Hog doggers strike again

I always said I wouldn't lump everyone in one group but as far as I'm concerned there are no good once left. I thought I was done with this problem.
History behind this is I had to refund a group of hunters because of hog doggers and the guy actually told me he would go anywhere his dogs did and didn't care that I had to refund money his dogs were worth more than that. Anyways that old news no problem for a couple years.
Fast forward until this morning when I was informed by a group that they can legally enter my property as long as they try to contact me first and that if I don't answer they can enter my property and if I do answer I can't deny them access.
Bad part is I was always one to allow it outside of deer season but I'm done with all of them.

If you had to refund money based on the dogs, you have demonstrable damages. Sue them.

And honestly. Until someone enforces the law on them, they'll keep doing it. You need to be ready to get the Sherriff's office out next time. Don't shoot the dogs, don't argue with them, corral the dogs and hold them until LE gets there. "I had to follow my dog" is absolutely not a free pass to trespass, but you have to take the next step, and don't be careless in doing so.

These days most people simply don't respect others properly.... They feel they have every right to trample all over your rights....sad!

I have had my fill of them. I hate to "lump" too - but "lumping" is justified with the vast majority of hog doggers.

They pretty much live by the saying that they'd rather ask forgiveness than permission. Sounds like yours won't even do that.

Yep. I didn't even argue with him because he new he was right. Unfortunately I found out after he had already done it but the call was just a courteous call and he was gonna go anyways. I will prosecute to the fullest if caught

I'm going to ask knowing the answer but what part of the state is this?

Palo pinto county

Not sure I understand why he can enter your property (I'm assuming you own) without your permission. Help me understand how the guy can do this, and it not be considered trespassing.

He can't legally but "they" seem to think the law allows them to to retrieve their dogs. Some of the guys just don't care but some really think the law is on their side and they can enter the property. This has happened on property that I own and slso property that I lease the landowner of the property that I lease gave the guys my number and said to contact me. They were very respectful and apologetic and I helped them get their dogs. There's just way more of the bad guys.

I've had experiences with that type unfortunately.

So I won't even start on Hog Doggers. NONE are welcome on my property anymore.

I know that ALL of them are not that way, but MOST of them (where I live) ARE!

Their mindset is absolutely crazy.

http://texashuntingforum.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/6470814/1

I was sitting in a stand waiting for hogs one night, and had a hog dog come in under the feeder. No doubt what he was doing as he had a protective collar covering his neck. It was friendly and I got it by the collar. I saw some lights back in the woods, and hollered at the guys that I had their dog, but couldn't get them to come out. I finally let the dog go as I couldn't exactly blame it.

Do hog doggers really think it is a defense to prosecution if they are getting their dogs? That's ridiculous. The trespass law is a pretty easy read.

Boy Boy, I had the same problem years back when I hunted in Mississippi.....done with those people and the state. Just no respect or ethics. Thank God for Texas.

Is there some law, or legal precedent that I've missed? An unwelcome dog running loose is a dead dog. I'm puzzled by the notion that this simple practice is suddenly invalid.

The practice isn't suddenly invalid. It is illegal to shoot stray dogs without owner consent...



Just to hammer home the point, this can be a FELONY offense.

I don't like dog killing threads.

Regulations vary from area to area, and county to county, but where I hunt the county has posted signs that read "Fine for Dogs Running Loose $500".

Not that I plan to shoot anyone's dogs, but I'll admit I've been tempted on occasion.

Haven't had problems in past couple of years, but most of the neighboring properties now have "No Trespassing" signs because the guys running dogs kept coming through. They've cut fences (and repaired them) and taken gates off of hinges. They replaced some of the hinges upside down to make it easier to get back through, which reminds me I need to bring some tools out so I can turn the hinges around to prevent cattle from knocking the gates off.

OTOH, the property I hunt is changing its' tax status from Agriculture to Wildlife Management. Part of the paperwork we had to submit list Feral Cats as a species to be controlled. We talked about this specifically with the wildlife biologist and were advised to shoot feral cats on sight.

Not an expert by any means, but if a feral animal is on your property, might you be considered the owner? I think that's how it works with feral hogs. The state does not claim them.

This was definitely not intended to be about the dog but about the ignorant.

