nikred Posted January 15, 2011 Posted January 15, 2011 We all know there is only one B*T*H responsible for the dog menace in this country. No, there is Amala (the actress) of Blue Cross of Hyderabad too. She is as effective as Menaka. :mad:
CSK Fan Posted January 15, 2011 Posted January 15, 2011 Now comparing dogs with cars Maybe you come from the land of Disney ? I think he had a point. You are attacking the symptom not the problem. BTW, according to the post mortem reports, the death of the child might not have caused by dogs after all so people jumped the gun. Not daying strays are not a big problem though
ViruRulez Posted January 15, 2011 Posted January 15, 2011 It is not only about death. Terrorist attacks hardly kill many people and thousands of times more people die of many other problems like road accidents, malnutrition and what not .. but does that mean we should neglect it... that is the worst logic I have ever heard .. I do not see the use of stray dogs in the ecosystem of cities .. for that matter I dont see the use of even monkeys in the ecosystem of cities .. but stray dogs not only create problems but they are a regular nuisance in the night where they simply chase and bark relentlessly .. I am not saying that they should be killed but they should be taken out of cities alongwith monkeys and if needed some sanctuary should be made for them .. I have hardly found even a single good use of stray dogs and monkeys in cities and I do not accept all the terrible explanations for their inclusion in the ecosystem of cities
suma25 Posted January 15, 2011 Posted January 15, 2011 :haha: bhaisaaab if u collect all the dogs and put them in a so called sanctuary unke liya khane dekhbhal ka kharcha kaun karega besides they wont stay there for long Most of them will be either eaten by bigger predators or they will come back to human habitatiobn since they are habituated to it and can't fend for themselves for long.
ViruRulez Posted January 15, 2011 Posted January 15, 2011 :haha: bhaisaaab if u collect all the dogs and put them in a so called sanctuary unke liya khane dekhbhal ka kharcha kaun karega besides they wont stay there for long Most of them will be either eaten by bigger predators or they will come back to human habitatiobn since they are habituated to it and can't fend for themselves for long. I am no Maneka Gandhi if you are expecting me to promote stray dogs :giggle: .. dogs will feed on the local resources of the sanctuary .. the mess they create in cities from messing up garbage bins to barking in night and disturbing social life to chasing people at night to even killing people as in the above case I do not have any soft feelings for them .. they are not useful in any manner and so I am not going to promote increasing their numbers .. we have enough problems where people are not able to live properly in the nation and I would rather think about them instead of a useless animal like stray dogs or for that matter even monkeys in cities .. make electricity enabled fences for the sanctuary if needed so that animals trying to flee would get a slight shock like it happens in the west so that they wont run away easily .. I am not against stray dogs or monkeys but keep them in control instead of letting them roam about in cities and disturbing the urban population.
suma25 Posted January 15, 2011 Posted January 15, 2011 :haha: Iam not asking you to support dogs iam just amused by the ideas that you are proposing There are more incidences of people killing people in india then dog killing people or babies for that matter .dogs do make a mess near garbage cans but People make more mess in the cities than dogs . man seriously have you ever seen people actually dumping garbage in the garbage can properly in indian cities they fling the garbage bag as a target practice As for controlling dog population there is simple solution of neutering instead of herding them like cattle to a congested place called as sanctuary so that they can be safe from creating trouble.
