I don't normally sign petitions, or share them to be signed, but this truly breaks my heart.

https://www.change.org/p/george-brauchler-save-sophie-s-life-and-lobby-against-mandatory-death-sentence-for-dogs?recruiter=419733786&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=share_for_starters_page&utm_term=mob-xs-no_src-no_msg

Damnit now my makeup is ruined. Couldn't get all the way through it, sorry.

Oh my…

There is a facebook page where they are updating, but no new news yet.

Signed this. Absolutely heartbreaking.

I'm not intending to start a feud here and definitely agree that this situation might have been handled differently but
Elpert County, Colorado is primarily an agricultural county ( 11 people per mile² ) so country attitudes are going to hold sway.  
According to Elpert County Zoning Laws, depending on the size of the piece of property 30-50 chickens at large is legally acceptable.  
Further, according to Colorado statute a dangerous animal is one that "Demonstrates tendencies that would cause a reasonable person to believe that the dog may inflict bodily or serious bodily injury upon or cause the death of any person or domestic animal."

While I haven't looked, I'm pretty certain that the neighbor was well within his legal rights when he shot Sophie to protect his domestic animals.  The law regarding a dangerous animal does not concern itself with the legality of the domestic animal of immediate concern - I presume with the assumption that if a dog will chase an animal in this situation it will chase them in any situation.

If one of my dogs runs free and is chasing a steer (since I'm in Texas, beef is more common than chickens) the rancher is entitled to kill my dog <period, end of discussion> and I have no recourse.

Were they trying to dog proof their property?  The article says that they were.  The dog managed to get loose and I'm sorry (and while it may sound like I'm not, I am really sorry) Sophie is going to have to pay the penalty for their lack of control.

If you've made it this far without getting completely angry at me, I come across hard when people talk about letting their dogs run loose.  This is one, too perfect example of why this, with rare exceptions, is completely unacceptable.  This is a 7 month old Husky, in most peoples eyes that looks like a full grown dog; chasing livestock is ample reason to kill the dog.

Do I hope they're able to reach a resolution that doesn't result in euthanasia of Sophie?  Yes, I do, I know what it feels like to lose a pet. Given everything I've read, I'd not be optimistic of that outcome.

Al, you brought up the points that my husband and I had one evening, many moons ago. Miya went with my husband hiking on our neighbors property. It was spring turkey season, and what do you know, she took off after a turkey, crossed the fence line onto a ranchers property, in which he leased for hunters. Miya indeed was around 7 months old, the terrible teenage phase. One track mind and selective hearing. I argued had the hunters been on property at that moment they would have shot her, for fear of a coyote. Had the rancher been out he would have done the same, and she wasn't even chasing a domesticated animal. It is sad that this happened. I feel for the owners and for Sophie, but, I will agree with you Al, in the end it is the owners fault for not securing their husky. Please, nobody hate on me, I fully take responsibility of Miya and Sofie, I do allow them off leash, but with 100% visual, and always within a close distance. If that were to happen to me and either of my girls, yes I would fight to keep them safe, but I would fully understand the consequences of my actions, and those of a rancher or farmer. The farmer or rancher has every right to protect their property, and they do not have to wonder if it's a friendly pet or not.

The same can be said with just the opposite situation. We had a pitt come on to our property and took Miya down, with out a growl, bark, nothing. He gripped a hold of her neck and would not let go. My husband wailed on this dog, he kicked, he punched, this dog was well over 100 pounds to Miya's 60. The owner discovered that his dog was loose, and seen the commotion. By the time the owner got there my husband managed to get this dog in a choke hold and I grabbed Miya. The owner told us we had every right to shoot him, and why didn't we. we told him we figured he was someones pet. The owner, our neighbor, told us he was a rescue, he was a fighting pitt, and had hoped that he had rehabilitated him, by keeping him contained, and used him as a hog dog. He opened his kennel, and he sprinted out. He collected his dog, and later that evening my husband went to his house to tell him that Miya was fine, he had offered to take her to the vet. He told the gentleman, that we weren't mad at him or his dog, freakish things happen, just please make sure he was always properly contained. He shot his dog the next morning. For fear his dog could escape again, only to cause harm to a smaller animal.

I feel for this family, I would  never want this to happen to either one of my sweet dogs, but it is something we all must realize may happen. Would there be any difference to how we feel, if instead, Sophie the husky ran in front of a car and it was a hit and run? We would be angry at the driver who hit her, but then again, it probably would never make it newsworthy. That happens almost every day. The reason I was sad and angry was not because of the actions of the farmer, but the actions of the owner. They were not responsible, had they placed her in her crate, if she had one, while they built this fence, none of this would have happened.

Again, please don't hate guys, it is truly a sad situation, and I pray the outcome is a happy one for Sophie and her family. I would prefer this thread to be an eye opener, for all of us, to know that we have to be 100% responsible for our pets. If we do not have 100% care, control, and custody of our pets, we can only blame ourselves for any outcome.