Your wildlife biologist may have have told you to do something that is expressly against the law. He won't face possible charges if you do the shooting. You will. Consider consulting your attorney before engaging in such acts.

The animal cruelty law has some subjectivity in the defense to prosecution in the subsection related to wildlife management, killing of livestock and depredation control. The trespass law is clear. No defense mentioned for retrieving a dog. Simply put, I'd rather explain to a game warden why I shot a cat than what I'm doing on someone else's property without permission.

'Feral' has nothing to do with it. Feral Hogs were reclassified as 'Exotic Livestock' some years back. By doing so...they belong (are owned) by the land owner on who's property they exist (with certain provisions). This absolves the State of any responsibility or ownership.

Feral Dogs, Cats...etc must be dispatched under the various depredation or health laws.

I can copy/paste too;

"(e) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (b)(2) or (6) that:
1) the animal was discovered on the person's property in the act of or after injuring or killing the person's livestock animals or damaging the person's crops and that the person killed or injured the animal at the time of this discovery; "

"(f) It is an exception to the application of this section that the conduct engaged in by the actor is a generally accepted and otherwise lawful:
(B) wildlife management, wildlife or depredation control, or shooting preserve practices as regulated by state and federal law"


You have a defense to prosecution if the dog was injuring livestock or harassing wildlife.

Yes, it has already been stated at least twice in previous posts.

The subject however is the indiscriminate killing of dogs that are simply on the property. The law is clear about that and 'case law' exists to support it. I don't recommend it.

I had dog issues for a very short time. Dog guys always harp on this law, and seem to leave this part out.

[/b]) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:

(1) the actor had a reasonable fear of bodily injury to the actor or to another person by a dangerous wild animal as defined by Section 822.101, Health and Safety Code;  or

(2) the actor was engaged in bona fide experimentation for scientific research.

(e) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (b)(2) or (6) that:

(1) the animal was discovered on the person's property in the act of or after injuring or killing the person's livestock animals or damaging the person's crops and that the person killed or injured the animal at the time of this discovery;  or

(2) the person killed or injured the animal within the scope of the person's employment as a public servant or in furtherance of activities or operations associated with electricity transmission or distribution, electricity generation or operations associated with the generation of electricity, or natural gas delivery.

(f) It is an exception to the application of this section that the conduct engaged in by the actor is a generally accepted and otherwise lawful:

(1) form of conduct occurring solely for the purpose of or in support of:

(A) fishing, hunting, or trapping;  or

(B) wildlife management, wildlife or depredation control, or shooting preserve practices as regulated by state and federal law;  or

(2) animal husbandry or agriculture practice involving livestock animals.

(g) This section does not create a civil cause.[b]

Also hunting dog's are considered part of the hunter. So the hunter who releases the dog can be prosecuted for trespassing even if he never enters the property.

I don't have dog problems anymore.

I would not consider it "indiscriminate" killing of dogs if they are costing the man business. I love dogs have 5 of my own but when it comes to money out of my pocket the dogs have to go. What I found is the words gets out fast and the problem stops.

Nope, I didn't leave any of that out. I was just replying to the indiscriminate shooting of loose dogs which does not fall under the statutes involved. I also very specifically stated that is CAN be a felony, alluding to the aspect that there may be mitigating circumstances, none of which are covered by solely indiscriminate shoot on sight doctrine.



Based on how our legal system seems to work, most any law has some subjectivity in defense to prosecution, often the matter coming down to perspective of opposing parties. Again, I did not say the act WAS a felony, but that it CAN be a felony.

Tim Conaster got to play the legal game 2015 as did Chadwick Grimes and Johnnie Nelson Randolph in 2016. Even Deputy Jerrod Dooley lost his job and was indicted by a grand jury for shooting a dog, although the charges were later dismissed. These have been very costly incidents for each of these folks.

Hog doggers are gifted fibbers,
They must practice excuses and strong worded BS statements to throw off landowners. A few that I have heard over and over, a some that I have witnessed.

A friend had one tell him that the land he was own wasn't his and that he didn't have permission to be there but they did. I have heard of this statement being used before.

