Experts Challenge Mass Dog Removal Plans in Supreme Court Case
A powerful coalition of international experts has submitted a critical warning to the Supreme Court. They oppose proposals to remove and mass-shelter India's community dogs. The experts argue this approach would harm public health, break existing laws, damage urban ecosystems, and waste public money without improving safety.
Who Are These Experts?
The group includes leading figures from multiple fields. Chinny Krishna, who created India's Animal Birth Control program, has signed the statement. Evolutionary biologist Lee Dugatkin from the University of Louisville in the US joined him. Anindita Bhadra from IISER Kolkata, public health specialist Leena Menghaney, and Pushpinder Singh Khera from AIIMS Jodhpur also added their names. Julie Corfmat of Mission Rabies supported the warning too.
Several respected organizations back their position. The International Companion Animal Network (ICAN), Pet Dog Trainers of Europe (PDTE), and the International Institute for Canine Ethics (IICE) all stand with them. The Bangalore Hundeskole Academy for Research and Canine Studies (BHARCS) also supports the coalition's analysis.
Key Arguments Against Mass Removal
The experts present several strong points against large-scale dog removal.
Stable Dog Communities Disrupted
Free-living dogs form organized social groups when they have consistent food, sterilization, and vaccination. Removing them on a large scale breaks these systems. The empty territories quickly attract new dogs. These newcomers often lack vaccination and sterilization. This situation typically leads to more dog bites and higher disease risks.
Rabies Control Undermined
Mass removal destroys herd immunity against rabies. India's current Catch-Neuter-Vaccinate-Release (CNVR) system works when implemented properly. It aims to vaccinate at least 70% of dogs in any area, meeting international standards. Data shows clear results. Human rabies deaths and dog-bite incidents drop sharply in regions with steady sterilization and vaccination programs. Abandoning this proven method risks losing two decades of progress.
The Dangers of Mass Shelters
Experts highlight serious problems with mass sheltering plans. High-density animal housing is classified globally as a biohazard activity. It requires strict quarantine measures, continuous disease monitoring, and strong worker safety protocols. Many shelters struggle with overcrowding. Animals suffer from stress-induced immune system weakness. Diseases spread rapidly in such environments, especially where enforcement capacity remains limited.
Scientific Perspectives
Lee Dugatkin addressed common misconceptions. He stated that justifications for removal often rely on myths, not biological facts. "These dogs have lived alongside humans in India for thousands of years," Dugatkin explained. "Disrupting stable populations because of fear or wrong information ignores everything we understand about animal behavior and disease ecology."
Anthrozoologist Sindhoor Pangal said the debate has lost touch with evidence. "Replacing proven, low-cost public health systems with a mass-detention model is not just unscientific," she argued. "It actively increases risk while draining resources that should strengthen vaccination and disease prevention."
Ecosystem and Legal Concerns
Free-living dogs perform important roles in urban ecosystems. They scavenge waste and control populations of rats and other scavengers. These other animals cannot be vaccinated or monitored effectively. Sudden dog removal can cause rodent population explosions. This increase links directly to diseases like leptospirosis and plague.
Legal experts point to clear conflicts with existing regulations. Mass relocation directly contradicts the Animal Birth Control (Dog) Rules of 2023. These rules mandate sterilization, vaccination, and return to original territories. Large-scale confinement also raises constitutional and labor safety concerns. The occupational hazards associated with mass animal housing present serious risks for workers.
The coalition's message is clear. They urge the Supreme Court to consider scientific evidence, public health data, and legal frameworks before making any decision about India's community dogs.
