you arrived on the scene, seeing all the deer that were laying around and it was pretty evident, that it wasn't animals that were hungry, that were looking for something to eat, it was basically a slaying is what it was."
With the fence being up to eight feet tall, the deer couldn't escape.
Joe and Dee's bedroom window is only 50 feet from the pen, but they didn't hear any noise.
Joe Leonardi: "I didn't hear dogs barking, or deer crashing into any of the fences or any of that."
The Leonardi family has been raising deer for eight years. Their herd was valued at 40-to-60 thousand dollars. They had hoped to sell a few to build a college fund for their children.
"We had it where we could sell about five a year, starting now and help with our college funds for our kids."
Joe Leonardi shot and killed the three dogs and will not be charged, the decision has not been made whether the dog owner will be charged.


Araceli Pedroza, apedroza@wgem.com

[Art]

I didn't know deer were worth almost $2000 each?

[treerat]

HECK YEA THE OWNER SHOULD BE RESPONSABLE,,,

[killinmammals]

I'd say the owner should be responsable. Who would have ever thought just a regular deer was worth so much...:confused:

[Duster]

Just curious how the dog's got into the pen in the first place ???

[ril7572]

With the fence being up to eight feet tall, the deer couldn't escape.



Maybe there's a lesson to be learned here:rolleyes:

[scratch]

While I don't agree with deer being kept as livestock...Theres no doubt in my mind that the dog owners will be found liable for these losses.If the owner has done all that is reasonable to keep their livestock safe and with the nature of the pitbull and pitbull mixes,then it looks to me like the dog owner had better have good insurance or deep pockets....what a waste

several years ago this happened to the goat herd that Itchy raised at my dads house...pitbulls killed 8 or 9 nannies in one night.The nannies were in the barn and the dogs dug into the barn and went on a killing spree...dogs were killed and the owner had to pay for the goats.

[kytrapper]

Most definitely should have to pay if they own up to owning them. The problem I have in Whitley County is nobody seems to own all these free roaming dogs. I had twenty chickens killed last year one day and none of the neighbors had ever seen the dogs before.

[AteUp]

Maybe there's a lesson to be learned here:rolleyes:

That's what I was thinking. The dogs were being dogs and chasing deer like they always do, only the deer couldn't run away like they always do.

[Allison77]

I would like to see the daddy buck making these baby's at $1500 a piece. I just may be in the wrong line of work!:D I might just have to quit killing and go to catching.

[maxcam]

That's what I was thinking. The dogs were being dogs and chasing deer like they always do, only the deer couldn't run away like they always do.

What part of the dog makes it act like a "dog"........Once upon a time "dogs" were wild animals werent they?

Dominion of all animals is a God given right the way I read the book of Genesis......Chapter 1 verse 26 if Im not mistaken.....

[Art]

I don't know about what the bible says, but I really can't think of an instance where animals are harming either game animals or domesticated animals that can't be traced back to the stupidity of man.

It's just not acceptable on this forum for people to place the blame on anything BUT the animal from what I have seen over the years, unless we're talking about hunting dogs or what not who are rarely ever at fault.

IMO, the blame for this should go directly to the dogs owner.

[Bigspringhunter07]

I say there is no need for pitbulls period.. or rottweilers ..

[barney]

I don't know about what the bible says, but I really can't think of an instance where animals are harming either game animals or domesticated animals that can't be traced back to the stupidity of man.

It's just not acceptable on this forum for people to place the blame on anything BUT the animal from what I have seen over the years, unless we're talking about hunting dogs or what not who are rarely ever at fault.

IMO, the blame for this should go directly to the dogs owner.
I disagree on the first part! I have had dog damage, and witnessed how dogs act when away from home. They are BLOOD THIRSTY KILLERS! And I have watched several different breeds also, not just the "aggressive" breeds. One of the worst I had was a neighbors beagle. So I could not blame the "stupidity of man".

I agree, its not the animals fault, thats just what they do(though most dog owners think their sweet baby, could never act in this manner) they do! The owner of the dogs are liable, for not keeping their pets under control.

[newshooter05]

i have seen hogs cut up on there hams like someone used a razor on them cause when a dog bites it pulls back . dogs chase hogs and cattle for fun most times and in a pack any dog becomes as aggresive mostly as the pack leader.anyone who thinks a dogs owner is not responsable for its actions when loose is mistaken . being penned wild animals might make some differance to a judge but i can't see why.
david

[Bray]

I say there is no need for pitbulls period.. or rottweilers ..

