Whether it is an artificial limb centre I am setting up or a child helpline
service, there is sure to be at least one question on the stray dog
'menace'. It is a shame how disinformation and unthinking repetition has
caused the term 'menace' to be associated with creatures as helpless and
persecuted as homeless Indian dogs. I would like to believe that people who
continuously press for their killing do so out of a lack of basic
understanding of the issue and not out of an innate cruelty. Therefore let
me explain why dog destruction campaigns don't work.
As they grew more congested, our cities grew more violent and intolerant.
Animals were the first to bear the brunt. Whether it was beautification
schemes ('cities are built for people not animals'), or health drives ('you
want people to live or animals?!'), or 'concerned' citizen calls ('There is
a bitch who has littered near our house, please take her
away"),municipalities that never found time to clear drains or garbage,
would respond with alarming alacrity to despatch death squads. Paid a
pittance per dog, untrained Class IV employees sought out easy prey--
healthy, friendly animals that respond to a human call (diseased/violent
dogs hole up in ditches and drains and are much more difficult to catch).
Clamped about the neck with iron tongs, these dogs were dragged off to the
pound. After 3-7 days without food or water, those not already dead, were
splashed with water and touched with a live current. Low voltage and
fluctuations meant several shocks and long minutes before the animal died.
For 50 years millions of dogs were murdered by electrocution, poisoning,
beating, shooting, starvation and burying alive.
Did the dog population decrease? Not by a single dog.
Did dog bites and rabies cases reduce? No, they actually increased.
So all that killing was not just cruel, it was totally ineffective.
Killing does not reduce the urban dog population by a single dog.
Conversely, stopping the killing does not increase that number either.
In 1980, Delhi's stray dog population was estimated at 1.5 lakhs. The
municipality killed an average of 50,000 dogs a year. Yet in 1990 , MCD
surveys showed that the stray dog population stood at exactly the same
figure. One year after the killing was stopped and before an alternative was
introduced, it still remained the same.
It is a shame how disinformation and unthinking repetition has caused the
term 'menace' to be associated with creatures as helpless and persecuted as
homeless Indian dogs. I would like to believe that people who continuously
press for their killing do so out of a lack of basic understanding of the
issue and not out of an innate cruelty. Therefore let me explain why dog
destruction campaigns don't work.
As they grew more congested, our cities grew more violent and intolerant.
Animals were the first to bear the brunt. Whether it was beautification
schemes ('cities are built for people not animals'), or health drives ('you
want people to live or animals?!'), or 'concerned' citizen calls ('There is
a bitch who has littered near our house, please take her
away"),municipalities that never found time to clear drains or garbage,
would respond with alarming alacrity to despatch death squads. Paid a
pittance per dog, untrained Class IV employees sought out easy prey--
healthy, friendly animals that respond to a human call (diseased/violent
dog's hole up in ditches and drains and are much more difficult to catch).
Clamped about the neck with iron tongs, these dogs were dragged off to the
pound. After 3-7 days without food or water, those not already dead, were
splashed with water and touched with a live current. Low voltage and
fluctuations meant several shocks and long minutes before the animal died.
For 50 years millions of dogs were murdered by electrocution, poisoning,
beating, shooting, starvation and burying alive.
Did the dog population decrease? Not by a single dog.
Did dog bites and rabies cases reduce? No, they actually increased.
So all that killing was not just cruel, it was totally ineffective.
Killing does not reduce the urban dog population by a single dog.
Conversely, stopping the killing does not increase that number either.
In 1980, Delhi's stray dog population was estimated at 1.5 lakhs. The
municipality killed an average of 50,000 dogs a year. Yet in 1990, MCD
surveys showed that the stray dog population stood at exactly the same
figure. One year after the killing was stopped and before an alternative was
introduced, it still remained the same.
Zoological studies establish that animal populations multiply to the extent
that can be sustained by the environment. Stray dogs come into a colony and
live there because of the availability of rodents and garbage. As long as
this food source exists, there will be dogs to fill that biological niche.
Killing fails because there is an exact dog for dog replacement-- the dogs
you kill or remove are simply replaced by another lot-- either surviving
females will have larger litters or other dogs will move in. In fact killing
aggravates the problem because while dogs native to an area are friendly
with its residents, new dogs are strangers to the territory and likely to be
hostile initially.
