A male dog and be responsible for fathering many litters of puppies! Even if the survival rate of the puppies is 2 per litter, it still contributes to the stray dog problem!
Neutering of males eliminates their urge to fight and win control of any area and keeps them in check. Which in turn keeps the population in check!
In exceptional cases, the local municipality needs to use strongarm tactics and overcome the pressure imposed by animal rights activists and animal lovwrs groups! For Eg. a stray dog that has bitten once is liable to do it again, such dogs and rabid ones need to be put to sleep!
RE:Neutering of male dogs is the solution!
by Aman on Apr 19, 2007 03:27 PM Permalink
There are 70,000 dogs in Hyderabad. That's the official estimate. The hyderabad local govt could make a provision to neuter only 2,000 stray dogs. There are 14,000 stray dogs in Bhubaneswar, the local govt could make provision only for 5,000 stray dogs. At this rate, I wonder if we are not fooling ourselves thinking that neutering will solve problems! (I am not making any reference to you, please note, I am refering to Indians in general).
As a citizen of this country I also think that the municipality rather spent time and money and manpower on mending roads, on enhancing the garbage disposal system, on planting trees and parks and gardens, on creating better sewage systems, on covering manholes (enough people have lost their lives in manholes) rather than waste time and money on stray dogs! That money could be used for education of street children, giving small term loans to financially poor people for self employment, infact, even increasing the pay of the local govt officials themselves, and instead of spending money on stray dogs, spend it on health awareness and medical facilities for the urban poor, for slum dwellers. They need and deserve that money much more than dogs. ... The list is endless.
RE:Neutering of male dogs is the solution!
by Aman on Apr 19, 2007 03:35 PM Permalink
The above statement is not specifically in reference to your post, only generaly so. It is a more general statement. As the situation stands now, your views are correct. Immense corruption on part of both the stray dog welfare ngos and local govt bodies has accelerated the problem to a screaming pitch. They had better be taken to task and made accountable for this specific activity.
I will also like to add that we cannot WAIT for a stray dog to become ferocious or rabid or diseased and only then destroy it, as many activists keep howling, because by then, it might have already harmed not few people. because we know it ought to be destroyed only when it has already created damage.
Its not about humans and animals..there are people in our country who feel different for everything around..infact we have people change opinions often for anything..they hold an opinion for one thing and due to some ineviatability they may change their mind and hold a seperate opinion for the same thing eventually..what changes is not self but perspectives..Dogs to be beaten up or protected can be a debatable issue but then whose poll are we looking at? An agitated person whose son has just escaped a dog attack is bound to struggle for human life and not animal life, however the same guy if escapes a dangerous phase due to a dog may strive to change his mind too..
So folks this all depends on situations we face in life and perspectives we want accept it for.
RE:Animal Lovers or Humans
by Aman on Apr 18, 2007 04:29 AM Permalink
Actually it ___IS___ about humans & animals.
It has come down to that. Opinions do vary. But in any given context, there can be only one right path. Stray dogs don't have to be beaten up. I have not heard of anyone escaping a dangerous phase because of a stray dog, but I have heard of many, many instances of accidents because of them. Someone in another blog wrote that a dog saved an infant in the tsunami in Indonesia. He seems not to remember that for one dog (whether it was stray or domestic, is not mentioned) that might do some good, there are lakhs who do nothing but harm. I read of a pregnant woman in Russia who had a miscarriage because of a stray sog's bite. What about that?
Thousands of children are being hospitalized every other because of dog bites. These incidents are now becoming a norm. These facts are not publicized too much maybe because of vested interests. But the immense trauma, the disruption of normal life and the constant worry these strays give can only be tackled by their destruction.
Your reply sounds great, however as i mentioned earlier its all about opinions..on one hand you say dogs dont have to be beaten up and your last line suggests that the evergreen problem of human life at stake by such strays can be tackled by destruction!Can you put light on what means would you help humans in such instances?
RE:Animal Lovers or Humans
by Aman on Apr 19, 2007 12:10 AM Permalink
When I say that dogs neednt be beaten up, I mean they don't have to be beaten up wantonly, pointlessly, or for the heck of beating them. I mean nobody should hit any animal just for the kicks.