I agree with that completely. A Rot or Pit serves no other purpose than to attack. They are no better companions than any other dog. These agressive breeds are nothing but trouble. I have never understood why someone would want one of these dogs.

[Hammer]

Just curious how the dog's got into the pen in the first place ???

Maybe there's a lesson to be learned here:rolleyes:


http://www.madjacksports.com/forum/images/smilies/00x12.gif http://www.madjacksports.com/forum/images/smilies/00x12.gifhttp://www.madjacksports.com/forum/images/smilies/00x3.gif

[thunderchicken09]

I say kill all pitbulls and rotwielers then things like this wouldn't happen.

[kytrapper]

Those are both notorious breeds but ANY dogs that pack together cause trouble with livestock. I have a large chow mix problem but I've seen beagles leading the deer running pack to half bird dogs. people need to keep their dogs up or be responsible for their damage.

[biggun]

Guys it doesn't have to be a pit or rotty to be aggressive with livestock. A few years ago we had a young calf attacked. Luckily the attack was stopped before it was badly hurt. Guess what the breeds were. Two collies and a cow mix. It was the collies that were the aggressors.

[Rat]

I agree with that completely. A Rot or Pit serves no other purpose than to attack. They are no better companions than any other dog. These agressive breeds are nothing but trouble. I have never understood why someone would want one of these dogs.

Wow, you guys are showing your true ignorance. Rottweilers are considered to bite less than Jack Russells, Beagles, Chows, Schnauzers, and most of the small dog breeds. The CDC is acting like the Global Warming freaks by claiming that all Rotts, Pits, and Chows need to be destroyed. There has been no proof about a correlation in the breed of a dog and it's natural born aggressiveness. Some dogs are bigger and stronger than others. And individual dogs are raised differently than others. I have been bit a lot more times by small little pipsqueek dogs than I have been by larger dogs. It is all how the dog is raised. The owners of small dogs tend to encourage the dog to bark and be aggressive to strangers. They play with them rougher and are less likely to scold the dog for using its mouth and teeth to play. If even 10% of the large dogs played like 90% of the small dogs with people, all large dogs would be outlawed. It has also been proven that dogs that are chained up or penned up for many hours each day become naturally more agressive. Any dog can be trained to kill or bite. Any dog that is abused or neglected can become agressive. Rotts have well been known to be great dogs with kids and are very loyal when they are raised properly. I have also known 3 people that owned pit bulls as house dogs. Not one of those dogs has ever even bared it's teeth to me even when I played with them. The problem is with the dogs owners and not the dogs themselves. People who mistreat their animals or train them to kill are ignorant inbred SOB's.

[Art]

Wow, you guys are showing your true ignorance. Rottweilers are considered to bite less than Jack Russells, Beagles, Chows, Schnauzers, and most of the small dog breeds. The CDC is acting like the Global Warming freaks by claiming that all Rotts, Pits, and Chows need to be destroyed. There has been no proof about a correlation in the breed of a dog and it's natural born aggressiveness. Some dogs are bigger and stronger than others. And individual dogs are raised differently than others. I have been bit a lot more times by small little pipsqueek dogs than I have been by larger dogs. It is all how the dog is raised. The owners of small dogs tend to encourage the dog to bark and be aggressive to strangers. They play with them rougher and are less likely to scold the dog for using its mouth and teeth to play. If even 10% of the large dogs played like 90% of the small dogs with people, all large dogs would be outlawed. It has also been proven that dogs that are chained up or penned up for many hours each day become naturally more agressive. Any dog can be trained to kill or bite. Any dog that is abused or neglected can become agressive. Rotts have well been known to be great dogs with kids and are very loyal when they are raised properly. I have also known 3 people that owned pit bulls as house dogs. Not one of those dogs has ever even bared it's teeth to me even when I played with them. The problem is with the dogs owners and not the dogs themselves. People who mistreat their animals or train them to kill are ignorant inbred SOB's.

I agree with you in theory, but it has been proven time and time again that pitbulls tend to be much more dangerous than other dogs, especially towards other animals, I have firsthand experience.. I agree that people can make or break a dog's personality BUT would you rather have a Jack Russell running loose in your neighborhood or a pitbull?

It's not so much about how mean or aggressive a particular breed of dog is, it's what the dog can accomplish when it becomes aggressive. Pitbulls have the abilty to kill almost any animal they will encounter, and that goes for people as well. Small dogs do not.

