Prize Coon Dog Shot

This is a friend of mine from high school. He's been coon hunting all his life and this just blows my mind that someone would do this.
The story has the value of the dogs incorrect, they aren't worth $30,000 but instead that's what they could win.

http://www.wishtv.com/dpp/news/local/west_central/DNR_investigating_prized_coon_dog_kill_20090928

That burns my arse!

I had a high dollar nite champion female (18 month old no less) that was shot. She lived. spent better than a grand tryin to fix her up. x-ray must have showed at least a hundred pellets around her spine. had a inch and a half whole above her hip, close range shot from a shotgun. After about four months I had to put her down due to complications and infection.

If they were that close to the dogs, how did they not run into the guy who shot them? Story doesn't say, but I'm assuming this was at night, so you'd think the shooter would have had some lights on at some point...

Coon season isn't in until November 8, so the only thing legal the shooter could be after at dark would have been coyotes, and that would have had to be with written permission from the landowner, as regular season doesn't open until October 15...

aint the running season open now?

Right, running season is open... I'm talking about the guy in the woods who shot the dog... I thought you couldn't carry a firearm, except CCL, when running dogs, so I'm trying to figure out what the guy/shooter in the woods was up to that he had a gun at night, if that was the case...

i saw this on the news the dogs got on to property that they didn't have permission to be on and the property owner shot the dogs. still a crime and bull ****

Watching it right now. The dogs were attacking the guys golden retriever, and was threatning the guy that shot it. They interviewed the shooter

I ain't buying that story....

I don't really buy it either but who was there to disprove the guy? I ran into an issue a few years back w/ some guys who were trespassing w/ their hounds. I had a dog fight in the backyard and ended up taking my lab to the emergency vet after finally gettin 2 hounds off him.

It can happen, but it's not the norm. Biggest problem is when houndsmen turn loose on a 5 acre patch of woods they have permission on, knowing their hounds are going to be runnin allover private ground they don't have permission on.

I have hounds I hunt and I completely understand the fact that we can't always control where they run, but we do have control on how much ground we turn them loose on. I'd be as mad as anyone if my dogs got shot. But if a home owner says my dog was attacking his dog in his yard what do you do? We've got the right to protect our property right? Now if this didn't happen on the "shooters" property then it's an entirely different story and they should charge the guy.

if it were me, that golden retriever better have some bite marks

Very true, but like I said how do you prove that those hounds weren't "attacking" his dog?

Its certainly an unfortunate situation. Hopefully some good things as far as awareness will come from it.

Here's some stories with video clips on the pages... second one has the shooter's statement...

http://www.fox59.com/wxin-coon-hound-shooting-092809,0,7649177.story

http://www.wthr.com/Global/story.asp?S=11228239

AWARENESS from all stand points would be a great thing. Like I've said.....I own hounds, but I've been on both sides of the fence.

If the guy has livestock there's nothing the DNR can do, it's lawful to kill a dog if the farmer belives it's going to cause harm to his/her livestock, the dog is as good as dead, was told that by a county deputy.
Don't get me wrong it's sad that it happend but i urge everyone to educate themselfs about laws pertaining to this. A guy i coon hunt with goes around the evining we're going to hunt to get permission to run his dogs it has help this situation from happening to him, this way the landowner know he's going to be hunting or running his dogs.

Good post NLTSO and Tobias. The situation is never cut and dry as he shot my dog because he ran through my yard. Bottom line is none of us were there so it is impossible to prove one way or another. If the dog owner feels he is a victim of a crime then let the courts hash it out.

I don't think there are too many people out there just waiting to shoot your dogs for no reason.

No mention of tresspass. No mention of the shooter. Not many facts period, other than the dog owners account. I seriously can't even believe this made the news.
Sounds like the coon hunters need a high fence operation.

The Hendricks County Prosecutor has formerly charged the shooter in the shooting of Brad Hall and Mike Dohoney's dog Banjo and Brad and Albert Hall's dog Remus.

The charges include:
Killing of a domestic vertebrate animal owned by another...Class B Felony

Animal cruelty (two counts) Class A misdemeanor

Are there any other FACTS to report? This is situation that has (or can have) so many variables.

