People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals - India warned that relocating stray dogs is “not scientific” and “had never worked” before.
Published Aug 12, 2025 | 6:52 PM ⚊ Updated Aug 12, 2025 | 6:52 PM
Stray dogs on a street. (iStock)
Synopsis: PETA said forced removal of stray dogs will cause uproar in communities that care deeply for them. It will also ultimately do nothing to curb the dog population, reduce rabies, or prevent dog bite incidents. It added that building sufficient shelter facilities for such large numbers would be unrealistic and that relocating dogs could lead to territorial fights.
Doubts have been raised over the feasibility of the Supreme Court’s order to capture, vaccinate, sterilise, and house stray dogs in dedicated shelters within eight weeks.
Many felt that the order was impractical considering the stray—or community—dog population in Delhi and the National Capital Region (NCR), comprising Noida, Gurugram, and Faridabad.
A Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadev issued the five-point order on Monday, 11 August, in light of increasing dog bites and rabies cases.
Though the Supreme Court directive applied only to Delhi and the NCR, it sparked concern among animal welfare groups and civic bodies across India. They questioned the practicality and ethics of the large-scale relocation of dogs.
The order called for setting up new dog shelters within eight weeks, staffed with enough personnel to manage sterilisation and long-term confinement, with CCTV surveillance to prevent the removal of animals.
It also instructed officials to round up stray dogs from all neighbourhoods, focusing on high-risk areas, and to capture at least 5,000 within six weeks. Any failure, the court warned, would invite strict action.
Additionally, authorities have been asked to keep daily records of all captured and housed dogs, launch a dedicated helpline within a week for reporting dog bites or rabies cases, and ensure that any such report is acted upon within four hours. The directive also called for a detailed account of anti-rabies vaccine stocks and availability.
The court stressed that “no sentiments should be involved” in the exercise and that the safety of infants and young children was of top priority. The matter would be reviewed at the next hearing, with compliance reports expected from all bodies concerned.
Responding to the Supreme Court’s order, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals India (PETA) warned that the approach was “not scientific” and “had never worked” before.
The organisation stressed that many residents viewed street dogs as part of the community, and removing them could lead to resistance.
Referring to a 2022–23 survey, PETA noted that Delhi had an estimated 10 lakh community dogs, with fewer than half sterilised.
“Forced removal will cause uproar in communities that care deeply for them. It will also ultimately do nothing to curb the dog population, reduce rabies, or prevent dog bite incidents,” PETA stated.
It added that building sufficient shelter facilities for such large numbers would be unrealistic and that relocating dogs could lead to territorial fights.
PETA pointed out that since 2001, India has mandated sterilisation and anti-rabies vaccination for community dogs. The organisation emphasised that sterilisation calms them while vaccination protects public health, arguing that these measures remain the most humane and effective means of managing street dog populations.
Vasanthi Mantravadi, Founder President of People for Animals (PFA), Hyderabad and Secunderabad, described the Supreme Court’s sheltering directive as “the most inhumane, unworkable solution”.
“When even pet dogs sometimes don’t receive proper attention, how can we expect shelter dogs to survive?” she asked, adding that the Constitution gives animals the right to live in their natural habitat.
Speaking to South First, Vasanthi said the abrupt removal of all community dogs would disturb the ecological balance, triggering a “vacuum effect” triggering.
“If the dogs are taken away, rats will come, monkeys will come, and with them, the diseases they carry,” she warned. “As long as food is available on the streets, stray animals will come,” she added.
In her view, the real challenge was not the presence of dogs but the incidents of dog bites, which could be addressed through strict enforcement of the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2024. Removing territorial dogs, she added, would only allow unsterilised dogs from other areas to move in, undoing any short-term gains.
Vasanthi felt it would be logistically and financially unfeasible to shelter large numbers of dogs.
“In Hyderabad alone, there are three to five lakh stray dogs. A shelter can hold at best 300 or 400,” Vasanthi said, adding, “In NCR, there is not enough space for people, making the idea of accommodating lakhs of animals unrealistic.”
Running shelters required continuous feeding, cleaning, water, electricity, and trained personnel, all of which, she argued, make such mass operations unsustainable. She noted that overcrowded shelters would become disease hotspots, further undermining public health goals.
Vasanthi urged a shift from reactive to preventive measures. She recommended reducing open food waste on streets, which would attract stray animals, and scaling up sterilisation and anti-rabies vaccination drives, which would control population growth and calm the animals.
“If we remove the dogs without addressing why they are there, we will only replace one problem with another,” she stated.
To employ waste management as a tool against dog bites, the Supreme Court’s Administrative General Branch, on Tuesday, 12 August, mandated that leftover food items should be disposed of in properly covered dustbins within its complex.
The directive was in response to increased incidents “of roaming of stray dogs in the corridors and also inside the lift in and around the Supreme Court Complex”.
“All leftover food items must be disposed of exclusively in properly covered dustbins. Under no circumstances should food be discarded in open areas or uncovered containers,” the circular said.
It added that the measure was crucial to prevent animals from scavenging for discarded food items.
(Edited by Majnu Babu).
