Himalaya Harbinger, Uttarakhand Bureau
A coalition of multisectoral experts from a range of global institutions has lent its weight to petitioners in the stray dog case being heard in Supreme Court. The coalition warned that authorities’ proposals to remove and mass-shelter India’s free-living community
dogs could undermine public health, go beyond the law, destabilise urban ecosystems and impose enormous fiscal costs, without elivering greater public safety.
ZThe cautionary note draws on experience of veterans in public health, behavioural science, veterinary medicine and law. Signatories include Chinny Krishna who pioneered India’s Animal Birth Control programme, evolutionary biologist Lee Dugatkin (University of Louisville, US), Anindita Bhadra of IISER Kolkata, public health expert Leena Menghaney, Pushpinder Singh Khera of AIIMS Jodhpur, and Julie Corfmat of Mission Rabies among a host of others.
Organisations include International Companion Animal Network (ICAN), Pet Dog Trainers of Europe (PDTE), International Institute for
Canine Ethics (IICE) and Bangalore Hundeskole Academy for Research and Canine Studies (BHARCS). Highlights of their analysis:
Free-living dogs form stable social groups when food sources, sterilisation, and vaccination coverage remain consistent
Large-scale removal disrupts these systems,
creating territorial vacuums that are rapidly filled by other dogs — often unvaccinated and unsterilised an effect associated with increased dog-bite incidents and heightened disease risk.
Mass removal undermines rabies control by dismantling herd immunity. India’s existing Catch-Neuter-Vaccinate-Release (CNVR)
framework, when implemented consistently, targets the internationally recognised threshold of vaccinating at least 70% of dogs in a given area.
Data show steep declines in human rabies deaths and dog-bite incidence in areas with sustained sterilisation and vaccination
programmes. Abandoning this approach risks reversing hard-earned gains achieved over past two decades.
Mass sheltering, experts argue, compounds the risks. High-density animal housing is globally classified as a biohazard activity, requiring stringent quarantine, disease surveillance, and worker-safety protocols
Dugatkin noted claims justifying removal often rest on myths rather than biology. “These dogs have coexisted with humans in India for
millennia. Disrupting stable populations based on fear or misinformation ignores everything we know about animal behaviour and disease ecology,” he said.
Anthrozoologist Sindhoor Pangal said the debate had become detached from evidence. “Replacing proven, low-cost public-health
systems with a mass-detention model is not
just unscientific · it actively increases risk
—
while draining resources that should be
strengthening vaccination and disease
prevention,” she said.
Position statements from IICE highlight that
large shelters frequently experience
overcrowding, stress-induced
immunosuppression, and rapid disease transmission, particularly where enforcement capacity is limited
Free-living dogs play a role in urban
ecosystems by scavenging waste and limiting proliferation of rats and other scavengers that can’t be vaccinated or monitored. Sudden dog removal can lead to rodent population
explosions linked to diseases such as
leptospirosis and plague.
Legal experts point out that mass relocation directly contradicts the Animal Birth Control (Dog) Rules, 2023, which mandate sterilisation, vaccination, and return to the original territory. Large-scale confinement also raises constitutional and labour-safety concerns, given occupational hazards associated with mass animal housing.
