Farmer shoots tamaskan

this is really sad. I wonder where the owner was...

Poor dog

the wording of that article!!!!

Tupacs2legs wrote:the wording of that article!!!!

I agree

Thats awful...how can no cows have sustained any injuries if a "savage beast" had to be shot 6 times to save them poor poor dog and owner.... sounds more like the dog was chasing them and the gamekeeper needed a reason for 6 bullets!!

wonder if it wouldve been worded differently if it was an another breed like a lab for eg

Lainyb wrote:wonder if it wouldve been worded differently if it was an another breed like a lab for eg

if it was another breed you prob wouldnt have heard about it.
SHOCKING!!

Here is the Article as it appears on line. First thing I notice is that the incident happened in March and it is now the end of November.
Perth Sheriff Court hears about cow attacking dog

Nov 27 2009 by Andrew Welsh, Perthshire Advertiser Friday

A CRAZED dog was gunned down by a Perthshire gamekeeper after it attempted to bite pieces out of cows.

But it took no fewer than SIX bullets to kill off the savage beast as it ran amok in a field near Dunkeld last March 30.

Fiscal depute Robbie Brown told Perth Sheriff Court that the pedigree Tamaskan was owned by Wayne Murphy (33), a housemaster at the nearby Butterstone New School.

At about 8pm a farmer on Carndney Estate was with his wife when he saw the wolf-like dog lunge and attempt to bite cattle.

The cows became distressed and moved to a boggy patch, heightening concerns for their safety.

“After the farmer ran back to the gamekeeper’s house they went out and the dog was wreaking havoc,” said Mr Brown.

“The gamekeeper shot the dog and it took six shots before it was brought down.”

The farmer recognised the Tamaskan as belonging to Murphy and his phone number was on the dog’s collar.

Fortunately, the cattle sustained no injuries during the attack.

A solicitor for Murphy, who subsequently moved to a new job in London, said his client had been “considerably upset” at the death of his dog, which was worth £800 and was less than three years old.

Murphy, of Lauderdale Avenue, Dundee, admitted being the owner of a dog which worried livestock by chasing them in a way that might cause them injury or suffering, at Middle Carndney Farm.

He was fined £200.


I can't stand reporters and their one sided view to sell advertizing. It sure would be nice to hear the Tamaskan owners story ats to the incident instead of everyone believing wholeheartedly everything they read. Granted the Tamaskan should not be running at large and unattended as hunters and farmers may mistake a Tamaskan for a wolf. However the article did say the farmer recognized the dog belonging to Murphy.
This is very sad and unfortunate.

John

Lanie wrote:Thats awful...how can no cows have sustained any injuries if a "savage beast" had to be shot 6 times to save them poor poor dog and owner.... sounds more like the dog was chasing them and the gamekeeper needed a reason for 6 bullets!!

Totally agree Lainie,

although a farmer is well within his rights to shoot a dog worrying his livestock, this is disgusting, he had time to run and fetch a gamekeeper and the 'crazed beast' still hadn't injured any cattle in that time?

and they way the article is worded is just scaremongering sensationalism, definitely wouldn't have seen wording like this if the dog was a Labrador 'A CRAZED dog was gunned down....... But it took no fewer than SIX bullets to kill off the savage beast as it ran amok in a field .......wreaking havoc.......

Obviously they are trying to get an emotional response from the reader. Unfortunately the response they are going for is “Wow the Tamaskan must be a very dangerous breed”. Not true at all. If you ignore the exaggeration it becomes clear that the dog was just being a dog having fun chasing cows. But most people won’t. They will take it at face value. I highly doubt it actually tried to bite one. It died for one reason. Its owner allowed it to run free. If the owner had been more careful the dog would never have been near those cattle and the farmer wouldn’t have felt the need to shoot a harmless animal. The wolfy look no doubt contributed the decision to fire. I’ll bet they didn’t believe there was no wolf in the dog. And now someones canine best friend is dead.

Apparently there is some confusion as to the timeline as to when this actually took place. In speaking with the breeder, this event happened approximately a year ago. Why it is being brought out now as if it just happened is under investigation.

Would the answer to that not be that if it had came out in the papers round about the time of the attack on the livestock then this appearing in the papers wouldve jeopardised any forth coming court proceedings.....ust a thot

Anything is possible, but the breeding did confirm it was about a year ago. And your 'theory' is possible in that this guy has been trying to get another Tamaskan since, and the breeder refuses to sell him one. Who knows who else is searching for what ... To be honest, I wouldn't put it past a TDR person to have 'alerted' the media to try to put the breeder in a bad light. But, just speculation based on history. I do find the comments above interesting though: Why did the cows not show any injury (if that's true) if in fact it was "attacked" and this dog was so "savage". Very curious inded.

I don't think the TDR would put their breeds reputation on the line to give one breeder a bad name, after all it is in no way the breeders fault and the breeder is not even mentioned.
It is obviously the owners fault for not securing his dog correctly and I do not blame the breeder for not wanting to sell him another puppy, I nkow I wouldn't

takari wrote:Anything is possible, but the breeding did confirm it was about a year ago. And your 'theory' is possible in that this guy has been trying to get another Tamaskan since, and the breeder refuses to sell him one. Who knows who else is searching for what ... To be honest, I wouldn't put it past a TDR person to have 'alerted' the media to try to put the breeder in a bad light. But, just speculation based on history. I do find the comments above interesting though: Why did the cows not show any injury (if that's true) if in fact it was "attacked" and this dog was so "savage". Very curious inded.

The article clearly states the incident happened 30 March. This case went to court where the owner was fined . It then became public record where the media grabbed the story and printed it. This article more than likely made it to press as a result of the court case and not of any "TDR person".
Lets not try to speculate and point fingers please.