>

How do you mistake a malamute for a coyote?
The fact that hunters were that close to marked trails and shot in their direction is fucked up. >

AND they shot at blaze colored clothing none the less. 
Nothing in nature is that bright of an Orange or Yellow, at least nothing you could legally be shooting at unless you’re a flower hunter. >

Took a course for my FID 10 years ago and one of the biggest rules was DONT FUCKING SHOOT UNLESS YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU’RE SHOOTING AT ffs >

Hunters are some of the most careless, entitled, blowhards I’ve ever encountered. I’ve seen them shoot across highways. >

Which part of "Be sure of your target and what lies beyond it" do these clowns not understand? >

On the other hand you can also say "One way to be sure a hunter doesn't shoot your dog is to make sure it's inside/leashed/fenced/chained/wireless fenced and not running around someones hunting property."
It's sad but coyotes are fair game and sometimes a misidentification of a species happens in the woods. Also a little known fact, is if your dog is harassing wildlife (ie chasing off deer) it's actually legal to shoot the dog on that facet alone, in some places. I'm not saying I would, but I know people that would. Why risk it?
At least it's not like that woman who shot and killed a husky because she thought it was a wolf and was so confident she even SKINNED the husky and posted it on FB. >

Who shoots a random pet dog they see in the woods, other than an asshole? Some people just like killing things. >

I pulled on the side of the road and got out for a dog that had walked across the street from it's house . Not only was it a long 2 lane road with no other cars around to block anything, I was also waving my arms like crazy telling him to slow down. This guy straight up looks at me and plows into this cute golden retriever, not stepping on the breaks once. Honestly traumatizing. There are people out there like that >

Holy shit, where was this? How horrifying. >

A lot of people in more rural areas sadly see dogs as a utility, not a pet. My family is from South Dakota. One year, many years ago now, while pheasant hunting one of the guys had a younger lab...couldn't have been more than a year old. It was the dog's first hunting season, so he was excited and on this particular trip kept running too far ahead and scaring up the birds before we were within range. 
One of the guys, older, was getting noticeably upset at the dog. After we called it a day, this older gentleman offered to buy the pup off the owner. The owner agreed, cash traded hands, and the old guy shot the dog on the spot. I'll never forget it. >

wtf, is america full of psychopaths in that area? My questions about whether eating dogs and cats and the hypocrisy around eating meat would not work on those people thats for sure.... >

Yea.. There's a reason I don't get along with my father's side of the family. >

Insane that Someone mistakes a dog for a coyote. LAZY damn hunters. If can’t confidently ID - don’t shoot. Jesus.
Also - if I’m hunting deer what good is it to shoot at other shit when I’m trying to be quiet? >


mistakes a dog for a deer

Article said he mistook him for a coyote >

Fixed it - was frustrated and posted in haste lol >

mistaking a dog for a coyote isn't nearly as crazy as mistaking one for a deer, though, so your outrage doesn't make any sense
missing the harness and collar, though, is pretty outrageous
ITT: people who can't read and want to argue with shit I didn't say >

It was an Alaskan Malamute. I’m not saying they couldn’t mistake it for a coyote but I’m skeptical. The dog looks like a domestic dog to me, if anything I’d mistake it for a husky. 
Pic of the dog >

Says a malamute mix and now that ive seen the picture, that actually looks MORE like a coyote than i was expecting. Not sure of its size, but the only thing that might clearly differentiate it as a domestic dog is its wider snout. Thats not too far off though, IMO. and coyotes can be light grey in color too.
I still dont disagree with you that he shouldnt have pulled the trigger unless he was certain. >

Sadly I think the real story isn’t being told here.
They adopted the dog from a wolf dog sanctuary, a place in NJ that specializes in adopting out said animals- and claimed it was a malamute mix? Yeah, I’m thinking PA is not pursuing charges on this because this animal wasn’t legal to own in PA to begin with. Wolves and wolf hybrids aren’t legal to own in PA, and haven’t been for quite some time. 
I’m not saying it’s right or okay to take any dog or hybrid out this way, especially not a loved family pet-  but basically, Fish and Game aren’t going to push too hard because the dude saved the state having to confiscate/euthanize it. >