Since it's a fact we cannot stop the actions of ignorant people, perhaps we can take away some of their tools. I don't think Pitbulls should be banned because of what they are, I think they should be banned because of what people make them. It's rare to go a week or more without hearing of a story involving a pitbull attack around here.

[trust me]

I agree with you in theory, but it has been proven time and time again that pitbulls tend to be much more dangerous than other dogs, especially towards other animals, I have firsthand experience.. I agree that people can make or break a dog's personality BUT would you rather have a Jack Russell running loose in your neighborhood or a pitbull?

It's not so much about how mean or aggressive a particular breed of dog is, it's what the dog can accomplish when it becomes aggressive. Pitbulls have the abilty to kill almost any animal they will encounter, and that goes for people as well. Small dogs do not.

Since it's a fact we cannot stop the actions of ignorant people, perhaps we can take away some of their tools. I don't think Pitbulls should be banned because of what they are, I think they should be banned because of what people make them. It's rare to go a week or more without hearing of a story involving a pitbull attack around here.


I disagree entirely. Pitbulls are capable of mayhem because of the strong builds but any large dog can kill. The meanest dog I ever encountered was a Golden Retriever that was pretty enough to be on the Alpo commercials. Yet he was a killer. Just like guns, if you let them ban one kind, it's very hard to draw a hard and fast line to keep them from banning more.

If you own a dog, you are responsible for it, period. Whether you are hunting or at home, your dog can get in trouble and you have to bear the load. Everytime I take my setter out, I run the risk that she'll kill somebody's chicken, or chase their cat, or maul their child. She's never shown the urge to do any of those things, but if something clicks in her mind, if her deeply hidden wolf genes suddenly turn on, who knows what can happen.

A pitbull is like an assault rifle. It's only as dangerous as the person behind it. Too many punks get a pitbull for the same reason they flash their weapons around: they want everyone to see what a badazz they are and they want to show off.

Throwing irresponsible pet owners in jail would be a lot more effective in protecting the public than banning the ownership of particular breeds.

[Bray]

Wow, you guys are showing your true ignorance. Rottweilers are considered to bite less than Jack Russells, Beagles, Chows, Schnauzers, and most of the small dog breeds. The CDC is acting like the Global Warming freaks by claiming that all Rotts, Pits, and Chows need to be destroyed. There has been no proof about a correlation in the breed of a dog and it's natural born aggressiveness. Some dogs are bigger and stronger than others. And individual dogs are raised differently than others. I have been bit a lot more times by small little pipsqueek dogs than I have been by larger dogs. It is all how the dog is raised. The owners of small dogs tend to encourage the dog to bark and be aggressive to strangers. They play with them rougher and are less likely to scold the dog for using its mouth and teeth to play. If even 10% of the large dogs played like 90% of the small dogs with people, all large dogs would be outlawed. It has also been proven that dogs that are chained up or penned up for many hours each day become naturally more agressive. Any dog can be trained to kill or bite. Any dog that is abused or neglected can become agressive. Rotts have well been known to be great dogs with kids and are very loyal when they are raised properly. I have also known 3 people that owned pit bulls as house dogs. Not one of those dogs has ever even bared it's teeth to me even when I played with them. The problem is with the dogs owners and not the dogs themselves. People who mistreat their animals or train them to kill are ignorant inbred SOB's.

This isn't my first go round with this topic. http://www.kentuckyhunting.net/forums/showthread.php?t=42775&highlight=Bull&page=7

Don't call me ignorant on this becuase I have facts to back it up. Pitts and Rotts make up 74% of attacks and maimings. See the Clifton study here http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf.

The Clifton Study was an indepth study on dog attacks, maimings, and fatalities. There is some interesting data here.

I am not going to argue over this, the last thread went almost 10 pages. The fact is that Rotweilers and Pittbulls have a greater propensity to attack then other dogs all things being equal. There is no need to have these breeds of dogs. They provide nothing that a different breed cannot provide. I will agree that a lot of the problem is in how the dog is raised but then again a lot of it is in the breed itself. Pitts and Rotts have been bred to attack. That is their purpose, same as a beagles is to run a rabbit. No matter how you raised it, you couldn't trust a beagle in a rabbit pen the same as you can't trust a Pitt around people. Last time I checked I haven't seen a basset hound on "When Animals Attack".