I think the "facts" will be up to a judge and jury to decide at this point.

Man arrested for shooting dog

By Wade Coggeshall

DANVILLE — Charges have been filed against a resident here for the shooting and subsequent death of a trained hunting dog.

John J. “Jay” Faubion, 64, of 3821 N. C.R. 400 E., was arrested and charged with a class D felony for killing a domestic animal and two class A misdemeanors for cruelty to an animal. A class D felony in Indiana carries a minimum sentence of six months in prison.

Hendricks County sheriff’s deputies and Jeffrey Wells, conservation officer with the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, were dispatched to the Faubion residence on the evening of Sept. 23 on a report of a dog shooting.

According to the probable cause affidavit, Brad Hall told investigators that he and his father, Albert, had just begun to run their treeing walker coonhounds near the intersection of County Roads 400 East and 400 North when the dogs took off toward the south. The dogs were wearing Global Positioning System devices. The Halls used those to track them to the Faubion residence.

Investigators say Faubion told them he heard what sounded to him like a dogfight outside his home at the time. He told officials he went outside and saw his dog on its back with three unknown dogs attacking it. Faubion then told officials he yelled to separate the dogs and was able to get his dog inside the house. No injuries were reported on Faubion’s dog.

The report then states that Faubion came back outside with a handgun and fired a shot into the air when one of the dogs charged him. That supposedly prompted the dogs to run south through the open gate of a fenced enclosure used as a dog pen. Officials say Faubion, realizing the enclosure had openings under the fence, decided to enter the pen to further scare off the dogs, fearing they could harm his wife if he left them. The report states that Faubion entered the pen and fired another shot into the air to scare the dogs. He told police he then shot two more rounds directly at the dogs when they charged at him.

One of the coonhounds, Banjo, was shot between the eyes. It was later euthanized. The other dog, Remus, suffered a graze wound on the back of its neck that had to be sutured.

In the affidavit Wells said he questioned Faubion as to why he would enter the pen with the dogs when he had previously been concerned for his safety. Also Wells said he asked him why he stood in the path of the open gate while he was supposedly trying to get the dogs off his property. For both Faubion reportedly answered that in hindsight it may not have been the best way to handle the situation.

Treeing walker coonhounds are known for being good trackers of wild game. Because raccoons are nocturnal, coon hunting generally occurs at night. Hall said he uses GPS collars on his dogs to keep track of them, and owners of such coonhounds are required by law to wear hats with headlights when hunting.

Hall told investigators Banjo had a meek nature, had extensive training around humans and other dogs, and had never displayed any aggressive behavior.

Banjo was set to compete in the Pro Kennel Club’s World Hunt in October at Salem, Ill.

Ironically, Hall is director of the Hoosier Tree Dog Alliance, which started a campaign called “Don’t Shoot My Dog,” meant to educate the public on what hunting dogs do.

“I never would’ve dreamed I’d have to use what we’re training for myself,” Hall said. “I want this tragedy to be a positive, to be an education out of a bad situation.”

Thanks for the post Wes. Still doesn't tell a whole lot though, other than dogs where shot on "private" private property that they probably didn't have permission to be on. If dogs where shot w/out reason then it's wrong. All I'm really getting is that coonhounds ended up on private property w/out permission and they were shot. No dog should be shot w/out reason.......but every property owner has the right to protect his property.

Likewise every dog owner has the OBLIGATION to keep their hounds off of property they don't have permission to be on.

Don't think I would ever go that far, as to shoot a dog, but we definitely have our trouble with the night time hunters!

For sake of greater understanding, anyone know how many acres the coon hunters had permission to hunt on where they cast their dogs? It might be interesting to know if these guys knew that their dogs were likely to go onto property they didn't have permission to hunt on. I had a talk with a coon hunter last Saturday evening and listened to his story but told him that if found on the property, for any reason, the CO would arrest him and that I would be asking a local gentleman to trap our property. He was upset with the trapping comment and concerned about his dogs. I found this a little funny since his dogs don't have permission to be on the property. Frankly, I hope that the trapper catchs his dogs and calls the CO who can then call this guy and arrest him when he sets foot ont he property to recover his dogs.

