Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => Fishing-related Issues & News => Topic started by: nosey on February 08, 2013, 01:22:34 PM
-
As much as I've always had respect for our Conservation Officers I couldn't help but be appalled by the story of that guys dog being shot for barking at the CO on the front page of todays Province newspaper. I've always been a dog person and some of my dogs have always barked at people approaching me, dogs bark for crying out loud, that's what they do best, it shouldn't be a death sentence for barking at someone that's approaching their master. Anybody that irresponsible or that afraid of a dog barking shouldn't be allowed to pack a gun, does this mean if you armed the postmen there'd be no dogs left in the city. Give me a break, fire that idiot.
-
There is usually two sides to every story; let's hope so in this case.
-
http://www.theprovince.com/news/Burnaby+watches+horror+conservation+officer+shoots+death/7934846/story.html
Tough call on this one. Probably be more information about why they seized their fishing gear as well.
-
Two sides to every story and the province is always looking to sell papers with these headlines. The guy himself said the dog left his side so how can he say what happened, he didn't see what happened. It's unfortunate but he should have had control of his dog. I'm going to give the benefit of the doubt to the co out there by himself, it's not part if his job to get bit by a loose dog. The owner needs to accept some responsibility here and stop blaming someone else for something he could have prevented. Funny how the province doesn't report on the violations this guy was committing. Sounds like he was breaking the law, I for one appreciate the co out there conserving our resources from guys like this.
-
Good point in the article about the pepper spray the officer should have used though. Using a gun is very dangerous, who knows where the bullet would have gone...
About the violations and gear seizing, I realize the picture is from some other time but there is more than his limit of fish on that stick. I've heard east European guys brag about as many as 19 trout they've caught and kept at a time. Some of them are under the impression that the lakes are not owned by the province hence their conscience is clean (as long as they don't get caught).
I really hope the guy is genuinely sad about the dog and not faking to get a payday, it's happened before (I would know, I'm Russian and know my culture). Why else would someone go to the papers... it's not like the CO is denying it.
-
Obviously these guys were fishing illegaly and their gear was seized.
Also you are supposed to keep your dog on a leash in public places unless marked as an off leash park.
Conservation Officers have to deal with a whole bunch of "characters" all the time.
We don't know if the guy sent the dog on the officer and we know nothing about him.
Some people find it "amusing" and exciting when their dog charges someone. I've seen a lot of idiots like that.
Before we lynch the CO, let's hear his side of the story.
I have two dogs and know what a well trained dog is and every time I let my dogs off leash (and that's all the time) I know I'm risking scaring someone.
But my dogs are clearly friendly and would lick everyone to death I am not as worried that someone would shoot them.
If a dog charged me in the middle of nowhere I wouldn't hesitate to put it down.
But because I am a dog owner and can read dog body language I would probably make double sure that the dog is really aggressive.
This is something that you can't train people. They either know it, or they don't.
Some people simply fear dogs and will always overreact.
Unfortunate? Yes.
But I wouldn't lynch the CO just yet.
-
http://www.piquenewsmagazine.com/whistler/dog-shot-and-killed-by-conservation-officer/Content?oid=2450171
Here is another article.
Looks like these guys were known poachers and the dog may have been a tool for indimidation.
I'm thinking this office should be rewarded.
Who knows.
I love the Facebook crowd mouthing off instantly without knowing anything about it.
-
As a person who is a dog owner, and who also knows farmers and people who own acreages and who own dogs to protect their property I really have to question the officer's actions. I think the violation that is being explored is being over their allowable limit, but I think that will come out in court. But as far as the officer shooting the dog, give me a break. You have pepper spray, a baton to protect yourself, and a sidearm. Either the pepper spray or a well aimed whack on the nose of the dog would have sent it scampering. Failing that a warning shot will normally stop any dog in its tracks. To me this reeks of of a person not using a firearm in a responsible manner and overreacting to the situation. If he has to be fired, it is unfortunate but his actions are pretty hard to defend in my opinion.
-
I would hope this will go to the new independent commissioner. It certainly raises concerns. However you can not make judgment based on what you read in a story. I am not sure where it says they are known poachers or if has any relevance. The action of shooting a dog is at issue not their conduct. All Law enforcement has my support and I know their job can be brutal. That does not mean there are a few that act badly.
-
http://www.piquenewsmagazine.com/whistler/dog-shot-and-killed-by-conservation-officer/Content?oid=2450171
Here is another article.