ViruRulez Posted January 15, 2011 Posted January 15, 2011 :haha: Iam not asking you to support dogs iam just amused by the ideas that you are proposing There are more incidences of people killing people in india then dog killing people or babies for that matter .dogs do make a mess near garbage cans but People make more mess in the cities than dogs . man seriously have you ever seen people actually dumping garbage in the garbage can properly in indian cities they fling the garbage bag as a target practice As for controlling dog population there is simple solution of neutering instead of herding them like cattle to a congested place called as sanctuary so that they can be safe from creating trouble. Kindly accept me even a single beneficial point on the use of stray dogs or for that matter even monkeys in the ecosystem of cities .. if they are useful in any way then I would have no problem and I dont think anyone else would have too
suma25 Posted January 15, 2011 Posted January 15, 2011 Use them as guard dogs in buildings, train stations hotels and vital installation ,bomb squad dogs Give them for adoption less maintenance and less susceptible to diseases instead of adopting foreign breeds which are not used to indian weather .There you go. I dont know abt monkeys since I was only discussing abt dogs
ViruRulez Posted January 15, 2011 Posted January 15, 2011 Use them as guard dogs in buildings' date= train stations hotels and vital installation ,bomb squad dogs Give them for adoption less maintenance and less susceptible to diseases instead of adopting foreign breeds which are not used to indian weather .There you go. I dont know abt monkeys since I was only discussing abt dogs stray dogs create a nuisance in all these places rather than guarding :giggle: regarding bomb squad dogs who will bell the cat .. I mean who will give the training :winky:
Mariyam Posted January 15, 2011 Posted January 15, 2011 I think he had a point. You are attacking the symptom not the problem. BTW' date=' according to the post mortem reports, the death of the child might not have caused by dogs after all so people jumped the gun. Not daying strays are not a big problem though[/quote'] Thanks for acknowledging that I had a point. No thanks however for calling me a 'he'. I am a she. I thought it was evident from my user id. Use them as guard dogs in buildings' date=' train stations hotels and vital installation ,bomb squad dogs Give them for adoption less maintenance and less susceptible to diseases instead of adopting foreign breeds which are not used to indian weather .[b']There you go. I dont know abt monkeys since I was only discussing abt dogs Those are some great ideas.
Clarke Posted January 15, 2011 Posted January 15, 2011 We need to clone Dharmendra in every area with this problem. If you're too young to know, his fav dialogue was, "Kutte, Kamine, main tera khoon pee jaonga".
CSK Fan Posted January 15, 2011 Posted January 15, 2011 Kindly accept me even a single beneficial point on the use of stray dogs or for that matter even monkeys in the ecosystem of cities .. if they are useful in any way then I would have no problem and I dont think anyone else would have too So the existence of thousands of animals depends only on how usefeul they are? Bit calluous IMO
Ram Posted January 17, 2011 Posted January 17, 2011 I am trying to be pragmatic. Being idealistic is saying we should neuter dogs. The right to procreate is a nature given right of every organism on God's green earth. You and me, do not have the right to debar a certain individual or a species from this right. All you say is true, HOWEVER, there are 2 points that you overlook: 1) Humans don't have places to stay, but its not their natural habitat which has been encroached upon by millions of dogs. Its not their natural way of life that has gone for a toss. Ultimately, humans are responsible for the fate of their kind due to this haphazard urbanization. But what about the fauna of th place they call cities? The dog (which we call a stray) is punished for human urbanization without any kind of returns. The entire 'stray' phenomenon is a result of urbanization. If there wasn't such mindless urbanizations, the strays wouldn't be as threatened and they wouldn't have to eat/maul a young kid. That is not the natural behaviour of a dog. 2) You talk about reducing the population of dogs, and that is possibly happening anyways. If you try and see the ratio of people to dogs in say, the geographical area of Mumbai city from 1800 to present, you will find that the number (ratio) has been drastically reduced. I'm bad with numbers and am not going to do this calculation :P Since you like human rights over rights of other species, will you chop off all the trees in the Borivili national park and rehabilitate the homeless there? That is also putting human needs over the needs of others in the food chain. This whole discussion reminds me of a very famous saying " The true character of a nation is displayed in the manner in which they treat their poor, their oppressed and their fauna " - Mahatma Gandhi Your version of pragmatism is to contend that dogs have equal rights to roam the cities, as much as humans have, to live in them?
suma25 Posted January 17, 2011 Posted January 17, 2011 stray dogs create a nuisance in all these places rather than guarding :giggle: regarding bomb squad dogs who will bell the cat .. I mean who will give the training :winky: bhaisaab the trained stray dog/dogs can accompany their rpf constable/handlers when on duty just like they do when dogs accompany bombsquad personnel on duty.And the same people who train the alsations/labradors/rottweilers which are used for the jobs can train the strays.
