Indiscriminate killing of stray dogs
By Aileen Qaiser
THE recent attacks by rabid dogs on some 80 people in Rawalpindi city are testament to the growing menace of stray dogs in our cities, a problem which is already being faced by Karachi.
This menace could eventually spill over into Islamabad where hundreds of people who daily walk the streets or play and jog in numerous parks will be at risk of being attacked, if we fail to effectively control the population of stray dogs in our twin city.
Apart from being a public health hazard, rabies being a contagious and fatal viral disease, stray dogs also often cause traffic accidents. Besides, the sight of sick hungry dogs roaming the streets and foraging for food is distressing to residents and visitors, and tarnishes the image of our cities.
It was, however, shocking to learn from reports of the attacks by rabid dogs in Rawalpindi that our method of solving the problem is the random killing of stray dogs by shooting them on sight.
According to the District Health Department, its teams had killed 65 dogs (and a suspected rabid goat as well!) within two days of the dog attacks in Rawalpindi. The department also claimed that in 2006 it had eliminated 730 stray dogs in the city and 1,562 stray dogs in the peripheral areas.
A total of 2,292 dogs indiscriminately killed in 2006 in the Rawalpindi area and yet the result in the beginning of 2007 is 80 people being attacked by dogs!
It is regretful that we are still practising this inhumane method of controlling the stray dog population when the World Health Organization and the
World Society for the Protection of Animals, an international animal welfare organization, have long opposed the method of killing stray dogs and instead have been advocating the ‘neuter and release’ strategy.
Not only is indiscriminate killing cruel and barbaric but, according to these organisations, it does not work in the long term. As stated in the WHO Guidelines for Dog Population Management: “Any reduction in population density through mortality is rapidly compensated by better reproduction and survival. In other words, when dogs are removed, the survivors’ life expectancy increases because they have better access to the resources, and there is less competition for resources”.
Thus, according to the same WHO report: “Removal and killing of dogs should never be considered as the most effective way of dealing with a problem of surplus dogs in the community.
It has no effect whatsoever on the root cause of the problem”.
Although killing or poisoning — as it is being practised in some cities elsewhere — reduces the stray dog population in the short term, it can never be carried out intensively and persistently enough to eradicate them.
As one American research study reportedly claimed, one fertile female dog (together with its subsequent offsprings) can breed up to 67,000 offsprings in 6 years! This is why it is widely believed that killing dogs can never effectively solve the stray dog problem unless every single female is exterminated.
Even when a large number of dogs in an area are killed, they are quickly replaced because the conditions that sustain the dog population remain unchanged.
That is why dogs are still prospering in some countries despite carrying out wholesale slaughtering of stray dogs for many years.
“In the long term, control of reproduction (i.e., neuter and release) is by far the most effective strategy of dog population management”, recommended the WHO in its 1990 report. This strategy involves catching the dogs, neutering them and vaccinating them against rabies, and then putting them back in their own areas. Only those dogs which are sick, incurable and dangerous should be humanely put to sleep.
The Pakistan Animal Welfare Society (Paws) has been campaigning for the adoption of the neuter and release strategy to control Karachi’ stray dog population, reported to number one hundred thousand. But so far, our local governments, at least in Rawalpindi and Karachi, seem to lack the political will and understanding, and perhaps the funding as well, to work cooperatively with local animal welfare organizations like Paws to reduce the population of stray dogs humanely.
It is a pity that we no longer have the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), an office which used to have branches in major cities of Pakistan (e.g., Karachi and Gujranwala). This office was vested with powers to arrest people for cruelty to animals “whether it be a caged parrot or a cart- pulling donkey — and haul them to the city courts to be prosecuted and fined for the offence under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (1890).
If the SPCA existed today, it would not have tolerated the kind of wholesale killing of dogs being practised by our city authorities, nor would it have condoned the reported hunting of 800 partridges and 20 wild boars in Sanghar district by two federal ministers last month.
However, we do have now another local animal welfare organisation, the Pakistan Animal Rights Organization (Paro), which has been lobbying for stiffer penalties for cruelty against animals. Paro has been calling for amendments to be made to the 1890 Act, especially exemplary sentences for dog fighters and other animal baiters.
If we can get the 1890 Act amended to specifically make the indiscriminate killing of dogs an offence under the law, this could help pave the way for our local governments to adopt a more humane and compassionate way of solving the stray dog menace in our cities.
The chances of success would be greater if local governments implement the neuter and release strategy in close cooperation with local animal welfare organizations (e.g., Paws, Paro and perhaps even the Kennel Club of Pakistan), as well as commercial organizations like pharmaceutical companies, banks, consumer products’ companies, etc., all of which can play an important role as sponsors.
If implemented efficiently, not only would we be on the path towards permanently controlling the stray dog problem on our streets, we would also be correcting our image as a society uncaring to animals and wildlife.


