Neuquén Calls Off Plans for Stray Dog Massacre

by Stephanie Feldstein · 2010-08-09 08:32:00 UTC
Topics:

Two residents of Neuquén, Argentina, came down with leptospirosis, supposedly after coming into contact with stray dogs, and it was declared that there was an outbreak in the city. Leptospirosis is a bacterial disease that's spread via the urine of mammals, most commonly rodents. When people come into contact with water, food or soil that's been contaminated with the urine, they may develop a range of symptoms, which in rare cases results in death.  So, city officials decided the best way to stop the disease was with a mass killing of stray dogs, whether they were sick or not.

But the animal welfare community didn't stand for it. Change.org community member, Carin Zellerman, started the petition Prevent the Killing of Strays in Neuquén. More than 7,000 people signed on, sending emails to government officials, asking them find a better solution. In the days before the massacre was scheduled to begin, animal protection groups staged protests around then country.

On the day they planned to start killing 220 dogs per day, the Neuquén government decided not cull the stray dogs, after all.

The killing never made a whole lot of sense, since dogs aren't the root of the problem when it comes to leptospirosis and, even if they were, they can be vaccinated against it. Seems like lepto was just a convenient excuse to get rid of a stray dog problem.

As Steve Dale points out on his blog, we've seen this so-called solution before. About 58,000 dogs were killed in and around Baghdad earlier this summer due to a surge in strays that has led to attacks. China routinely culls strays and Bali has been killing off dogs by the tens of thousands to curb rabies. We see a version of this kill-for-the-greater-good mentality in the U.S., too, where millions of animals die in shelters every year, some of them never given a real chance at adoption.

But it never works. You might slow down a disease if you kill off a bunch of the carriers, but that's true for any population, including humans. Yet, we've learned that a blood bath isn't the best way to manage public health. For one thing, trying to exterminate the carriers doesn't eliminate the disease itself unless you get rid of the source, which usually means vaccination and improving water supply and living conditions.

And, as we've seen over and over again, humane solutions to disease or overpopulation also tend to be the more effective ones. In Bali, the Gianyar district has successfully gotten their stray dog problem under control through a massive vaccination effort. While the rest of the country continues to kill dogs and see rising numbers of dog bites, Gianyar saved some 65,000 dogs and has seen their bite rate drop by 50 percent.

Following the public outcry, the Neuquén government changed their mind about killing over a thousand stray dogs. In a classic backpedal, a municipal spokesman said, "There's no way we're going to kill those dogs. Several councilors have misspoken in the matter."

Instead, they're going to clean up the city dumps, where many of the stray dogs hang out and where they reportedly contracted the disease. The dogs that were going to be killed are instead going to be neutered and put up for adoption.

Not only will the dogs of Neuquén get to live, but the people will get a cleaner city and some great companion animals out of the deal. I have no doubt that local animal welfare groups will be keeping a close eye on the government to make sure this happens and, hopefully, to help get those dogs into homes.

Photo credit: anselm

Stephanie Feldstein is a Change.org Editor who has been part of the animal welfare and rescue community for over a decade, and most recently worked for an environmental organization.
PREVIOUS STORY:
Oil Couture?
NEXT STORY:
Petitions Delivered Around the World for Release of Indonesian Circus Dolphins

COMMENTS (14)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.