Mariyam Posted January 17, 2011 Posted January 17, 2011 Your version of pragmatism is to contend that dogs have equal rights to roam the cities' date=' as much as humans have, to live in them? [/quote'] My version of justice (and morality) says that a dog has as much right to stay and reproduce in its natural habitat as much as humans do. However, in this case, we humans have encroached the natural habitat of the dogs, relegating them to the status of a stray and almost removing them from the existing food chain. Neutering the dogs is not the way to undo the mistakes of unplanned and massive urbanization.
Ram Posted January 17, 2011 Posted January 17, 2011 My version of justice (and morality) says that a dog has as much right to stay and reproduce in its natural habitat as much as humans do. However' date=' in this case, we humans have encroached the natural habitat of the dogs, relegating them to the status of a stray and almost removing them from the existing food chain. Neutering the dogs is not the way to undo the mistakes of unplanned and massive urbanization.[/quote'] Vakeel ji, try as hard as you want, but your attempt to camouflage your utopian ideals in the garb of a manufactured reason of how stray dogs serve some real purpose in the food-chain, is not going to fool many people. Apparently for you, it seems that the humans right to live in peace, without the fear of being mauled to death (like it happened in this case), is less than important than the stray dogs' right to share the 'eco-system with the humans..'. Thats a laughable argument really, so completely devoid of context or proportion.
Mariyam Posted January 17, 2011 Posted January 17, 2011 Morris ji, lets try and establish some common ground here. At least find some facts/principles we agree on.Some salient points. Feel free to correct me where you think I've gone a-stray (no pun intended) :P A. The problem in the article is of stray dogs. Stray dogs are a result of massive unplanned urbanization while ignoring the natural ecosystem of the place where the urbanization takes place. If it weren't for the urbanization of the areas that are Bangalore/Mumbai etc today, we wouldn't have stray dogs there. B. It is not the natural behavior of a dog to eat human flesh or maul human kids. I think, and I'm not very sure about this, but they have problems digesting human flesh. You don't take my word for it, ask some of your vet friends or people who have a degree on psychology/ animal behavior. This incident was a rare exception, which just highlights the desperation of that particular dog or dogs like those. C. Dogs have been an active part of the food chain in the ecosystem where the major cities today lie till urbanization happened. Then the dogs natural habitat diminished, and so did the species on which it feasts. The dogs were reduced to a role of being total non entities on the food chain and eating off garbage cans, or at least from what I observe. These points are the basics of my argument. Vakeel ji' date=' try as hard as you want, but your attempt to camouflage your utopian ideals in the garb of a manufactured reason of how stray dogs serve some real purpose in the food-chain, is not going to fool many people. [/quote'] My intention on a public cricket forum is not to 'fool' people about a dogs place in the food chain of a city. My intention is to put across my opinion. I'm sorry if you felt that I was trying to fool you. My question to you here is what is the relevance of a place in the existing food chain (never mind the fact that the species doesn't have one due to urbanization) to the dog being neutered. Does not having a place in the food chain (artificial as it may be) give us a right to exterminate a species from a geography? Also, I'm not trying to be Utopian, I'm preaching what I practice. If I stayed alone or had my way in my current place of residence, I would adopt another stray. Apparently for you, it seems that the humans right to live in peace, without the fear of being mauled to death (like it happened in this case), is less than important than the stray dogs' right to share the 'eco-system with the humans..'. Thats a laughable argument really, so completely devoid of context or proportion. Out of proportion is calling for the neutering of all dogs because of one or two stray incidents. Please point out to me where I have said that humans right to live in peace is lesser than that of stray dogs. I never said anything of the sort or implied that in anyway. Not neutering strays is not equal to denying humans the right to stay peacefully.
