Dogs, rabies and us

If nothing else, the recent controversy surrounding the stray dog problem has led to a public airing of the facts and statistics concerning the stray dog population of Sri Lanka and the incidence of rabies. This is to be welcomed, as the education of the community is an essential part of fighting disease – apart from the desirability, in a democracy, of keeping the public informed, in general.

While in most other tropical countries, wild animals are significant vectors in the spread of rabies, in this island the disease propagates

predominantly through dogs – who account for 96 percent of human cases; 3 percent are caused by wild animals and 1 percent by cats.

The stray dog population, we are told, stands at 3 million, and is rising despite the government spending a billion rupees a year to sterilise dogs and despite the efforts a several non-governmental organizations, such as the Dogstar Foundation, Sathva Mithra, Animal Welfare Trust, KACPAW and Embark which try to get stray dogs off the streets and into homes.

Dog population

According to government statistics, about 270,000 stray dogs are sterilised annually. However, the depo-provira injection which is administered has not proved to be effective – hence the huge stray dog population. The government moratorium on dog-killing since 2006 has certainly not helped control the population, either, to say the least.

On the other hand, although 2,000 people are bitten every day, the annual incidence of human rabies has declined to less than 50 per year, compared to over 100 at the turn of the millennium and over 200, two decades ago.

This is probably due to the fact that government vaccinates 1.3 million dogs every year, both stray and domestic; which is double what it was a decade ago and over three times what it was twenty years ago. The government also spends Rs 500 million each year on treating the victims of dog bites, which also prevents incidence.

The part played by the government and by the thousands of public servants who undertake duties in connection with dog population control and rabies prevention and treatment is largely unsung in relation to that of the glamorous high-profile dog-lover NGOs. However it is the essential bedrock on which all else is founded, and out of proportion to the meagre publicity it receives.

Animal Welfare Trust

By way of comparison, one of the most active of the NGOs, the Dogstar foundation, a British-based NGO, vaccinates 500 dogs and sterilises a further 500 at special clinics. The Animal Welfare Trust has in the past five years re-homed 250 homeless dogs and has sterilised 1,500 dogs and cats. The programme of Embark, probably the highest-profile private campaign, is to sterilise 5,000 dogs and to vaccinate 35,000 more over the next three years.

It is hence patently obvious that it is the government which has to bear the brunt of it, and with very little thanks! This is not intended to belittle the activities of the private enthusiasts, who work with NGOs and provide a most valuable adjunct to the state – especially in the field of educating the community, for rabies eradication and animal control is very much a community-based activity.

A survey carried out in Kandy district by the Hokkaido and Peradeniya Universities a few years ago found that the levels of awareness of rabies and of receptiveness to rabies control measures were high. Significantly, 88 percent knew that rabies is preventable by vaccination and 96 percent would seek treatment from a doctor or a hospital after being bitten by a dog.

Pet care practices

However, there was a difference in attitudes and pet care practices between urban and rural areas, possibly reflecting the inaccessibility of facilities and the lack of services that would enable community participation in rabies control in more remote areas.

Also significantly, while three quarters of respondents said their dogs were vaccinated, only half could actually provide the vaccination certificates. This indicates the power of social pressure on pet care practices.

It is these two areas that NGOs can be most effective. For example, the Dogstar Foundation works with monks in the Randeniya area of Kegalle district to re-home with village people some of the animals living in their temples. The remainder are given sanctuary in the temples and provided with food, vaccinations and veterinary care.

Foreign breeds

Where the private NGOs could probably be most valuable is in re-educating the dog-owning populace, with a view to getting more effective population control and better dog re-homing figures.

One of the main causes of the growth of population of stray dogs is the increment due to the abandonment of puppies on roads. These dogs are not adoptable because they are mongrels or do not belong to a recognised breed and hence have no intrinsic value in today’s keep-up-with-Jones’ society.

On the other hand, the richer of our people spend enormous amounts of money on buying puppies which belong to coveted status-giving foreign breeds

Hence enormous funds are spent on feeding and keeping healthy dogs which belong to these foreign breeds; money which should more correctly be spent on feeding and treating our indigenous and mongrel stray dog population.

How many of our dog-owners know that Sri Lanka has its own native dog breed, the yellow-brown Sinhala Hound, which used to be ubiquitous a few decades back but is now almost extinct? Would it not have been better to preserve this hardy and healthy breed than to spend millions on importing sickly foreign canines?

The NGOs should deploy as much of their money as possible on publicity to enhance the status of indigenous and mongrel dogs; this would make the adoption of strays more acceptable to society. It would hence reveal the government of much of its canine-related expenditure, enabling these funds to be deployed for other urgent medical tasks.