Get involved in YOUR city and locality - Improve Your World
Get involved in YOUR city and locality - Improve Your World
Get involved in YOUR city and locality 
Improve Your World Home | About Us | Sitemap | Search | Contact Us 

  Home >> Animal Issues - Stray Dogs >>  Response to Vinay's observations on the High Court order pertaining to Stray Dogs 

Response to Vinay - reg. stray dogs & Vinay's response

By just calling some number, you expect someone else to do all this for you? Even if you are willing to pay, that does not mean  much the treatment of an injured stray dog does not end with admitting it into the hospital and paying Rs.5000/-. Will you come and pick it up when it is well, and release it back into the locality? How much can the hospital do? And why should they do it? You got the animal in, it's your responsibility to take it out also. And whom do they call if the animal dies? Are you willing to then get the animal cremated?

A list of NGO's /organizations doing the job can be compiled, and is there in Karmayog, but is that going to help? We know they can't reach out to all the calls that come, and whatever they are doing is already extra.

I don't see MCGM doing much because for them the work of MCGM is just a job they don't care about the dogs at all. When I visit the animal hospitals to admit animals, I am often afraid for the animals do the ward boys and other staff who work there care for them, or is it just a job for them?

Vinay, you visit the Parel Hospital and see the animals there their state is pathetic but it's the best we have in Bombay, so what do we do?

3) Citizen in distress: 
Again, it is the citizen's problem, not the stray dogs' the animal Ngo's are totally out of this loop they are not here to attend to citizen's problems it is a local issue the citizens must tackle it locally understand the situation, look for a solution, and do it themselves. If garbage is the problem, as in garbage attracting the strays, get the street clean. If dogs need to be sterilized, get the job done, through MCGM, or by paying for the services of an NGO. There are several vets in the city, who will do the sterilization operation for cats and dogs at nominal cost for strays the citizens have to take the trouble to befriend the animal, take it to the vet, get the operation done, and treat it for post-op. 

If you care enough, you will do it but most people are just bothered by it, and want it out of their sight.

Again by calling a help-line, the problem cannot be tackled. It will be just temporarily shifted somewhere else.

MCGM shirking its work
One way for MCGM to get going is to have a separate department to tackle the stray dogs with budgets and man-power they will hire  the requisite people, they will arrange for the necessary space themselves agreed MCGM has said they can't do, they don't know, etc, but they have the money to get it done. This may be better than out-sourcing to the existing NGO's and creating new NGO's let the final blame still be with MCGM at present, MCGM is doing nothing, animal NGO's are struggling, and everyone is saying how bad the situation is. MCGM is responsible even if NGO's are doing extra work. If MCGM says it can't do the work, that is obviously incorrect hire the people to do it if there is no money even that can be

MCGM is also capitalizing on the pro and anti dog stance that exists on garbage it is clear, no one wants garbage, so they will get going on that one. The support for quick-fix "cheaper" solutions from the anti-stray dog lobby is what MCGM is playing up to.

1) participating in the process
regarding the "pets are the problem" email. I have a pet cat she was a stray, we adopted her 11 years ago she has her own toilet in our flat which she uses. But she still loves to go down to the garden and feel the grass below her feet, and roll in the mud, and smell exciting things in the bushes. Some people in my building take objection to her using the garden, so my mom usually takes her at the crack of dawn, when not many people are about, and she also takes this "pooper-scooper" that we have, to scoop up any of her droppings.

Sure there are stupid pet owners around, who will not clean up after their pets, but then there are also stupid people around who spit in public, and litter, etc. 

Basically to talk to unwilling people is like me being a vegetarian and trying to convert a non-veg to it
I'm happy with the way I am, if that person sees differently, that's his problem. I feel this is why the animal NGO's have not come in to participate: they have a clear ideology and path, which defies logic (you said yourself, how can someone have this much compassion?) they are doing their work there is no reward but the work itself the rest of the world can support them, or not they will continue with the work.

Another point: the reason why there are 2 polarised groups regarding dogs and not many related groups like for cleanliness, is that there is no profit making or business opportunities in this venture. Unlike in Cleanliness, where companies even have a business interest, there is no such factor in the case of stray dogs. It is compassion versus indifference/selfishness.


[Well said. I do, however, disagree with the following:

a) "If you care enough, you will find out the numbers and names." That logic and attitude defies me. It is the government's duty to ensure that info is available as easily as possible. I should not have to run pillar to post, or waste a lot of time to find out info. Especially when it is common standard info that is needed by lots and lots of people.

b) "You got the animal in, it's your responsibility to take it out also." I don't think so. That way, who will help a (non-dog) accident victim? 

c) "it is the citizen's problem, not the stray dogs' " - yes, but the way some of them will tackle it / are trying to tackle it will harm the stray dog cause.

d) "If you care enough, you will do it" - that's ok in theory, not a wrong expectation in reality. I should not have to care 'enough' based on someone else's definition of 'enough'. I want the govt / system to perform.

e) "if that person sees differently, that's his problem" - unfortunately, it can also become your problem. The veg- non-veg  example is not a good one unless it offends you religiously if a close family member is not veg. In the case of animals, as an animal-lover, you certainly do not want to see the person being able to force a wrong and bad solution. The assumption that
the current High Court order will protect stray dogs for ever is a myth. It is better if animal-lovers wake up and look at both sides of the coin. Five more deaths of kids and you can be sure that the H C order will go for a toss.

f) "why there are 2 polarised groups regarding dogs" - there aren't only 2 polarised groups. That is an obsession with animal-lovers (or those of them) who see the world that way.

g) " It is compassion versus indifference/selfishness" -- i daresay that it is the animal lovers who are not being compassionate and are indeed harming the cause of animals by not accepting that situations of menacing dogs do need to be tackled. It does not mean that the dogs have to be killed. 

I do hope that you and others in the group will respond. Sensitisation is important -- both ways.


Dec 5, 2005

It is one of the beautiful compensations of this life that no one can sincerely try to help another without helping himself. --Charles Dudley Warner