My wife and I also adopted dogs from the same place. Yes, they have mostly wolfdogs, but they also occasionally rescue normal dogs that get mixed up in the wolfdog craze. Example: A family in Maine pays thousands of dollars for "wolfdog" puppies from a backyard breeder. What do they actually get? Two GSD mixed with malamute. Now they go around telling everyone they have wolfdogs (including their vet) so on paper the animals are labeled as wolfdogs. Eventually, they decide they can't take care of them, so they give them up to a recuse like Howling Woods Farm. The "wolfdogs" gets brought to the recuse and the staff there take one look at the animals and realize they have 0% wolf in them. So now they have two regular dogs for adoption.
Just because the dog came from HWF doesn't mean it was a wolfdog.
Source: we adopted the dogs in my example. >

Thanks for the info! Do they ever Embark the animals they get to see the wolf content? >

I can't give you a definitive answer as I don't work there, but when we adopted our two dogs they had not been DNA tested. My wife and I ended up doing it ourselves. >

John Wick is about to show the fuck up. >

Weirdly written article.
The hunter should be shunned by the community. >

That's a whole ass mess. 
1) why were the dogs not leashed with the owner in an area with hunters?
2) that dog looked nothing like a coyote. Ignorant, trigger happy, moron just caused so much heartache. The dogs were visibly marked with harnesses and on a marked trail, even.
While I believe the PA Game Commision, I'm surprised there would be no repercussion for the hunter
As an owner of an adopted senior dog that works closely with hunters, I'm sickened. So much of this was preventable. >

Whole ass mess seems right.  Seems also since no laws were technically broken, and the Hunter expressed plausible deniability (“I thought it was a wolf!”) that the commissioners hands are tied.  Any repercussions for the hunter from authorities in PA would have to stem from laws broken, otherwise it’s just going to rile up gun activists (on both sides) without leading to anything productive.
I agree with both your points, it seems like a “civil matter” if anything. >

Cool so we can hunt endangered animals now as long as we don't identify them first right? Game warden is a fucking idiot apparently. If you misidentify a person as bigfoot, would you be allowed to kill them no repercussions? If you can't identify the game you are hunting you have absolutely no business hunting. Even if he hadn't killed the dog, just missed, he should have his hunting license revoked for not being able to tell the difference between a family dog and a coyote. Fuck this stupid hunter and that dipshit game warden. >

Trump took wolves off the endangered list, and coyotes were never on. 
Idk if there’s any sort of season for either in that state. >

I wasn't saying wolves or coyotes are endangered. My point is that if you can shoot your neighbors dog under the guise you "thought" it's a coyote and it's excused, then the burden of identifying your target is completely gone and hunters are free to shoot anything that moves. They COULD shoot something endangered, let's say the last tazmanian tiger on earth(they're extinct not endangered but that's beside the point, they would be illegal to kill), and face no consequences by simply saying I thought it was something else that i'm allowed to kill. >

Oh I see. Yea, last year someone shot TWO different elk and thought it was a deer. imo there’s no excuse to not know what you shot >


According to Pennsylvania Game Commission, it was a case of mistaken identity. Hence, the hunter won’t face charges

What the fuck?! Isn't it the hunter's job to ensure the target he is shooting is what he actually intends to shoot? This is absolute insanity that he can walk about scott-free after killing a dog, which to many are literally family members, and continue with his bullshit hunting abilities. >

The issue to me, as a hunter, is that if you can mistake a dog for a deer (or coyote as the article says, dont know hy everyones saying deer actually) it means you just saw fur and fired without any kind of positive identification. That couldve been a person. 
Not to mention, you need to know whats behind your target as well so you dont shoot someone behind it. So you need to see the target really well to actually shoot.
As the most pro-gun person around, this guy shouldnt have a gun. >