Nobody has written, or even implied, that stray dogs are the EVERGREEN problem of human life.
Don't distort the meaning of the words and become unnecessarily sarcastic.
pariah dogs are a BIG problem for MILLIONS of people around the country.
I don't understand what do you mean by "it is all about opinions". People cannot sleep, or walk on the roads especialy at night & early morning. People can't jog even inside closed residential localities. I & my neighors have stopped jogging on the streets inside out colony because the dogs run after joggers and bite them, as they did a neighbor of mine. Stray dogs have begun to determine our lives. People everyday find it more difficult to step out of their houses. There is no opinion out here, but bare simple facts. Please check them out if you think these are exaggerations. Walk on the streets of ordinary middleclass localities especially after 9 at night, for example. You'll get the point.
When it is said that the only solution is destruction, what is meant is mean just that. A proper, purposeful, systematic euthanization of stray dogs (using "humane" methods, if you please).
Not for the kicks, but simply because nobody will ever find another way out. And because people are unnecessarily suffering.
RE:[object]
by Aman on Apr 19, 2007 12:17 AM Permalink
Please clarify what do you mean by "Can you put light on what means would you help humans in such instances?" I am sorry but I can't understand your question, or what are you refering to.
RE:Animal Lovers or Humans
by Neha Mehta on Apr 19, 2007 01:29 PM Permalink
I am referring to your action plan if you had to be on the other side of making everyones life easier. What would you do to make your life easier if you were given a choice of elevating these stray dogs?
RE:Animal Lovers or Humans
by Aman on Apr 19, 2007 03:14 PM Permalink
I am sorry if I sound like a fool, which I am undoubtedly sure I am sounding like, but I still don't get it. If you are asking what line-of-action I'd suggest given the option that stray dogs don't necessarily have to be killed, and that there are other ways our, I still would not endorse this kind of nation-wide sterilization. I would not attempt any "elevation" of stray dogs.
India is a poor country. Indians are poor people. At this point of time, the average Indian middle-class office goer, or even a businessman has to work at least 10 to 12 hours a day to make a decent living.
To earn about 30,000 bucks per month one has to work HARD. We put in those 12 hours. We burn the midnight oil for 20 years of our lives, to be able to work 12 hours a day for another 40 years of our life. we often travel 50 kms to & fro to college or school, and then drive 50 kms to & fro to office. Given that things are always more difficult in a poor country than a developed one, the average Indian has to slog it out like hell. To tax him, and to use this precious money for as pointless an activity as sterilization of stray dogs, is, i think, a cardinal sin. This hard earned money can be put to much greater uses.
Nope. as an individual i will never support any other way than simple elimination of stray dogs. To deprive the Indian taxpayers money of much greater uses, and to deflect their use to neutering stray dogs is as good as flushng all that money down the drain. It goes NOWHERE. I work 15 hours a day, ma'm, and i see no rationale in struggling so hard & paying taxes to the govt only to see crores of rupees being spent on stray dogs who are of NO use in any respect to either me or the society i live in.
RE:RE:Animal Lovers or Humans
by Neha Mehta on Apr 23, 2007 03:36 PM Permalink
Dont mind Aman, but I think you have written about everything but nothing that I feel that my question was answered. However as your first line suggests you have not been able to identify what my question indicates which looks obvious from a person like you who thinks a hell lot about effective time management! Anyways, Nevermind. Thanks for your valuable feedback
RE:Animal Lovers or Humans
by Aman on Apr 23, 2007 05:06 PM Permalink
I know I have not answered your question.
For the simple reason that I havent understood it.If you wld clarify further I wld be glad to answer it. I dont like leaving questions unanswered.It so happens I am on a week-long holiday, so I have time to come to this website.
I'll let the quip regarding time management pass. It was witty and intelligent.
I wonder if you are asking what steps should be taken to make things easier for human beings, at the same time looking after stray dogs. That is, what steps ought to be taken to do something for people to reduce the problems they are facing now, the problems created by the presence of dogs, without eliminating the dogs.
I think I know what to say about that, but I would be glad if you clarified.
I dont mind criticism. It impels an individual towards clarity and comprehension.
And if I am being dumb, I dont mind being told so either.