The Outsider Posted January 17, 2011 Posted January 17, 2011 ^ Aren't dogs just domesticated wolves ie. dogs, as we know them today, did not exist in the wild? It's only after some kinds of wolves were domesticated that dogs came into being? Don't think the dogs we see in urban surroundings have the ability to survive in the wild.
Ram Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 A. The problem in the article is of stray dogs. Stray dogs are a result of massive unplanned urbanization while ignoring the natural ecosystem of the place where the urbanization takes place. If it weren't for the urbanization of the areas that are Bangalore/Mumbai etc today, we wouldn't have stray dogs there. Why do you keep repeating this mundane fact about urbanization as though it is some kind of rare truism? We all know the cities are there – we can see them with our own eyes. You don’t have to keep referring to urbanization as though it is an unpleasant reality that can be wished away. Fact is, cities are not going anywhere. B. It is not the natural behavior of a dog to eat human flesh or maul human kids. I think, and I'm not very sure about this, but they have problems digesting human flesh. You don't take my word for it, ask some of your vet friends or people who have a degree on psychology/ animal behavior. This incident was a rare exception, which just highlights the desperation of that particular dog or dogs like those. I don’t care what they eat and what they don’t. All I know is, they’re a terrible menace. Have you ever been troubled by stray dogs? Let me tell you , I have been and its not a pleasant experience. And for God’s sake, they just killed a baby and you’re still looking for proof of their threat and nuisance value? If your criterion for removing stray dogs from the streets is to act only during the time they start devouring humans, then that is just plain wrong. My intention on a public cricket forum is not to 'fool' people about a dogs place in the food chain of a city. My intention is to put across my opinion. I'm sorry if you felt that I was trying to fool you. That was only a metaphorical reference. Don’t take it that seriously. My question to you here is what is the relevance of a place in the existing food chain (never mind the fact that the species doesn't have one due to urbanization) to the dog being neutered. Does not having a place in the food chain (artificial as it may be) give us a right to exterminate a species from a geography? Also, I'm not trying to be Utopian, I'm preaching what I practice. If I stayed alone or had my way in my current place of residence, I would adopt another stray. If you’re so insistent that the problem is of urbanization and that we have encroached upon the dogs’ eco-system, let me ask you – How do you deal if there’s an insect/bug attack in your home? Do you have them exterminated? Or do you tell yourself ‘Oh well, the problem isn’t the question of bugs inundating my house. The problem is me building a house here in the first place..’? and let just let the bugs run riot in your house? Out of proportion is calling for the neutering of all dogs because of one or two stray incidents. Please point out to me where I have said that humans right to live in peace is lesser than that of stray dogs. I never said anything of the sort or implied that in anyway. Not neutering strays is not equal to denying humans the right to stay peacefully. You know Vakeel ji, all your arguments may sound good in a lecture to a group of bespectacled, human rights activists who were once professors in Delhi University. But they’re so out of touch when it comes to public policy. You want society to follow the same moral compass as you do as an individual. You obviously have lots of love and compassion for other animals and I laud that. But you simply cannot extrapolate an individual’s moral boundaries to that of an entire govt. It is not practical and will lead to all sorts warped conclusions. Honestly, there are some arguments that involve intense moral discussion. This one is not one of those. It’s a civic problem, with practical solutions. Lets not complicate the issue with all sorts of out-of-touch moral and ethical considerations. I would love to deal with this in a humane, considerate manner. Unfortunately, we niether have the resources or the will to make that happen. The best way to approach this problem is to come up with simple, practical solutions that WORK, rather than engage in a prolonged ethical debate that leaves us all none the wiser. Btw, I would like to ask you – How would you propose we deal with this menace? You obviously oppose killing these dogs in a painless way. You oppose neutering them as well. So how do we contain the situation? I need you to propose at least 3 practical solutions that can be implemented in a easy, cost-effective and quick manner.
Recommended Posts