A ‘derisory’ fine of £300 imposed on the owner of two dogs involved in a horrific attack on sheep at Castleward Farm in Braddan has provoked outrage among the farming community.

The attack on the sheep, some of which were pregnant, left one of them dead with two others being put to sleep shortly afterwards due to their injuries. Four other sheep also suffered injuries.

The farmer, Alf Caine wrote to the Examiner following the attack, saying: ‘In my opinion our Manx farming industry and the Manx public were not afforded proper justice... I am appalled at the derisory fine of just £300 imposed on the owner of the two dogs that attacked a flock of 110 sheep, resulting in death and inflicting horrendous injuries to a number of sheep.

‘I am led to believe this attack was the second attack on sheep in a matter of just two months by the same two dogs.’

Mr Caine was especially upset that, as one impacted by this attack, he was not advised of the court date and not requested or invited to give evidence.

He wrote: ‘Sadly we were not afforded the opportunity to express how we feel and how this dog attack has affected us, clearly we are not that important we are just the people at the sharp end who had to actively deal with the two dogs attacking our sheep, when I had to drag one of the dogs off a severely injured sheep with my bare hands, I then safely handed over the dog to the police when they arrived at the farm, the police then in turn handed the dog safely back to the owner, whilst we at the farm had the delightful task of dealing with the mess the horrendous aftermath left behind by the two dogs attacking our flock of sheep.’

Although Mr Caine was not in court, Sarah Comish and Carolyn Lace from the Manx NFU were.

Ms Comish said: ‘As representatives of the MNFU we went along to observe how Isle of Man courts proceed in such cases. We noted that the defence lawyer was not aware of the previous case at Chibbanagh, as the defendant had not informed him. This complicated proceedings, as it took some time to clarify that the police had not issued an official caution in the previous incident.

‘Had they done this, it could have added weight to the prosecution case before the court.

‘There was similar frustration that, as there had not been submitted a ‘complaint’ against the dogs by the owner of the sheep, they could not be subject to a control order.

‘The police could have advised on this.

‘It was also disappointing that the vet’s bills could not be included as they had not been forwarded to the prosecution for consideration. The owner [of the sheep] was not aware they could do this. Livestock owners should be better advised by the police in these cases, which is certainly not always happening as we learned through recent feedback.’

When it came to the two dogs involved, the defence advocate said that the owner had since taken the dogs to doggie daycare for training and provided a letter as evidence of this and the court did not order any further action to be taken.

‘I do not harbour any ill feelings towards the owner of the two dogs, I’m sure this has been a very difficult time for her also.’

However he goes on: ‘In my opinion, these two dogs have now got a taste of blood.

‘I believe it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to train out from the two dogs their experiences of attacking sheep. What will the authorities do if the dogs attack livestock for a third time? Or, heaven forbid, if they attack a young child.

‘I would be a very nervous owner if I owned these two dogs.’

Sarah Comish agreed, saying: ‘We did not feel that submission of support from a doggy day care on the character of the dogs should be considered as ‘evidence’, neither should comments by the defendant that they were ‘lovely family pets’. In most incidents, livestock attacks are typically carried out by ‘lovely family pets.’

Both Mr Caine and the Manx NFU believe that a change in the law is necessary and that our current ‘Dogs Act 1990’ is inadequate for protecting livestock. Other jurisdictions have already been tightening the law on this issue: in May 2021, Scotland amended the law on dogs that attack livestock so that owners can now be fined up to £40,000 or imprisoned for six months.

‘It allows the courts to ban a convicted person from owning a dog or allowing their dog to go on agricultural land.

Sarah Comish said: ‘What this specific case really demonstrated is that the police, with some exceptions, do not take the matter seriously enough, but ultimately the legislation is so weak that there is little that can be done.

‘We felt that the court achieved the best outcome they could with the legislation and submissions they had.

‘It is important to recognise that our Animal Welfare Bill, designed to protect animals from suffering, recently been passed by Legislative Council, does not contain any updated legislation to protect livestock from dogs.

‘It begs the question why do we continue to wait to decide on legislation that would protect animals from this unnecessary suffering?

‘We should instead take guidance from other jurisdictions such as Scotland, who have already implemented stronger penalties for livestock worrying.’