RE:Animal Lovers or Humans
by Neha Mehta on Apr 24, 2007 03:14 PM Permalink
Yes, well with an intelligent(seemingly)person like you, I thought it would not take this long for an answer. However as expected you have been over successful in understanding my question infact. I am actually talking about " what steps should be taken to make things easier for human beings, at the same time looking after stray dogs. That is, what steps ought to be taken to do something for people to reduce the problems they are facing now, the problems created by the presence of dogs, without eliminating the dogs" (which means the same thing undoubtedly) and now that you know what to answer, request you to do the needful. Moreover my email is nehamehta81@rediffmail.com and I happen to check my emails more often than visit this section. Unfortunately since I am not on a long week holiday, would prefer if you can possibly answer this to the email mentioned.
RE:Animal Lovers or Humans
by Aman on Apr 25, 2007 11:46 PM Permalink
"Seemingly" is unexpected! I thought you'd parenthesize "somewhat", if not "certainly not"!
Your gaze is impeccable. Nothing escapes it. I am arrested.
Coming to the dogs, as such I think I had answered your question, in a way. Any concrete steps to be taken to make things easier for people would involve mobilization of huge amounts of resources. As an individual I wouldn't endorse that. My whole point was that such steps ought not to be considered or taken in the very first place, since the number of dogs, and people affected, is extremely large. Effective efforts could have been made in the late 80s or even early 90s, when both were far more manageable. Then, we could have actually realized the vision of a society which does not exterminate animals on purely utilitarian grounds. But India is a huge country, & a poor one at that. Nevertheless, steps CAN be taken even now at least in urban & semi-urban areas, even though they' ll consume inordinate time, labor & expense.
Please allow me a day or two to gather my thoughts so that I can articulate them properly. I don't think I have any ingenious ideas, mere suggestions. I shall write to you when I have formulated a few well considered points.
RE:Animal Lovers or Humans
by Neha Mehta on Apr 26, 2007 12:58 PM Permalink
Alright, with my "impeccable gaze"(so called)I can once again only find this message a little disappointing for not having an exact, appropriate answer articulated by a seemingly"somewhat" if not "certainly not" intelligent person, however now that you need 2 days particularly to gather your thoughts which may indeed be of some use to our country(if not to me as of now)I feel I can grant that from my end(if not by the country)!Shall await your "suggestions" if not "ingenious ideas" on your thoughts!!
RE:RE:Animal Lovers or Humans
by Aman on Apr 27, 2007 03:22 AM Permalink
The message was NOT SUPPOSED TO BE a list of do's and don't's, and it was meant to say that it isn't. Do let me know WHEN any suggestions will be of use to you. We can communicate then. If they are of no use to you now, it is not necessary to discuss them now. Any suggestion in this line by anyone is going to be of no use to the country whatsoever. So as far as this message board goes, we can leave it at that.
RE:Animal Lovers or Humans
by Aman on Apr 27, 2007 04:21 AM Permalink
I am reachable at amansharma_19782007@rediffmail.com
In the msg reported for "abuse" there was an error in the last line while editing & "Submit" was pressed by mistake instead of "cancel". There was nothing _abusive_ in the msg whatsoever. Good answers, especially in this context, don't come easily.
RE:Animal Lovers or Humans
by Neha Mehta on May 09, 2007 03:22 PM Permalink
We are not here to discuss personal usage to the suggestions implied..the board is open for discussions, queries, suggestions on any social issue which is so called raised on any subject. The purpose of this borad for me is not to feel offended and fight and show the so called "attitude" that you seem to be presenting through your words. Its just openness on topics. If you feel you are unable to communicate do let me know too. No one is here to take anything you may want to sound like. For me, your post sounded pretty rude!Hence this reply. Thanks
Hi All, as I am reading the different messages posted by people, I am beginning to believe that the major cause of all the miseries in India are stray dogs. You get rid of them, you turn India into a paradise. How cool.
Guys, people are talking about stray dogs sperading diseases, but where does your sense of hygiene go when you go out and eat from road side eating joints? Can you guarantee that they sell hygienic food items? You think its very good when you piss on a wall in the open or eat a paan and spit on the walls but you think that stray dogs are unhealthy.