[redneck1377]

basset hound may not be train as an attack dog which is a good thing consider how strong their jaw muscles are , I have seem them finish bones pretty quick

[quackrstackr]

I am not going to argue over this, the last thread went almost 10 pages. The fact is that Rotweilers and Pittbulls have a greater propensity to attack then other dogs all things being equal. There is no need to have these breeds of dogs. They provide nothing that a different breed cannot provide. I will agree that a lot of the problem is in how the dog is raised but then again a lot of it is in the breed itself. Pitts and Rotts have been bred to attack. That is their purpose, same as a beagles is to run a rabbit. No matter how you raised it, you couldn't trust a beagle in a rabbit pen the same as you can't trust a Pitt around people. Last time I checked I haven't seen a basset hound on "When Animals Attack".

You sound like a staunch gun control advocate....

Pits and Rotts probably show up on those reports more than others because there are more of them that have been nurtured to be that way. But, I give about as much credence to that report that you keep throwing out as I do eyewitness black panther reports on this forum.


Reports are logged as received, and the current log is printed out as
requested. Compiled by the editor of ANIMAL PEOPLE from press accounts
since 1982,


An animal rights organization list compiled from press accounts... :rolleyes:

[KYHUNTER14]

I had a pit bull when I was a little kid. He was as gentle and as meek as a kitten to me and my family. He was also as strong as a bull and would send any dog that came to the yard out in a hurry. That is just how he was.

I don't think any breed of dog should be banned. I read this and immediately thought of the comparison to banning uzis and AK 47s. I am glad Trust Me brought it up. It saved me from typing it.

I do agree that Rotts and Pits are probably the most dangerous dogs just because of their strength and build and ferocity in certain situations.

I do not disagree that they are responsible for more attacks and maimings than any other dog, but the reason for this is largely because it takes them very little time to do damage whereas some other dogs have to prolong attacks to hurt people

Funny that basset hounds came up, because I knew a family who had one. The son (he was 17 or 18) was messing with him one day and Sammy flat tore the kids face up. I mean reconstructive surgery.

Any dog can do damage, and some are obviously more capable than others, but if you start banning them, where does it stop? Pits and Rotts today, Boxers and Chows next week. Coonhounds and Fox dogs after that.

[JP]

Animals require proper training and ownership or else they act like animals. "Aggressive" breeds or dogs that have a record of vicious attacks require even more---and it requires more thorough ownership, such as containment. I read somewhere that early Pitbulls were used to help cattle farmers herd large bulls....the dogs were trained to bite the bull's nose and hold it so the farmer could work with it. The fact that our more modern pits have been trained to fight, etc is truly sad...but I don't think that gives us right to make the breed extinct either. (and yes, I know some Pit's ancestors were trained to fight too) I can't stand seeing dog bites happen....and of the ones I've had to work with over the years, several aggressive breeds bites were pretty ugly especially with children involved. I always squirm and get mal feelings for those breeds too when those days come. But all in all, no doubt smaller dogs take the cake with the sheer quantity of bites that occur--some of those aren't pretty either. :o

[Bray]

You sound like a staunch gun control advocate....

Pits and Rotts probably show up on those reports more than others because there are more of them that have been nurtured to be that way. But, I give about as much credence to that report that you keep throwing out as I do eyewitness black panther reports on this forum.



An animal rights organization list compiled from press accounts... :rolleyes:

The report is what it is, find a different report we can go by that. You are right in that Rotts and Pitts are probably there because they are nurtured that way. I guess I don't have as much against the dogs themselves as type of people that own them. They go hand in hand I guess. Oppinions are oppinions I guess.

As for the gun control comment I find that laughable.

[Art]

You guys are all correct, but you're only fooling yourselves by claiming that pitbulls are no more dangerous than any other breed. All dogs are capable of harm, but pitbulls are on another level.

There are general rules and there are always exceptions to those rules. You may know of a Chihuahua that can rival Hitler, or you may know of a pitbull that goes around licking butterflies and kittens. It doesn't change reality.

The reality is that pitbulls have become a status symbol for poor, ignorant people who cannot take care of themselves, let alone a dog with a naturally violent disposition, capable of killing just about anything. The reality is that there are FAR more attacks vicious attacks on people and animals comitted by pitbulls then there are Golder retrievers or Labs which are far more common as pets. It is not only because of the owners, but it is because of the natural tendencies of the dog itself.

