Tackling stray dogs is as simple as ABC. Court's impractical order misses it

India Today

9 hours ago

On August 11, the Supreme Court of India dropped what was meant to be a bold ruling: remove stray dogs from the streets of Delhi-NCR, sterilise and shelter them permanently. The stated aim? To protect children and the elderly from rabies and dog bites. Noble, yes—but the ruling is neither practical nor humane.Here's the deal: Delhi authorities were instructed to pick up thousands of strays within just eight weeks—setting up shelters with sterilisation, immunisation, care, and CCTV monitoring, while forbidding the return of any dog to the streets.advertisementBut reality bites back—hard. Delhi's stray dog population is estimated to be between 5,00,000 and 10 lakh. Yet the court cited just 5,000 dogs for immediate action—how was that number decided? It seems utterly arbitrary. There's a staggering mismatch between the scale of the problem and the resources available.THE PRICE TAG OF IGNORANCE
Let's be blunt: housing hundreds of thousands of dogs isn't just expensive—it's outrageously impractical. Animal welfare advocate Maneka Gandhi laid it out clearly: building 3,000 shelters with drainage, kitchens, water supply, and staff could cost around Rs 15,000 crore. That's not just a big number—it's fantasy-level budgeting. India simply doesn't have that kind of funding sitting idle.DOGS DON'T STAY PUTHere's where logic wags its tail. Dogs don't respect jurisdictional boundaries. The court overlooked something obvious: strays will keep wandering in—from neighboring villages, Noida, Gurgaon, Ghaziabad—laughing in the face of state borders. You can't fence in logic with a court order.The ABC (Animal Birth Control) method, which sterilises and returns dogs to their original location, isn't sentimental—it's scientific. It acknowledges that existing dogs keep new ones out. The court claimed, 're-releasing sterilised dogs back to the same place that's absolutely absurd.' Yet their alternative ignores basic dog behavior: clear an area of dogs, and it will soon be repopulated—by other dogs, or by species like cats and rats.DISEASE OUTBREAKS LURK INSIDE SHELTERSHere's another unpleasant truth the ruling glosses over: shelters are breeding grounds for disease. Crowded, stressed dogs in confinement? That's a perfect recipe for kennel cough, parvovirus, skin infections—and yes, rabies can spread rapidly if vaccination and hygiene protocols slip even slightly. The court's plan doesn't appear to guarantee robust, sustainable disease-control measures across thousands of animals—a ticking time bomb waiting to explode.HE ABC LOGIC—SHORT AND SHARPIn a nutshell, ABC makes sense: sterilise, vaccinate, and return. It's humane, cost-effective, scientifically supported, and legally upheld under the ABC Rules, reaffirmed as recently as May 2024. It doesn't pretend you can remove every stray. It gradually reduces the population, builds herd immunity, and respects animal behavior—without expensive shelters or unrealistic deadlines. The court's disdain for this method is deeply puzzling.THE ORDER ISN'T LEGALLY SOUND—PRECEDENT MATTERSadvertisementHere's another kicker: the August 11 order not only contradicts the ABC Rules but also overrides a May 2024 Supreme Court ruling that reaffirmed those rules after 16 years of deliberation. There's also a previous consensus from a three-judge bench directing sterilisation, vaccination, and return. A two-judge bench cannot simply override that. Legally shaky and constitutionally questionable, this new order lacks the weight of precedent. It's a serious misstep that needs correction.IN PLAIN TERMSFinancially absurd: Tens of thousands of crores for impossible shelters.Biologically flawed: Dogs will return; shelters spread disease.Scientifically inferior: Ignores proven ABC logic.Legally dubious: Contradicts a three-judge bench ruling and the ABC Rules.At its core, the court's August 11 ruling shows determination—but it's misdirected, unsustainable, and ultimately cruel to both animals and society. It treats strays as problems to be locked away, not living beings with needs and instincts.We need a smarter, more compassionate plan: scale up ABC, run community-based vaccination drives, partner with feeders, and increase public awareness. Strengthen legal frameworks—don't bulldoze them. The streets don't need fewer dogs—they need better solutions.Because when you catapult a ruling from sentiment to sentence, you must remember: the leash of logic must be stronger than the chain of emotion. Otherwise, everyone ends up losing.- EndsTune InMust Watch