Guys, stray dogs become a menace when they do not get proper food. Man is said to be most intelligent and logical animal on earth. If hungry, even man can get aggressive and even kill for food. Then with dogs, it can be expected. And by the look of it, stray dogs have not become a problem overnight. We are ready to shell out 10,000-15,000 rupees to buy a puppy for our homes, but we feel economically burdened to feed a stray dog with the left over food. And believe me, the dogs out on the street can prove to be more loyal and trustworthy than those high end expensive pooches which are high on face value. Killing/sterilizing/neutering the strays is not a solution to this problem. Opening our eyes and understanding the root of the problem is. and remember, the problem has been created by us only.
RE:Stray dogs...
by Aman on Apr 11, 2007 05:30 PM Permalink
Who said that if stray dogs are removed India will become a paradise? Nobody has said that even by implication. Why do you started with "where does YOUR sense of hygiene go"? That's how u all begin - by jumping on people who are in trouble because of people like YOU. Is there any logic that if people dirty streets dogs should do that also? Are people who dirty streets not criticized or despised? In many countries they are fined severely. That may be done in India, but people here are generally too poor. They also lack a proper sense of hygiene which comes from bad education and insufficient cultural training. That will go with time. And that is no reason why we should also want or accept dogs messing all around the place. You do not seem to know that dogs create filth everywhere, in all localities, inside people's compounds, all along the streets, inside parks & hospitals, inside railway stations and schools. And who is stressing the filth created as the primary reason for their removel? There are hundred other reasons.
Which world are you living in, mister? What makes you think that dogs attack only when they are hungry? I see them eating all day long. They are big, fat, healthy, energetic, agile and fast. They attack anybody without any provocation. Either you don't know what's happening around the country, or you don't want to accept it. There is no such thing as they attack because they are hungry. That's another LIE touted by animal lovers.
Do you have any idea how miserable these creatures are, and what kind of atmosphere they create? I am sure you don;t. People like you are simply creating problems for OTHERS. Kyun yaar? Tum logon ko kya milta hai? What's all this nonsense? I don't see why u guys are so eager to make so many people sleepless & scared. You are FORCING ur stray dogs down our throats. Everything that a person does is his own choice and personal value. A dog I keep at home is MY choice and personal value. I don't see any reason why I should spend a single buck on a stray dog. Why should I? It is a choice i do not make and NOBODY can force me to make, in a free country.
And what is this thing about stray dogs being loyal? There is nothing of the sort. They wag their tails only because you are source of their food. That is all. There is no loyalty or love lost. I see more than 20 stray dogs everday just milling around the place. If you love them so much, TAKE THEIR RESPONSIBILITY. We dont want them, because they have made life miserable. And we are not going to take their responsibility. Do not misrepresent facts. If you are truly benevolent, go out and have a look at what people are going through because of these absolutely worthless and redundant creatures. If not a horror film, it has become extremely troublesome and worrying.
The no. of dogs in india has increased and it has becomedangerous to walk on the strees and roads.The street dogs now walk in groups and have learnt art of protecting themselves. In country like ours where we can not look after olds, kids and sick where is the place for dogs, all dogs are to be killed that is the only solution. so called dog lovers should take as many dogs as they want in their house but they shoul also to be asked to take of same no. of helpless people, the love for so called stray dogs is nothing but showoffs, it is high time the government should take action or supreme court will have to intervene to protect the lives of millions of people, simply kill the stray dogs.
Yesterday my 4 year old son was going to be bitten by a stray dog in my society, i my anger i kicked the bucket which had dog food and guess what happened next. The lady who feeds 10-15 stray dogs in my society complained to the police and brought them to my house. What are we supposed to do? We have no right to control our selves, our children and let them be bitten by stray dogs. Animal Rights lovers - Please take the stray dogs to our house, bungalow and feed them, take care of them yourself.Whom should i complain to have this stopped in my housing society, as the secretary is incapable to doing this?
RE:Stray dogs nuisance
by Preetham P on Apr 09, 2007 07:19 PM Permalink
Catch a couple of straydogs and put it in the stray dog lovers' home. let them take care of the dogs or train them whatever and get bitten themselves. Even these people dont even let their pet dogs to the streets which costs a 10,000 or 25,000 bugs and what does that mean - they dont want their dogs get hurt but what about others' children ???