Looks like these guys were known poachers and the dog may have been a tool for indimidation.
I'm thinking this office should be rewarded.
Who knows.
I love the Facebook crowd mouthing off instantly without knowing anything about it.
Nowhere in the article does it say they are known poachers. It just states that they under investigation for fishing violations.
-
Looks like the co caught a poacher. He should be commended for doing his job. I hope we get both sides of the story. I'm sure the last thing the co wanted to do was kill a dog. I doubt the province will report that the guy was poaching what's the news story in that? Kudos to our conservation officers, most of the public support the work you do. It's easy to criticize, who else is going to deal with poachers and the dangers associated. Most of these comments in this thread seem support the co. This guys story is fishy, no pun intended.
I would think a co would be the best judge of an animals behaviour. They deal with bears, cougars, wolves coyotes etc. they don't shoot animals willy nillly unless they have to, I don't see this as being any different.
-
All I can say is I am glad this C.O. does not patrol the Chillwack/Vedder River Valley. He would run out of bullets.
-
All I can say is I am glad this C.O. does not patrol the Chillwack/Vedder River Valley. He would run out of bullets.
lol... so far the best comment!!
-
http://www.theprovince.com/news/Burnaby+watches+horror+conservation+officer+shoots+death/7934846/story.html
Tough call on this one. Probably be more information about why they seized their fishing gear as well.
x2 First reactions are usually predominantly emotional, I'll wait for all the facts then judge.
-
If we are relying on the Province newspaper to report a story in an unbiased fashion, we will be waiting a long time. "Let's not let the facts get in the way of a good story".
The fact that a CO shot a dog is sad. Sad for the dog owner. Sad for the dog. Sad for the CO.
Sure the CO has other less lethal alternatives. We don't know his perception at the time, or what really happened until that information becaomes public; or why he chose lethal force over less lethal force.
Unfortunately, the dog owner gets to put his very opionated story out to the public and have a public outcry about how inappropriate it was (based on a one sided story). The CO on the other hand, gets to say nothing to the public (per Policy & Procedure), so he gets lynched before the facts are laid out before the public.
-
I am always amazed when people read an article it the newspaper and are then somehow experts on what happened... Newspaper sell controversy, no one knows what happened unless they were there. So before you can make a judgement, educate yourself and realize you dont have the information to make that judgement! The CO was in a remote setting trying to do his job, they are well trained and have to make a decision in a few seconds that people with critique over months... no CO is going to want to shoot a dog, so the fact that a dog was shot is sad for everyone involved.
-
I was fishing the Vedder two summers ago and a big dog aggressively came running toward me barking and growling and I could see 5 people sitting in lawn chairs wearing shorts and enjoying the sunny weather. They all looked toward the barking dog and me, didn't get up or move or call the dog back at all and some of them laughed at how their dog was scaring the big bad fisherman.
I shouted to them to call their dog because I said I will give him my left arm and gut him like a fish with my right and I reached for my knife. Boy did they move then. Idiot dog owner's that don't properly care for their dog and Yes, protect him from the peril's of the unknown should'nt be allowed to own them, so they lose them.
Every person has a right to enjoy the outdoors without fear of being attacked and bitten by a dog. As far as the CO shooting, who knows. The Province is out to sell paper and this story is pretty one-sided so until the facts come out I'll reserve judgement. All I can say honestly is that it is every dog owners obligation to be aware of where their dog is at all times and to be sure it is not acting aggressively toward other's because a beautiful day could turn into something else quite quickly. :D :o :D
-
If we are relying on the Province newspaper to report a story in an unbiased fashion, we will be waiting a long time. "Let's not let the facts get in the way of a good story".
The fact that a CO shot a dog is sad. Sad for the dog owner. Sad for the dog. Sad for the CO.
Sure the CO has other less lethal alternatives. We don't know his perception at the time, or what really happened until that information becaomes public; or why he chose lethal force other less lethal force.
Unfortunately, the dog owner gets to put his very opionated story out to the public and have a public outcry about how inappropriate it was (based on a one sided story). The CO on the other hand, gets to say nothing to the public (per Policy & Procedure), so he gets lynched before the facts are laid out before the public.
Well said.
-
As much as I've always had respect for our Conservation Officers I couldn't help but be appalled by the story of that guys dog being shot for barking at the CO on the front page of todays Province newspaper. I've always been a dog person and some of my dogs have always barked at people approaching me, dogs bark for crying out loud, that's what they do best, it shouldn't be a death sentence for barking at someone that's approaching their master. Anybody that irresponsible or that afraid of a dog barking shouldn't be allowed to pack a gun, does this mean if you armed the postmen there'd be no dogs left in the city. Give me a break, fire that idiot.