I have been aropund pitbulls a lot in my life. I've had many friends that have owned them, and I have kept one of my friends pit after his apartment complex said it must go. I have even taken in 2 stray pits that I found roaming my street. They CAN be good dogs, but very few people I have EVER come across that have owned one had any trust in it around children or other animals. They might tell you they do, but they usually don't in reality. I never have. Nearly all of the people that I have known who owned one ended up having to get rid of the dog after some sort of close call.

Some of you sound like you don't have a problem with pitbulls, but I guarandamntee you that if you had someone move in next door that had a dog, you'd much prefer it to be just about any other dog besides a pitbull. Everytime you let your dog or cat out, or your small child went out to play it WOULD be in the back of your mind and that's not because you believe all dogs are equal.;)

[turkeytalker]

You guys are all correct, but you're only fooling yourselves by claiming that pitbulls are no more dangerous than any other breed. All dogs are capable of harm, but pitbulls are on another level.

There are general rules and there are always exceptions to those rules. You may know of a Chihuahua that can rival Hitler, or you may know of a pitbull that goes around licking butterflies and kittens. It doesn't change reality.

The reality is that pitbulls have become a status symbol for poor, ignorant people who cannot take care of themselves, let alone a dog with a naturally violent disposition, capable of killing just about anything. The reality is that there are FAR more attacks vicious attacks on people and animals comitted by pitbulls then there are Golder retrievers or Labs which are far more common as pets. It is not only because of the owners, but it is because of the natural tendencies of the dog itself.

I have been aropund pitbulls a lot in my life. I've had many friends that have owned them, and I have kept one of my friends pit after his apartment complex said it must go. I have even taken in 2 stray pits that I found roaming my street. They CAN be good dogs, but very few people I have EVER come across that have owned one had any trust in it around children or other animals. They might tell you they do, but they usually don't in reality. I never have. Nearly all of the people that I have known who owned one ended up having to get rid of the dog after some sort of close call.

Some of you sound like you don't have a problem with pitbulls, but I guarandamntee you that if you had someone move in next door that had a dog, you'd much prefer it to be just about any other dog besides a pitbull. Everytime you let your dog or cat out, or your small child went out to play it WOULD be in the back of your mind and that's not because you believe all dogs are equal.;)


Good post.

[ptbrauch]

Since it's a fact we cannot stop the actions of ignorant people, perhaps we can take away some of their tools. I don't think GUNS should be banned because of what they are, I think they should be banned because of what people make them. It's rare to go a week or more without hearing of a story involving a GUN attack around here.

Interesting how just changing one word, we've all heard this argument before.

[quackrstackr]

As for the gun control comment I find that laughable.

Interesting how just changing one word, we've all heard this argument before.

I didn't mean that you were one, ptbrauch just did a better job of drawing the similarities than I did.

[turkeytalker]

I really don't think you can compare guns and dogs,i have never had one of my guns decide it wanted to shoot something and break out of the safe:confused:.

Personally i hate mean dogs, any type, and will dispatch one with any aggression towards my kids. I don't care what kind of dog a person wants but if you have a pit bull it should guarded more closely than guns because it has a mind of its own, and frequently they like to chew on people.

[Art]

Interesting how just changing one word, we've all heard this argument before.

We're not talking about guns here, were talking about a living animal with a beating heart and a mind of it's own, not an inanimate piece of steel. It's not even CLOSE to being the same argument.

[Bray]

I didn't mean that you were one, ptbrauch just did a better job of drawing the similarities than I did.

I know what yo were saying, it just made me chuckle at the similarities.

[chancey021]

Have you all seen the prices of these high fenced hunts? People raise those deer and sell them for those hunts. Most of the time you find them being raised at the place you pay to hunt.
http://www.thunderhillranch.com this is one place where they sell deer and hunts. Thats why there is up to $20,000.00 price tag on some deer. They are NOT wild or at least not completly wild.

[barney]

Have you all seen the prices of these high fenced hunts? People raise those deer and sell them for those hunts. Most of the time you find them being raised at the place you pay to hunt.
http://www.thunderhillranch.com this is one place where they sell deer and hunts. Thats why there is up to $20,000.00 price tag on some deer. They are NOT wild or at least not completly wild.
But, they look just like a wild deer, when their hanging on the wall.;)

[Buford]

Wow, you guys are showing your true ignorance. ...The CDC is acting like the Global Warming freaks by claiming that all Rotts, Pits, and Chows need to be destroyed.

Right. Only Pits and Chows need to be destroyed.
Even Mr Fabulous up their in the avatar agrees.