I think you're making a big assumption that this hunter could not clearly see and identify their target and thus accidentally shot a dog.
It wouldn't shock me at all if this hunter followed all of these ID procedures, positively identified his target as a dog, ensured behind the dog was clear/safe, and shot the dog. >

Fuck Hunters who don't ID their fucking target, or don't find out what's beyond where their hunting. >

What if I mistake the hunter for an enraged gorilla and shoot him in self defense? >

"It's coming right for us!" >

I am so tired of the protective status of hunters. In some states, a hunting dog can go on to privately owned lands that have no trespass and no hunting signs up. They can hunt their prey and the hunters can go collect the dogs and prey.  Some states even provide compensation for injured/killed hunting dogs.  Hunters have gotten away with shooting people (don't go hunting with Dick Cheney, he'll shoot you in the face), let alone animals.
If someone shot my dog, I don't know how I could control myself. I'd be in a near murderous rage. 
Shame on this hunter. He should be named and shamed for being a dog killer. I hope the family sues for every last penny they can. >


I hope the family sues for every last penny they can.

Pets are property. Like furniture. They wouldn't get much. >

I see. They should sue for ownership of any of his pets then. >

What, like ask a court to seize his property and turn it over to them? What possible grounds exist to justify that? >

What possible grounds exist to justify killing someone’s dog?
The answer is context. In this case, suing the dude. >

The family is welcome to sue the hunter. They're only going to get the retail value of the dog. They won't get a dime for "pain and suffering" or anything like that. I'm not trying to be a dick. That's just the way it is. Pets are property. The dog owner is not entitled to seize the property of the hunter. >

It’s shit like this that leads to people retaliating against people who wrong them. Hopefully the legal system catches up to the times, if what you say about this person’s recourse is true. >

Catches up how? What should change? >

Make the law reflect actual damages. The value of a pet is not the amount they cost when you got them. 
If the law doesn’t see the value of someone’s pet beyond the dollar value of an animal, it’s going to cause issues with the injured party not feeling whole. And that is specifically what the civil law system was created for: to stop retaliation and tit-for-tat crimes by providing injured parties a legal avenue to be made whole. >


actual damages

So what are your actual damages for the loss of a pet? You can't claim something "beyond the dollar value of an animal" when you're asking for actual damages. Your actual damages are the cash value of the pet. 
Maybe it was a purebred you were planning on breeding. In a case like that, you could probably present stud fees as lost income, or the value of a few litters. But for the family dog that was just a mutt you adopted from a shelter, your actual damages are going to be whatever you paid for the dog. 
A dog is property, like a table or a couch. I get what you're saying. I love my pets. But in the eyes of the law, they're just a piece of property. >

Sorry, but this is 100% a John Wick scenario for me. >

I don't understand where does all this joy of killing another living being comes from, like it was a normal activity or hobby. I mean what kind of life you must have to get enjoyment from the death of an animal? Don't you guys feel some empathy or you really think animals are such inferior creatures that we have the right to decide when and how their life ends?
I've seen animals express high intelligence and complex emotions, they form bonds, families and communities. There is absolutely no way I would enjoy hurting an animal. >

This is a bad look from the state. The hunter is at very least negligent. >

Dog's owner wasn't rich enough, so in America it goes from a crime to "unfortunate." >

I mean, not the worst hunting thing I've seen with PA.. there's been a few stories of someone shooting an elk whilst apparently thinking it was a deer.
And there's always the deer who mistake a traveling vehicle as not existing until they're sliding down a road after taking out the front end of a vehicle >

This is wholly unacceptable. The dog was wearing an orange vest and on a trail. This seems intentional to me. If you are allowed to shoot across or on a hiking trail in PA they need new hunting laws. >

Wait, what? You can just shoot people's dogs in PA without breaking any laws? >

The article gives me the impression that he shot it by mistake. >

That's arguably worse. 
Shooting stuff by accident means you're incompetent and shouldn't be able to own a weapon. >

And worse still, it wad wearing a brightly colored harness. And a collar. So the guy is either blind, stupid dog both