Two sides to each story. People are clueless to only believe only whats printed in the media. Remember, everyone has different perceptions. It comes down to how one articulates their actions.
-
I would hope this will go to the new independent commissioner. It certainly raises concerns. However you can not make judgment based on what you read in a story. I am not sure where it says they are known poachers or if has any relevance. The action of shooting a dog is at issue not their conduct. All Law enforcement has my support and I know their job can be brutal. That does not mean there are a few that act badly.
What do you mean their conduct doesn't have any relevance and the action of shooting a dog is the issue.
How can you look at a whole set of circumstances and isolate one period of time. This is rediculous statement.
It's like blaming a cop for shooting someone that drew their firearm and fired at the cop first.
Let's just look at the cop shooting this man.
-
I was fishing the Vedder two summers ago and a big dog aggressively came running toward me barking and growling and I could see 5 people sitting in lawn chairs wearing shorts and enjoying the sunny weather. They all looked toward the barking dog and me, didn't get up or move or call the dog back at all and some of them laughed at how their dog was scaring the big bad fisherman.
I shouted to them to call their dog because I said I will give him my left arm and gut him like a fish with my right and I reached for my knife. Boy did they move then. Idiot dog owner's that don't properly care for their dog and Yes, protect him from the peril's of the unknown should'nt be allowed to own them, so they lose them.
Every person has a right to enjoy the outdoors without fear of being attacked and bitten by a dog. As far as the CO shooting, who knows. The Province is out to sell paper and this story is pretty one-sided so until the facts come out I'll reserve judgement. All I can say honestly is that it is every dog owners obligation to be aware of where their dog is at all times and to be sure it is not acting aggressively toward other's because a beautiful day could turn into something else quite quickly. :D :o :D
Exactly, some dog owners are just stupid. Some assume that everybody likes dogs; and some assume incorrectly that everyone can read dog's body language.
I wouldn't think twice about ripping a dog open if it attacked me or my dogs.
So if you are not sure about your dog and think there is a chance he might display aggression toward someone, keep him locked up or on a leash.
People who have dogs trained to be guard dogs and be aggressive shouldn't take their dogs out as far as I'm concerned.
-
I'm glad people on this forum are able to see through this guy playing himself off as the "victim". He shouldn't be allowed to own another dog.
-
Obviously these guys were fishing illegaly and their gear was seized.
Also you are supposed to keep your dog on a leash in public places unless marked as an off leash park.
Conservation Officers have to deal with a whole bunch of "characters" all the time.
We don't know if the guy sent the dog on the officer and we know nothing about him.
Some people find it "amusing" and exciting when their dog charges someone. I've seen a lot of idiots like that.
Before we lynch the CO, let's hear his side of the story.
I have two dogs and know what a well trained dog is and every time I let my dogs off leash (and that's all the time) I know I'm risking scaring someone.
But my dogs are clearly friendly and would lick everyone to death I am not as worried that someone would shoot them.
If a dog charged me in the middle of nowhere I wouldn't hesitate to put it down.
But because I am a dog owner and can read dog body language I would probably make double sure that the dog is really aggressive.
This is something that you can't train people. They either know it, or they don't.
Some people simply fear dogs and will always overreact.
Unfortunate? Yes.
But I wouldn't lynch the CO just yet.
Very well put, lets not jump to conclusion.
-
I could not agree more with those that say we should not jump to conclusions.
I was attacked by dogs when I was young so I can tell you it is not something to be taken lightly. Even a normal dog can be aggressive if it feels it needs to protect its owner. Dogs should be kept in view when outdoors or on leash if dangerous.
I do not believe however it is satisfactory to let the Conservation Office investigate their own. Police are like a family and need to support their own to do the job. I do not fault them for this. This is why we have an in dependant investigator now.
The officer needs to meet the criteria for drawing his weapon. Since the alleged offence is minor in nature it has no relevance to this case. The only issue is if he at that time felt his or another persons safety was at risk. If he had other options he is required to consider them. As he is a CO one would hope he has training and experience dealing with dangerous animals and that would also be a factor. If the dog was a few feet from jumping him his actions would be totally justified. if he had opportunity to call to the owners to control the dog and did not that would put his actions in question. I would hope he did what he believed was necessary for safety and not for any other reason. It does not mean the dogs owners should not get an explanation in a reasonable time frame however.