Whthr this page is visited frqntly or not (I doubt if that's so) is irrelevant. Yesterday I saw a apprxmtly 10-yr old boy going to be attacked by 5 dogs. Provocation? He was walking by!!! Luckily he was close to a gate, so he escaped. Right now, about 6-7 dogs nearby are barking for the past 1 hr, non-stop. Mmmm... I have not seen any criminals or domestic servants bark all night. I hav also not seen a grp of 3-5 (or even 1) criminals or domestic servnts in every other lane/ bylane/ road run behind scooters, bikes & cycles & try to bite the rider. Well, to the main pts:- 1. Being a domestic servant DOES NOT make a man a criminal. It so happens that in r society, servants (usually ill treatd, uneducatd) hav a better opportunity to murder. Criminality comes frm OTHER & TOTALLY DIFFERENT factors. USA is the richest country in the world - but murders & crime abound there too. In other words, to even think of killing all domestic servants is absurd & pointless. But killing all the stray dogs WILL solve all the problems associated with them. ; 2. Most criminals in fact are not perpetual monsters. Most crimes are committed on impulse, rashly, etc. Being a human being, least of all a domestic servant, does not make a man a criminal. It has VERY SPECIFIC causes, which lie in r culture, economy, politics, value-education, level of corruption, social dynamics, historical heritage, political & economic ambition, military power, etc. Indeed, the richest & most powerful ppl in the world are invisible murderers on a massive scale. E.g. Dubyaman. ; &nbs p; Not to see the very specific causes that make criminals will logically lead to only one thing: Like EVERY stray dog, EVERY man is a potential murderer or criminal, so ALL men should be killed. The answer to that is obvious: To kill all men is not going to lead you anywhere, for in tht case one is going against the very purpose & basis of law, judiciary, police, defence etc. & it's precisely to establish a great society we need these institutions. For that, v need human beings%u2026 But that doesnt mean that like men, stray dogs should be left scot-free also. In a simultaneous, country-wide explosion of str dgs, attacks on human beings n other animals shall NECESSARILY increase. It is a law of nature. This comes from the simple fact that they are dogs. WHY? ; BCOZ THE PROBLEMS COMING FRM ANIMALS _DO NOT_ DEPEND ON UR ECONOMIC, EDUCATIONAL, POLITICAL, SOCIO-CULTURAL, HISTORICAL MATRIX. ; BECAUSE THEIR ACTIONS & BEHAVIOR ARE _NOT_ DETERMINED BY SOCIO-CULTURAL, ECO-POLITICAL FACTORS.
It comes from the very simple fact that they are dogs, and THAT IS THE PROBLEM: THAT THEY ARE DOGS. (Far from the fact that dogs r habitually abused, & that THIS attitude of abuse stems from socio-cultural & historical factors, the truth is that they are loved & admired in all societies. Even where they r eatn like cows or goats or pigs. There is no society/culture which has a custom or norm to torture stray dogs. At least India is not one.) ; The problems coming from human beings, on the other hand, DO NOT come from the fact that they are human beings, but because of the matrix in which their lives are formed, shaped & grow. Because the character & actions of human beings IS FORMED & FOUNDED UPON the socio-cultural, eco-politico matrix of a society & its institutions, values, level of devlpmnt etc &n bsp; And so, we do NOT kill all the domestic servants. And we OUGHT TO eliminate the stray dogs.
To answer the questions of animal lovers wud take LOTS OF tim & space, since they challenge the very foundations of human life & society. This much for now. So as to the rest, maybe smetime later.
In our country not only dogs roam on the street but there are other many animals who roam on the street freely such as cows oxen pigs even boys and girls in rags with begging hands wherever you eat or walk.How do us feel about them. Should we eliminate them all.There are many cases of accidents pickpocketings chain snatching etc. etc.Really pitiable to see them and to live with all such nuisance in our surroundings.This is the destiny of being a poor country that we can not feed our population whether it is human or animal nor channelise them into the mainstream of life.
RE:stray animals.
by on Apr 16, 2007 05:37 PM Permalink
Money once lost u can get that...i m speaking about robbery, chain snatching etc.....other animals like cow, oxen etc seldom bite......quite recently these stray dogs have lead to many deaths..you will not realise the seriousness until u have experienced it....