While deer hunting at the lease one day I had a hog dogger come by the blind. He said the land owner gave him permission to be there, he even knew his name. When I checked on it the land owner had no idea who they were and sent out an email for all leasers to call the sheriff on any hog doggers. My trespassers had wisely already hit the road.

One is threatening you with civil suits and/or charges for not allowing them to legally get their dogs, even without your permission. Then spout BS laws they have made up and talk down to you as if you are an idiot for not knowing.

A neighbor said a hog dogger told him it was the law that you had to fence dogs off your property if you don't want them there.

Another is to be the most polite and as apologetic as they can so the landowner will feel sorry for them. Then say it will never happen again, then they move on to trespass on the next guys place.

It simply doesn't matter what you or I might "consider", what matters is the LAW...plain and simple.

In the OP's case (as the incident was described) there was no immediate threat to person, property or livestock and no depredation....so no legal provision to dispatch the dog(s).

The presence of the Dogs (and possibly the Hog Doggers themselves) resulted in a 'disturbance' that displaced the hogs, thus resulting in monetary loss to the OP. This is considered 'damages' and restitution would be sought in small claims court. A royal PITA....I agree...but that would be your legal remedy.

Many folks choose to act outside the confines of the law for sake of expediency. Even if a common practice...it is still wrong (with respect to the law). This is how 'SSS' got its origins.

I might not agree with every law on the books, but I strive to obey them just the same. I don't disregard the law...because it doesn't suit me.

Nor will I dishonestly claim that an animal was doing something that is wasn't in order to justify the killing of it. There are far too many people who will shoot any unattended dog on sight, whether or not it was causing a problem. Hard for me to understand that kind of barbarism.

I don't like trespassing threads

Truth.

keep the dog leashed and you're in control of your dog and
there will be no issues

it's that simple

tired of excuses, i echo what TexasLawman and Sapper said

You better stay in your little Dallas neighborhood if you want everyone to keep their dog on a leash.

Shooting dogs? Nah.

Taking photos, and calling the Game Warden and/or the Sheriff? You bet.

Well said scalebuster, maybe he should try keeping his own dogs on a leash...I have pics of several dogs running around my feeder right after there were hogs there as well as a couple deer an hour before then. I will be calling the local game warden/sheriff to get assistance, guys on the lease next to us have done this almost every year, off and on.. time to put a stop to it....

^^^^ This would be the correct solution in most cases.

And you guys know where I stand with hog doggers and their owners.

http://texashuntingforum.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/6470814/1

Sort of shoots down any reason to own property if anyone with a dog can be on it. It isn't a dog problem, it is a people problem.

^^^^^^ Exactly!

so since the property owner owns the hogs , could he sue the hog doggers for killing one of the landowners hogs??

This could get very, very interesting......

I don't think a wildlife resource is considered "owned" until its been legally killed and retrieved. Wildlife species still alive are public property whether they are on your property or not. Property and hunting rights are private though. A person must have permission.

there are laws about killing domestic animals and abuse and such. But rural places and suburban places are different. That may sound stupid but there are more laws protecting livestock/wildlife/private property than there are dogs or cats. killing dogs/cats in a neighborhood area because they are harassing the squirrels is very different than those in a rural area and harassing wildlife/stock. areas where rural adjoins neighborhoods can be sticky. I would make certain I've communicated with the sheriff and or game warden here.

I don't think shooting them should be a landowner's first instinct. I would first report it to the sheriff, and I would make it known to the offending party that it was not welcome either thru conversation and or posted no trespassing. beyond that though if the problem persists you would be within your full legal right to just shoot them.

my grandfather had a 50ac cow place where we had that issue. lots of free-range dogs coming out of an adjacent small acreage NBHD area. they chased stock. He called the sheriff. The sheriff's first response was that he was in the county, there was no dog catcher there. If the dog was on his property and causing or suspected of causing problems then his recommendation was to shoot it. or if he wanted to catch it it would be at his own expense to attempt to hire someone. we shot several, most of the time nothing came of it. occasionally someone would ask if we'd seen one. we just said no we had not.

its not an exciting thing to do. but the law fully allows a private land owner to protect his interests. sometimes that is what has to be done.

[/quote]

so since the property owner owns the hogs , could he sue the hog doggers for killing one of the landowners hogs?? [/quote]

^^^^^^^^^ I was sort of wondering the same thing (in another thread about this).

