Well,In that case,Rem.870 & #4 shot,Afterall,Tis' the Season for Mincemeat,:)

i change my opinion to go with susan.

s.s.s. sounds appropriate.

I would do a little digging to determine what the state/local law is on dogs 'hazarding' livestock. And pay particular attention to exactly how 'hazarding' is defined.

If the sheriff is called in by a dog owner, as unlikely as that might be, you want to start the interview with the right words. Words that make it clear that yes, the dog/s were clearly a legally 'substantial and imminent' threat that fulfills the requirements for use of lethal force.

Words that make it clear that you are very careful how you shoot, what you use to shoot, what direction you shoot, and making clear that you are well aware of sight lines and the potential for bullets to carry over considerable distances.

I'm not saying that you lie. I am saying that you need to be careful how your case is presented. Police are trained to testify in court in a manner that makes it perfectly clear that a checklist of requirements has been mentally checked off before they used force.

A good example of this is a homeowner that shoots someone in their home needs to avoid talking about wishing/desiring/acting to kill or punish the intruder and any reference to the intruders race of status. Those are part of what normally goes through the mind but the laws doesn't allow you to act on those thoughts so it is better if they are not mentioned. In most situations you are only allowed to use lethal force if you are in fear for your life and to eliminate that clear and imminent threat.

Get it clear in your mind that you were in fear of clear, imminent and credible threat, and have on the tip of your tongue a laundry list of signs of why you were in fear and how you acted only to eliminate this credible threat.

How you present the situation, particularly in the initial presentation to the law, makes the difference between a open and shut case, and a protracted investigation and seating of a grand jury that can mean you will need to spend thousands on a legal defense.

In the case of shooting dogs questions that you might want to have answers readily on hand for questions that include:

Have you lost livestock previously? Can you provide witnesses and/or documentation?

How do you know it was dogs? Witnesses, tracks, type of damage, documentation?

How do you know the dogs shot were an imminent threat and not just 'playing'? Signs, location, behavior. Witnesses, evidence, documentation?

How do you know these dog/s were not just wandering by? Location, proximity to livestock. Threatening behavior?

Keep these answers in mind. They both allow you to firmly assert your right to defend your livestock and to defend against any charges that may come your way. First impressions and presentation matter. Hopefully this is handled without the law and courts getting involved (SSS) but paying attention to there details, documenting them if possible, may pay off big if they do.

Mucho Mierda!Kudos to Sue,For narrowing ALL these words down to 3 Letters,The Most Logical&Practical Solution!

Both dogs had collars and tags. One had a SWEATER on. They are local, they are pets, and they were actively chasing and biting and killing the birds. We have a plan if it happens again.

This is an owner problem, not a dog problem. Dog owner's who are not responsible need to be taught a lesson from the proper authorities. Most any dog given the opportunity would chase chickens. The fault belongs with the owner of the dogs.

People with dogs need to keep them within a fence or on a leash period.

When a pair of German Shepherds that had shown aggression toward other neighbors (but not biting) showed up in my back-yard, my first instinct was to simply put the leader down. Fortunately for the dogs the nice lady at animal control convinced me to not shoot them -- instead the owner was warned by one of their officers that the dogs were a problem. Much better -- it avoided me getting into it with a neighbor and I was able to avoid shooting what was probably a nice dog given a more responsible owner.

There are live traps that can probably be used to capture the dogs; then the county can deal with them as strays and the owner can bail them out . . .

This makes a lot more long term sense than the SSS alternative. Building responsible relationships with your neighbors can come in handy in the next emergency.

Merry Christmas to all... I have really enjoyed the lively discourse on this forum during the past year.

The rule of thumb where I used to spend a lot of time upstate - shoot dog, take out to side of road, a bit away from the house (so they can't be sure it was you) and HANG the dead dog from the tree where the owner is sure to see it. Sends the message "another dog was found chasing livestock/deer - control your dog"

The dogs are victims, too-of a neglectful owner. That said, predators are predators. perhaps some defensive measures would help- a 4 foot page wire fence with a strand of barbed wire above and below seems to do a good job keeping feral hogs and dogs away from our new home in Tallahassee. Having 4 dogs helps, too. On the more devious side of things, dogs are pretty easy to bait and poison-human iron supplements, raisins and grapes seem to be good choices.
Wolf and coyote problems are more often solved with poison baits than gunfire, I believe.