Man Bites Dog

…in a manner of speaking, that is. For it is the irresponsible behaviour of pet owners that is to blame for the menace and misery of street dogs

Open, 5 February, 2011

First, some figures. The Indian pet dog industry has long crossed the Rs 100 crore mark and is eyeing a projected market worth Rs 350 crore by 2012. We have an estimated 10 million pet dogs in India (3.6 million in six major cities). The country’s pet dog population is growing by an estimated 26 per cent, a rate second only to Japan’s. There are dog restaurants (Bow Wow, Gurgaon), dog parlours (Scooby Scrub in Delhi, Fuzzy Wuzzy in Bangalore and Tailwaggers in Mumbai), dog insurance (Bajaj Allianz General Insurance) and dog yoga (doga).

Now, some more figures. India has more than 25 million stray dogs. Few of these strays survive disease and vehicular accidents to die natural deaths. Nearly every second, someone is bitten by a dog. That amounts to more than 20 million bites a year, of which 30,000-40,000 turn out to be fatal. Dogs spread more than 60 diseases to humans. Rabies alone claims three human lives every hour. More than 80,000 quintals of dog shit and 3.3 million gallons of dog piss is discharged on Indian roads and fields daily, causing major health and environmental hazards.

The second set of data testifies to an alarming state of affairs that you can correctly blame on a callous society. But before you seek hope in the first set of data that speaks of how man’s best friendship is growing by the day, think again. The plight and menace of stray dogs in India are a direct consequence of irresponsible pet rearing.

Before the animal lover in you contests the statement, consider why we have not succeeded in controlling India’s stray dog population. Historically, we tried to reduce the number of strays by killing them, and we killed enough before giving up in frustration. Much before it became an animal rights issue, it was evident that killing, unless done en masse, could not bring down the numbers. With increasingly abundant resources (such as food in garbage dumps), the partial elimination of a population only reduces competition for resources and boosts breeding.

From killing, we moved on to sterilisation. Since 1992, the Government and NGOs have been carrying out Animal Birth Control (ABC) programmes in several cities. But unless at least 70 per cent of a canine population is sterilised within a six-month window, ABC drives fail to have any stabilising effect. Left to a few NGOs, no Indian city has yet achieved this target that requires neutering 600-800 stray dogs every day over six months. But even if we expand capacity and manage to hit the target, the stray dog population will continue to swell.

To understand why, we have to look beyond the apparently happy picture that dog owners and their pets present. In India, dog owners are not required to register their pets. It is not mandatory to get one’s pets sterilised or vaccinated. Owners simply do not need to be responsible for their dogs or their dogs’ pups. So every day, hundreds of unwanted pet dogs and pups are abandoned on Indian streets. Also, thousands of pet dogs are allowed to roam or break free and romance the strays.

The result? Governments and NGOs keep neutering a few street dogs while the country’s pet dogs, thanks to callous owners, keep adding to the stray population. It is like an attempt to mop the floor, to quote activist and researcher Meghna Uniyal, while leaving the tap open. It is commendable to adopt and shelter strays, but it is useless if these animals are not confined or sterilised.

Besides, the so-called Indian street dog has very little Indian about it. The stray population is mostly mongrels of various crossbreeds. Uniyal emphasises that ABC drives must target pedigreed pets with high breeding frequency. Like in Taiwan, the Government could offer incentives to owners to get their pets sterilised. To ensure that the carrot comes with a stick, a steep tax can be levied on breeding pets.

But reckless pet owners are responsible not just for the growing population of stray dogs. They must also take the blame for most dog attacks on people.

In The Ecology of Stray Dogs, possibly the most authoritative work on the subject, Dr Alan Beck observed: ‘Loose or straying pets and stray (feral) dogs are different. True stray dogs form somewhat stable packs… are more active at night and cautious about people. In general, straying pets have smaller home ranges and (are) active when people are.’

Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, observes that ‘street dogs are relatively non-territorial because they do not have any particular home or anyone to defend except their own pups. But dogs that are often kept in homes and fed by specific individuals at specific places tend to become territorial and protective’ and lose inhibitions.

In simple terms, pets and abandoned pets roaming free on roads are likely to be less fearful of people than strays are. Around its owner’s house, such a dog is likely to act strongly territorial and aggressively protective.

And then there is petting outside the home. We all know our neighbourhood good samaritans who feed a few stray dogs outside their homes or workplaces. This has the same effect as petting, turning stray dogs territorial and aggressive. Such feeding has also created monsters of monkeys in many parts of India. Be it religious or compassionate, Indians are never short of inspiration to feed feral animals. Why, even the Union Ministry of Culture in 2001 doled out Rs 10 crore to various organisations on Mahavir Jayanti for feeding stray animals.

Barely two weeks ago, amid demands for culling stray dogs responsible for killing 18-month-old Prashanto in Bangalore on 13 January, all media reports glossed over a vital detail. After the death, the police arrested one Gonti Yadav around whom the stray dogs lived. Apparently, Gonti used to routinely feed them and they followed him to the victim’s hut when he visited the child’s parents that night. Responsible for the killing or not (no scratch mark was found on the partially mutilated body), the stray dogs in question were not, to borrow from Dr Beck, ‘true stray’ dogs. Indeed, animal welfare is not as simple or straightforward as it sounds.

Merritt makes a compelling point when he offers medical statistics from the US where the last street dog disappeared sometime in the 1970s. But a 300 per cent growth in the number of pet dogs between 1950 and 2010 resulted in an 800 per cent rise in cases of dog bites requiring hospital treatment. In a
country without any stray population, then, 4.7 million people are still bitten by dogs every year.

An impromptu survey of 20 friends in different Indian cities tells me that nine of them have been bitten by dogs. Strays were responsible in only two cases. My family’s last dog died when I was eight. She bit me once. I was too young to follow the don’t-disturb-during-meal rule.

Irresponsible pet owners are the species’ biggest enemy. There are few sights more pathetic than orphan pups scrounging on the roadside. Tokenism in the name of animal welfare only increases the population of strays. It gives dogs a bad name as aggressors. It creates an environment of hate that seeks to justify culling. I am not sure if environmentalist Edward Abbey saw it coming, but yes, when man wants to be seen as dog’s best friend, the dog has a problem.