Smt.Menaga Ghandhi should provide, on her own cost,a place to shelter stray dogs.or the govt.should start manufacturing anti rabbies medicines which was banned by then minister,M.G.
RE:stray dogs
by AAISHIK KAR on Apr 01, 2007 03:47 AM Permalink
That is precisely what they want! Anti-rabies drug producing companies need a market. They have CREATED one in India, and other "Third World" countries. If the dogs are eliminated, these companies will simply have to close down, pack their bags & go home. They are one of the MAJOR forces behind this whole game. To kill stray dogs would be a BIG blow to all companies manufacturing anti-rabies meds, & vaccines & all. Not to forget all the stray-dog welfare NGOs which will have to shut down. They shall lose their money. How can they then celebrate Stray Dog day in 5-star hotels (while the dogs themselves rot in garbage dumps) & hold their seminars & exhibitions & auctions & lectures & fly around the country & talk about resurrecting Buddha? You think they shall let that money just be taken out of their hands?? Never!! They will NOT lose the money & "name-fame" which they are hogging. So they ensure that people lose their lives UNNECESSARILY. POINTLESSLY. It may sound bizzare, but not too many people are aware of these tricks of the elite.
I take on board that everyone has different views and opinions of stray dogs.
Let me make it absolutely and abundantly clear, all stray dogs are dangerous, they are a menace and a permanent health hazzard to anyone, whether they attack us Indian natives or visiting foreign tourists. We must remember, we do not and never will, have an adequate health service let alone a welfare state, that is on a similar level to a country that is richer than India.
If any country richer than India, had a problem with stray dogs, it would be dealt with, quickly, professionally and efficently, which is never the case with us here.
Regardless of what people's views and opinions may be, I would have all the dogs killed, not steralized regardless of unrest and protest, people must accept change whether they like it or not, stop living in the past. It makes no difference whatsoever, if they will be sterilized or nutered. Stray dogs look and feel unhealthy and diseased, as apposed to a pet dog which is owned by a family. We must also remember again, dogs in rich countries are well trained, well groomed and well fed, unforutnately that isn't and never will be the case here in India.
Stray dogs can carry a wide range of diseases, which does increase the risk of transmission to a human, should somebody get bitten. India has always portrayed a very negative image of dealing with a crisis and reaching a positive solution.
The roads and streets are ONLY used for road users and pedestrians (please walk on the pavement). There is no place for stray (dogs especially) animals or any other animal for that matter.
As a country, we really do urgently need to improve the standard of health and hygiene in this country, because the way I look at it, we are heading backwards. We don't want to portray an ignorant and negative image of India throughout the world in this way whatsoever. It is about time, we kept our roads and streets clean, tidy and garbage (rubbish) free.
We must act now before ignorance of our failures and weakness to deal with any crisis, becomes a growing major and permanent problem in India.
RE:Stray dogs
by Buddhadev Kar on Mar 29, 2007 11:57 PM Permalink
Perhaps the most intelligent post I have come across so far!!! The point, Virendra, is: how do we stop it?? I just cannot see the higher ups taking this seriously. Most of them are into the racquet - it is a HUGE money making racquet. Huge donations, no sterilization or vaccination & all the money in pocket!! Moreover, most people do not know that: 1) MAHATMA GANDHI - THE MAN WHO ALMOST CREATED THE PHILOSOPHY OF AHIMSA (since he expanded the older philosophies in terms of application to modern issues) - GANDHI EXPRESSELY SUPPORTED THE RITUAL ELIMINATION OF STRAY DOGS. The ARAs & media keep quoting him as the apostle of non-violence & AHIMSA, hiding the fact that he openly enjoined stray dogs to be killed. 2) To vaccinate ONE stray dog, ONE sheep has to be killed, since the vaccine is made from the sheep's brain. It is injected with some chemical, undergoes a tortured process of 4-5 hours, & dies. TO VACCINATE ONE STRAY DOG.
Love for animals?? Animal rights?? Or a big game??
Mr Rohit, ABOVE ALL, I m NOT engaged in any sort of contest/competition here, nor am I interested, in the LEAST. Whether YOU - or anyone else - is, is of no concern to me whatsoever.