Why are we killing dogs ? To reduce rabies and bites. An expert committee
set up by WHO internationally concluded that catching and killing dogs was
both ineffective and costly. "All too often, authorities confronted with the
problem of stray dogs, have turned to mass destruction in the hope of
finding a quick solution, only to discover that the destruction had to
continue, year after year with no end in sight" reported Dr K.Bogel, Chief
Vet Public Health Unit, WHO. The only way to reduce dog numbers and
eliminate rabies is through a sensible, systematic mass sterilisation
programme.("Rabies elimination by vaccination of the dog population is the
most cost-beneficial strategy" Dr. FX Meslin of the Deptt of Communicable
Diseases Surveillance of WHO) Instead of killing them, dogs should be
prevented from being born. This is how countries like Spain and Hong Kong
have achieved zero-rabies levels.
Based on this information, the Animal Birth Control (ABC) programme was
formulated wherein street dogs are brought in, dewormed, vaccinated,
sterilised and tagged for identification before being released into their
original localities. This way, the population does not increase, familiar
dogs protect their own areas and live out their natural lives harmlessly and
healthily. Sterilisation also reduces sexual as well as maternal canine
aggressive behaviour. Best of all, instead of money and manpower being
wasted on endless killing, this scheme is of limited duration and offers a
permanent long term solution to rabies and the dog population.
Let us look at the economics involved. Weigh the cost of 14 human anti
rabies injections against the price of a single canine vaccine. Also factor
in the number of man-days lost and the compensation package for rabies
victims. In Delhi, in 1989 this was computed at Rs 5 crores. Against this,
the total amount required for mass vaccination and sterilisation of Delhi's
1.25 lakh dogs is only Rs 48 lakhs (approx Rs 400/- per dog) and that too
for only a few years. The Bangkok Metropolitan Authority has allocated the
equivalent of Rs. 6 crores to sterilise and vaccinate its 1.2 lakh dogs.
After a test project, Turkish municipalities have also adopted and funded
such a programme called the Fethiye Stray Dog Project. Staring from
California, each borough and town in America is coming around to a No Kill
policy. This year Texas hosts a convention for NGOs and municipal health
workers from across America on the ABC ( animal birth control programme)
Since it is always rabies statistics that are used to scare the public and
revive senseless killing sprees of homeless dogs, let's take a look at
these. While official figures have not been changed since 1994 (
extrapolations from 3 hospitals are done instead ! ), a survey by Hoechst
Marion Roussel concludes that rabies deaths are definitely on the decline.
Since , in the minds of the public rabies is always related to dog bites,
how many dog bites are from homeless dogs ? How many bites by pet dogs?
Studies in Hyderabad reveal that 47% or almost half of all dog bites
actually came from unvaccinated pet dogs. I am willing to wager that the
figure is even higher. MCD documents as far back as 1989 show that 90% of
the dog bites in Delhi come from pet dogs.
Although the WHO recommendations on sterilsation and vaccination were given
to every municipality head in India as early as 1990, killing continued
unabated. I finally went to court and proved that since it was not working,
we needed to replace dog destruction with a more scientific strategy. It was
not and never has been a pro or anti dog issue. It is simply finding the
best way to eliminate the problem rather than , simplistically, the animal.
Subsequently the animal welfare groups have had to fight this out in many
High Courts : Mumbai, Bangalore, Goa,Vishakhapatnam,
Jaipur,Hyderabad-Secunderabad. We have won every case : the last was won in
Bangalore.
The ABC programme is now mandatory in India. Adopted by the Env & Forests
Ministry, it has been upheld by a number of High Courts (so clearly its
logic has been thoroughly examined) and there is a directive from the Union
Urban Development Ministry to all panchayats and municipalities on the
matter. It is illegal for homeless animals to be killed. The Veterinary
Council has issued a directive to all its animal husbandry vets and colleges
to learn the programme and cooperate with the municipalities and NGOs. The
ABC programme is being conducted by animal welfare organisations in
conjunction with local municipalities all over India and the results are
very encouraging. Jaipur, which started ABC in 1994 has been rabies-free for
the past 4 years and dog bites are down from a few thousand to just about a
hundred. Bangalore, which began in 2000, has reduced its dogs to 70,000 from
over a lakh, its bites by 30% and its rabies cases to zero. Hyderabad rabies
cases are down from 53 to just 1. Pune, Chennai, Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata all
show declining trends in both dog numbers and disease. Calcutta's Jyoti Basu
and the mayor were the first people to immediately grasp the concept and
hand over the pound for the ABC programme. Chennai's CM was next. Bangalore
not only gave the pound but has put a lot of money into the programme. Delhi
has made 4 clinics that will add to the NGOs who have been sterilising dogs
for the last 5 years. Every major city which had spent lakhs to kill is
turning the same infrastructure round to work for vaccination and
sterilisation. Goa is the first full state which has banned dog killing (
they used to pay people to shoot) and has set up spaying centres.