Bottom line here is a guy has a right to defend his property. Reguardless of whether or not you believe that was what he was doing, the dogs were somewhere they weren't supposed to be. I don't think anyone can argue that. What I have the biggest problem with here, is the property owner is facing FELONY charges for "defending his property". I think everyone on this board that owns a gun and a home should have a serious problem with that. And why wasn't the dog owner cited for tresspassing? Just don't all add up to me.

defending property doesnt mean you can just shoot any dog that crosses it. Apparently too many holes in his story to use the "defense" defense.

Many coonhunters I know, myself include(in the past-dont have dogs anymore) would shoot the dog themselves IF it done damage to person or livestock, or pets.

The point being made here is... One DOES NOT have the right to shoot a dog for "tresspassing", and could face felony charges if one chooses to take such action.

I get your point, and I agree with your statements, kinda. I realize that we cannot just shoot a dog for the sake of just shooting it. However, I believe as a dog owner, you are responsible for what that dog does, when, how, and where. Don't run your dog all over my property and expect me to overlook it...I don't want you there, that is why I posted the "NO Trespassing" signs. The fact that you would dump your dogs close to my property knowing darn well they could come my way shows your blatant disreguard. Get my point?
Let me ask you this.......Do you believe Mr Hall Should be charged with trespassing? Do you believe at all that this could have been prevented had he used better judgement of where he turned these dogs out? I think the answer is yes, and I believe a felony in this situation is BS. On the other hand....The shooter may have well used better judgement too, but from what I've read, he says it was out of defense.
You would not want to be in this position had you shot this dog in defense and were being made into a felon, would you? Not saying this is the case, only my opinion of it.

I agree with you 100% Coyoteman. It is hard to imagine a guy sitting on his porch just waiting to shoot every dog that crosses his property. My guess is there was either chronic problems or one big event that would warrent getting a gun and protecting yourself and your property.

If the guy was shooting everything that crossed his property he deserves to get what he gets. If he has been having problems or truely was trying to save his family/property then there should be no question.

Bottom line is none of us know the true story and none of us are on the jury so we don't or won't know the real story.

I have chickens, and predators. I wouldn't, however, shoot a dog (or any other animal) without good cause. I have seen coon hunters run dogs anywhere they like though.

This situation could have been avoided had the hunter asked for permission, or at least informed the neighboring properties that hounds would be in the area. If you stop at my house and let me know that you will be hunting adjacent land, then I'd know that the dog in my back yard is not after my chickens. If I didn't know a hunter was in the area, how would I know the dog was NOT after my chickens (or family, or dog, etc.)? Trust me, if a dog is attacking my dog/livestock/family, it will die.

By the way, I love dogs and have nothing against coon hunting. I also see know frustrating it can be when you lose chickens/livestock to any predator.

Charging the guy is ridiculous, especially a felony - but what is sad is that this "could" have been avoided. I feel bad for the guy - both of them! Charging him with a felony is very disturbing, and goes against common sense.

I do not think the man acted responsibly shooting these dogs. I agree a man has a right to defend himself from immediate harm but the man admits that he was out of harms way before he got his gun and went back outside.

I highly doubt those dogs were attacking him or his dog but who knows, I was not there. What I do know is that the man and his dog were out of a "threatening situation" before he went back out for more. If it was that dangerous, he should have stayed inside and called the authorities.

Very poor judgment. The man should have called the authorities and expressed his anger with the gentlemen rather than the dogs. Contrary to what some suggest, dogs do not know boundaries but people do and the bottom line the man was out of harms way before going back out looking and finding trouble.

Self-defense from a legal standpoint is whether the person in his mind felt threatened and a reasonable person in the same situation could react the same way.

In this case, as Skeeter said, once the guy got his dog away from the alleged attacking dogs and into the house, the threat had ended. So unless there was further fear of damage to livestock or property, he no longer had a legal right to go out and shoot the dogs. Once he had his dog in the house, he should have dialed 911 and reported the "stray" coonhounds running around his property.