ETA:In no way do I feel this pup should be put down, I personally believe Sophie's parents should pay a fine, or if chickens were killed compensate the chicken owner.

While her killing the chicken constituted the owner the right to shoot the dog it did not give him the right to threaten the owner of the dog with a deadly weapon when they tried to take the dog back. They are within their rights to collect their property from his and I would press charges against him for threatening my safety. I wouldn't drop the matter of his threat unless he was willing to drop the accusation against my dog. That would probably be the most effective course of action they could take to protect their dog.

Well said Jenn. It is a messed up situation, no matter how you see it.

Agreed Jenn, as Renee says it's messed up all the way round.  There were so many different ways that this entire situation could have - should have been handled differently.  

Each of the people involved bears a part in the momentary bad decisions that allowed this to happen.  I sincerely do feel sorry for the owners of Sophie, seeing their dog laying there bleeding and, at gunpoint, being able to do nothing must have been traumatic.  I tend to agree with you that they should have been able to do something before the police arrived and *I* would be investigating what options and possible reparations they might be entitled to.  Oddly, I can't find any laws that allow or prohibit the chickens owners actions. I know that in Texas what actions we can take (and those we cannot) are pretty well laid out in case law.

While those who live in the metropolitan east have their own challenges - traffic, dog thieves, etc; we in the very rural west also have our own unique challenges, more likely coyotes than cars.  Those who don't have the option of allowing their dogs some freedom must make certain that they're restrained / contained to protect them.  Those of us who can allow our dogs that freedom also have to ensure that they're as safe as possible when they're at large.

An example:  I, too, have a neighbor who has a few chickens, I spoke with him since my dogs do roam onto his property when they're free.  When one got too close he pulled out his .22 and put a couple of rounds into the ground behind my pup ... who hasn't been back since, silly pup was rightfully scared!  The person who shot Sophie chose the worst possible option ... and everyone involved is going to regret their part in this regrettable affray - probably for quite some time as it wends its way through all the legal process.

Al, what gets me, yes the chicken owner, ugh, he should have known it was a neighbors pup, and seriously a bad shot, but how can something like this drag on? This happened in June, this pup is now a dog at 13 months old, presumably living with his pet parents. You're going to tell me that if Sophie's parents lose the case, their going to put down a now adult dog, probably around 2 years of age? That to me seems the unjustified portion of this whole mess. Like I said earlier, fine Sophie's owners, and or make them pay restitution to the chicken owner, and have the court warn Sophie's owners, if it happens again they have no choice but to put her down. I would like to hear of a follow up, if one is put up online. Interesting case, and I imagine it's not the first time something like this has gone to court. Just the power of the internet that sheds light on the subject to all pet owners.

Btw, I get the whole legal system being slow for say human murderers, but I would imagine this is at a local level, why is it dragging on for so long?

A few comments are in order here:

CBS News out of Denver (Elbert county is a short ways SE of Denver) has picked up this story.  This can be either good or bad ... depending on the DA.

There is a video attached to the story ... and it disturbs me greatly the the fence they said they were constructing isn't there.  There's nothing around their property but a simple barbed wire fence ... and any dog can slip one of those without even trying.

I really dislike comments like "The dog’s owner admits her pet got out, but she says that’s no reason to kill it."  That's absolutely nothing but exaggeration ... the reason that her dog could be legally euthanized is not because she got out, it's because she killed four of her neighbors chickens when she did.  

In the video, Sophie (who is a good looking pup) is wearing a 'choke chain collar', I've had two dogs who could slip those.  All the dog has to do is shake his head to loosen the collar and back out of it, inattentive owner = loose dog!

Also, the comment section has "people who have chickens are asking for predators"; first, that's tantamount to blaming the fellow who owns chickens because they were savaged by a predator. Secondly, a neighbors pet dog is not what most of us would consider a predator. I'd consider wolves, badgers, hawks as predators. When the neighbors dog can be classed as a predator then the owner is completely within his rights to kill it.

Renee, the only comment I have about the time it's taking is that this is a misdemeanor charge, typically if these aren't contested they 'disappear' quickly; if contested they go on the docket with all the other cases and the backlog in most state courts is horrendous. There is no such case (2015M255) listed on the court's docket in either Elbert or Douglas counties (18th DA district covers both)

Sensationalizing the case is quite apt to produce exactly the results they do not want. The DA is doing his job, prosecuting law breakers and the law is written for a reason - regrettably in some cases, while it may seem unfair it must be enforced equitably across the board or it gives the impression that some are 'above the law'.
If the DA feels that the case is being sensationalized in order to obtain a verdict that is contrary to the law, he will quite likely strive to follow the law to the letter.
If the news or other reporting strive to paint the DA as the bad guy (which they, thankfully do not do in this case) the he's apt to give no thought of leniency.