These are the regulations for BC
Use of firearms
5 (1) A member of a police force must not draw a firearm in the performance of his or her duty unless the member has reasonable grounds for believing it necessary for
(a) protecting his or her life or the life of another person, or
(b) apprehending or detaining a person whom the member believes to be dangerous.
(2) A member of a police force must not discharge a firearm in the performance of his or her duty unless the member has reasonable grounds for believing it necessary for one or more of the following purposes:
(a) defending his or her life or the life of another person;
(b) effecting the apprehension of a person whom the member has reasonable grounds to believe is dangerous;
(c) destroying a potentially dangerous animal or one that is so badly injured that humanity requires its release from further suffering;
(d) giving an alarm or calling for assistance for an important purpose;
(e) warning a person in order to gain control of a situation that the member reasonably believes may result, if allowed to continue, in death or serious bodily harm to any person when there is no reasonably foreseeable likelihood of injury or death to an innocent person resulting from the warning shot.
(3) Before discharging a firearm, a member of a police force must be satisfied that assistance and a lesser means of force are not readily available or would not gain control over a dangerous situation.
-
Obviously these guys were fishing illegaly and their gear was seized.
Also you are supposed to keep your dog on a leash in public places unless marked as an off leash park.
Conservation Officers have to deal with a whole bunch of "characters" all the time.
We don't know if the guy sent the dog on the officer and we know nothing about him.
Some people find it "amusing" and exciting when their dog charges someone. I've seen a lot of idiots like that.
Before we lynch the CO, let's hear his side of the story.
I have two dogs and know what a well trained dog is and every time I let my dogs off leash (and that's all the time) I know I'm risking scaring someone.
But my dogs are clearly friendly and would lick everyone to death I am not as worried that someone would shoot them.
If a dog charged me in the middle of nowhere I wouldn't hesitate to put it down.
But because I am a dog owner and can read dog body language I would probably make double sure that the dog is really aggressive.
This is something that you can't train people. They either know it, or they don't.
Some people simply fear dogs and will always overreact.
Unfortunate? Yes.
But I wouldn't lynch the CO just yet.
Well said, Sasha. I agree 100% with you on this one.
-
One thing that came to mind was...
If the case had similar players in a different setting... say the officer was a cop investigating a drug dealer (or not) and was going into a grow op/meth lab, and shot a rot weiler or pitbull that was running/barking at the police officer conducting the raid/search, the story would not even make it to the paper.
Because this is about fishing and the public doesn't understand how poaching hurts the integrity of a species/ecosystem, they jump in bed with the offender.
::)
-
God damn poodle just ran into my driveway barking at me and looking to rip my leg off. :o
"Honey, grab the 30/30 this mutts going down" ::)
-
However, it is also interesting to note, just days earlier a similar an incident involving a conservation officer took place in Manitoba. A young fawn that had been abandoned was adopted by some folks on a Hutterite farm. An anonymous call came into the local fish and wildlife office that this deer might pose a threat to people on the colony, especially the young children. So the officer in question goes to the colony one day, and sees this so called killer deer. Draws out his 9 mm hand gun and shoots this deer on someone's front lawn in full view of people who live in the house. One of the people who witnessed the deer as it lay dying and struggling on the ground expressed her disgust at the Conservation officer's actions. The one big difference is that a govenment official from the department came on camera to say that what was done was wrong and the officer exercised poor judgement in killing the deer in a public place and in full view of people who live there.
The reason I bring this example up is it has many similarities as to what happened in B.C.. There was the perception of danger, a firearm was used, and a family pet was killed in front of the owner or caregiver by a wildlife officer. Hopefully out of these investigations some improvements and changes are instituted when conservation officers are called in to investigate a case.
-
So the officer in question goes to the colony one day, and sees this so called killer deer. Draws out his 9 mm hand gun and shoots this deer on someone's front lawn in full view of people who live in the house.
Killer deer, wth !!! This story just goes to show :
a. How someone with a gun and a badge can abuse power.
b. How brain-dead and stupid a person with a gun and a badge can be, or
c. Maybe there really are killer deer walking close by.
-
God damn poodle just ran into my driveway barking at me and looking to rip my leg off. :o
"Honey, grab the 30/30 this mutts going down" ::)
Need to change the breed of the dog in order to make it sound quite unrealistic eh? Well done.