There is no question that feral hogs were recently reclassified as 'Exotic Livestock'. And as such belong to the person on whom's land the hogs reside. But there is also the stipulation that the 'exotic livestock' is 'controlled or under the care' of the land owner. I suspect any 'fenced' property would presumably make the hogs under care/control of the L/O in the eyes of the court.

"
Sec. 161.002. CARETAKER OF ANIMAL. (a) A person is subject to this chapter as the caretaker of an animal and is presumed to control the animal if the person:
(1) is the owner or lessee of the pen, pasture, or other place in which the animal is located and has control of that place; or
(2) exercises care or control over the animal.
(b) This section does not limit the care and control of an animal to any person."

But...until such a thing is challenged in the courts (and case law established) it remains speculation.

I can conceivably see two things happening.

1. Justification for shooting a dog (or other animal) attacking/harassing a persons 'livestock'.
2. Hog Dogger if killing or removing a hog... having to pay restitution to the land owner for the loss of his 'livesock'. And in some cases face trespassing charges as well.

Wouldn't that be a hoot?

I caught a dog once...complete with a protective collar on...so there was no doubt what he was doing. I saw some distant lights in the thick woods and yelled at the guys, but they just disappeared and left me with the dog. I took pics of the dog and sent it to the local warden..who couldn't have cared less. They normally just tell you they are out working a different area and not available. I finally turned the dog loose, since it wasn't his fault.

https://feralhogs.tamu.edu/files/2011/08/Feral-Hog-Laws-and-Regulations-in-Texas.pdf


"Feral hogs are not a game or non-game species
in Texas. Instead, feral hogs are considered
exotic livestock as described in Texas Parks
and Wildlife Code Section 1.101(4) and Texas
Agriculture Code 161.001(a) [4]. Because of
this distinction, they fall under the ownership
of the landowner and not the citizens of the
state according to the Texas Agriculture Code
Section 161.002."

so since the property owner owns the hogs , could he sue the hog doggers for killing one of the landowners hogs?? [/quote]

^^^^^^^^^ I was sort of wondering the same thing (in another thread about this).

There is no question that feral hogs were recently reclassified as 'Exotic Livestock'. And as such belong to the person on whom's land the hogs reside. But there is also the stipulation that the 'exotic livestock' is 'controlled or under the care' of the land owner. I suspect any 'fenced' property would presumably make the hogs under care/control of the L/O in the eyes of the court.

"
Sec. 161.002. CARETAKER OF ANIMAL. (a) A person is subject to this chapter as the caretaker of an animal and is presumed to control the animal if the person:
(1) is the owner or lessee of the pen, pasture, or other place in which the animal is located and has control of that place; or
(2) exercises care or control over the animal.
(b) This section does not limit the care and control of an animal to any person."

But...until such a thing is challenged in the courts (and case law established) it remains speculation.

I can conceivably see two things happening.

1. Justification for shooting a dog (or other animal) attacking/harassing a persons 'livestock'.
2. Hog Dogger if killing or removing a hog... having to pay restitution to the land owner for the loss of his 'livesock'. And in some cases face trespassing charges as well.

Wouldn't that be a hoot?

[/quote]

EXACTLY what came to mind . Until someone wins the case ...BUT word would spread quickly . With feeders and plots on ones property , that should be enough to consider "caring for" the hogs.

I have had 4 cameras stolen and one of them was a $250 bushnell in one night because of hog doggers. Now my deal is I understand you can’t control where the dog goes I know because I have coon hunted with hounds. You can control where YOU go and if I catch you on my property there will be consequences. Unless you call me and if that’s the case I will come out and help you get the dogs.

We have a group of hog doggers that come of my land and always use the same excuse, "we are just looking for our dogs". The scary part is I'm always out hunting and it's my land but I have worrying about shooting because of people that shouldn't even be there. They've never once called me but I've run up on them a couple times and they always give me the same stupid line...

They would be selling that line to the SO and a judge.....

Yep. It’s amazing how bold some idiots are. If you can’t work it out with the landowner ahead of time, and it’s a possibility, then don’t risk it. It’s not your land. Period.