Vaccination programmes in Thailand, Laos, the Philippines, and Vietnam etc
have all been similarly successful. By contrast, in countries like Pakistan,
Bangladesh, Nepal, Cambodia and Iran that still kill, dog bites have gone up
3 times. In Iran alone, where thousands of dogs are killed dog bites have
risen from 66, 370 in 1987 to 183,000 in 1997. According to Dr Salahuddin of
Karachi's Liaquat National Hospital, "There are 55-60 dog bite cases a day.
Regular dog destruction campaigns in large cities have failed to reduce
these".
However if the ABC drive is to succeed across the country, it must have
public understanding and support.
The programme comes under constant threat from ignorant panchayats,
overzealous municipal councillors, officious resident welfare association
heads (usually retired bureaucrats who are used to picking on the weak),
defence cantonment commandants and I am sorry to add, sensationalist media
('packs of rabid killer dogs lie in wait for children'-- fact of the
matter--one child bitten by a dog in an abandoned area near a tannery which
dumps carcasses in the open thereby becoming a feeding ground. The
unaccustomed human incursion was probably mistaken as a threat by hungry
dogs and had nothing to do with rabies). Many of these reports are
motivated. When suddenly there is a spate of articles giving completely
untrue statistics on dog bites/rabies etc and baying for dog blood,
investigation has revealed that these have been fed to the press by people
involved with the dog leather trade. I'm sure that most of you don't know
that dogs are stripped and their skins sold as cheap leather to exporters.(
This was first discovered in Hyderabad where the hysteria for dog killing
builds up every few years and vaccinated, sterilised dogs are bludgeoned to
death) The American Congress has ,in fact, brought a Bill asking for the
banning of dog leather from Korea and India! But every such mischievous,
misleading story is followed by a vicious backlash that puts the entire
programme in jeopardy.
Every project has a gestation period which should not be interrupted in
order that the programmes achieve its targeted goals. If we've spent 50
years killing dogs without achieving anything, surely we can give an
alternative programme at least 5 years to be effective. There are too many
people and programmes that take too many short cuts and achieve too few
results. India needs more people who look beyond the obvious to achieve the
maximum public good.
Finally let us look at the basic question: Why should stray dogs be
considered a nuisance at all? Dogs are naturally friendly animals. Many of
the dogs that live on the street are befriended by poor people and in turn
provide them security. They do not steal, beg, or obstruct traffic-- fearful
of being kicked or stoned, they actually take great pains not to get in
anyone's way. Delhi has 120 lakh people and just over 1 lakh street dogs. A
one to 120 ratio cannot be called a 'menace'! (Besides if even one in 100
people were simply to adopt a street dog, end of problem.)
Far from being a nuisance, street dogs actually perform a vital civic
function. The dog is nature's city scavenger and predator. If you remove
him, apart from the piling up of huge quantities of garbage, the rat
population will multiply dangerously. Rats do not live underground for fear
of humans but for fear of cats and dogs. New York exterminated its feral dog
population, today it has the largest number of rats in the world. Closer
home Surat got rid of its dogs and got the plague instead. The dog plays a
crucial part in the urban natural cycle-- he is to the city what the wolf is
to the jungle. Do you realise that a single pair of rats turns into 35,000
in one year. Can you handle that? Can your municipality? When status quoists
press for the resumption of needless violence, it would be wise to consider
whether it is we who are protecting the street dog or is it really the
street dog who is protecting us? Who wants rabies to increase?
Smt Maneka Gandhi
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"English Learner's Cafe" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/english_learners?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
