The stray dog problem in Kashmir has moved far beyond routine complaint and occasional alarm. It is now a serious civic issue touching daily life in both urban and rural areas, with children, elderly people, women, walkers, farmers, and schoolgoers facing real fear and, in too many cases, actual injury. Recent reports from Budgam, where residents have voiced concern over increasing dog attacks and the absence of a dedicated rural mechanism, underline what many across the Valley already know: the problem is spreading, persistent, and dangerously under-managed. What makes the situation more troubling is that stray dog control in Kashmir remains uneven and largely reactive. Municipal areas may have some institutional response, however limited, but villages and peri-urban belts often fall through the cracks. That gap matters. The Valley’s population is not concentrated only in towns; a large share lives in rural settlements where schools, mosques, roads, farms, and orchards are part of daily movement. When stray dogs roam these spaces in packs, they do not merely create discomfort. They alter the rhythms of life, force parents to escort children, keep elderly people indoors, and make routine agricultural work feel hazardous. This is also a public health issue. Dog bites are not minor incidents. They can lead to trauma, infection, expensive treatment, and the looming risk of rabies if timely care is not available. Every attack is a warning that prevention has failed somewhere. And prevention cannot mean only post-bite treatment or occasional capture drives. It requires population management, vaccination, sterilisation, waste control, and clear institutional responsibility across the entire Valley, not just within municipal boundaries. The deeper challenge lies in governance. Kashmir needs a district-wise and village-aware strategy, not scattered measures that appear when public pressure rises and fade once the news cycle moves on. Local bodies, rural development institutions, the animal husbandry department, health authorities, and municipal committees must work under a single coordinated framework. Dog population mapping, bite reporting, vaccination coverage, and sterilisation targets should be monitored transparently. Schools and panchayat-level institutions can also help identify vulnerable zones where children and residents are most exposed. At the same time, the response must remain humane. A serious stray dog policy cannot be built on panic or cruelty. It must combine public safety with animal welfare, following legal and scientific standards. The objective should be control, not indiscriminate elimination. Countries and cities that have dealt with similar problems have done so through sustained sterilisation, vaccination, waste management, and community awareness — not through temporary outrage. Kashmir can no longer afford to treat the stray dog menace as an unavoidable feature of urban neglect or rural inconvenience. It is a manageable problem only if the administration recognises its scale and acts before more people are hurt. The Valley needs urgency, planning, and accountability. Above all, it needs a humane policy that protects both human lives and public conscience.
Source: https://risingkashmir.com/editorial/stray-dog-menace-12513339