ALL the domestic servants in India OUGHT NOT be killed. why? There are 2 things here- 1)understanding the cause. 2)understanding the consequences. Lets leave the CAUSE part of it to a later date. It wud involve the question of JUSTICE, & is too complex. Consider the CONSEQUENCE part, which is enough to convince ME.
1stly, it is very simple to see that killing ALL domestic servants is NOT the solution. The soltn wud be to either remove the very INSTITUTION of domestic helpers - i.e, there shud be no more servants (as was done in case of slaves); - or to ensure their socio-economic progress. The path followed by most societies is steady development. As the std of living rises, so does the no. of servants - as they are found in India - REDUCE. That wud lead to a positive, direct benefit to the society/country AS A WHOLE - in terms of productivity/innovation/prosperity etc. Investement in human resources, managed properly, wud make TREMENDOUS difference - not only to that specific country, but to the whole world. It wud be foolishness to destroy such potential. On the other hand, you can spend MILLIONS of dollars on _STRAY_ dogs, but it is not going to add a grain of rice to anyone's plate, or an anti-tetanus into a single injured child's arm.
2ndly, it would lead to UNPRECEDENTED CHAOS in society. Society wud just fall apart & collapse. That shall not happen even if you kill ALL the stray dogs in the world. There is no reason to. Their death isnt going to make any ANY difference to anybody or anything. People wud not remember them 3 months after their extermination. Not the other strays themselves. This is not said out of "SADISM" or callousness. It is a simple, self-evident truth.
3rd, if chronological appearance on the planet were the criteria for having rights to use MAN-MADE products, then reptiles, snakes & giant lizards wud have greatest right to use them, not pariah dogs.
If I live in a house as a tenant, I do not become the owner of the house, but neither does the lizard on the wall, which has lived there much before I moved in. The house wud STILL belong to the landlord. I do not know who is the LANDLORD in ur example. The analogy given is, thus, not correct, bcoz in one case we r talking about UNCLAIMED, GIVEN RAW material/elements (the earth, forests, rivers etc) & in the other, abt a distinctly MAN-MADE product (WITH A SPECIFIC OWNER) which is NOT POSSIBLE without man's mind, & to which no stray dog has contributed an atom.
The question of dominance on Earth & taking up other space previously used by other species is a lengthy but easier one. Briefly, MAN, Human consciousness & Reason - are ALL a part & parcel & a development of nature. NATURE CHANGES HER RULES WITH EVERY NEW STEP SHE TAKES IN HER EVOLUTION. From mineral to plant, plant to animal/bird & so on. One plant does not eat another plant - but animals arrived, & laws changed. Now one LIVING creature HAD THE RIGHT to feed on another LIVING creature. Something which wud seem a gross injustice from the pt of view of PLANTS. Similarly, Nature's rules changed when she evolved MAN out of the mammal.
The right to dominate & control nature has been given to man by nature herself, as much as she has given the RIGHT to the lion to kill & eat the deer/buffalo.
With the emergence of HUMAN consciousness, NATURE - mind u, it is NATURE HERSELF - WHO HAS EVOLVED A DIFFERENT BASIS FOR COLLECTIVE & INDIVIDUAL LIFE, SOCIETY, RIGHTS, OWNERSHIP & THE UNIT'S RELATIONSHIP WITH THE WHOLE (UNIVERSE). Man is not OUTSIDE nature, but as he is, not AUTOMATICALLY in perfect harmony with it either. His job is to discover what this perfect harmony is, & where does it lie. Since he isnt born with the knowledge of how to build an aeroplane or to establish a system of jurisprudence, NATURE has ordained that this path is a tortured process of trial & error. For that u have to accept that Nature has a certain underlying PURPOSE (not acceptable to atheists, I m sure) or at least moving in a DEFINITE direction - & is finding more efficient vehicles to fulfil her purpose. She has left behind the wolves, squirrels, crocodiles - i.e, INFERIOR forms of consciousness & an inferior code of life - and evolved a form of CONSCIOUSNESS far more efficient in dealing with nature, & a superior code of life. That of Man. (This code is not programed into his brain, so he makes terrible mistakes in DISCOVERING it.)
The question of Rights is the MOST important one. On that, & others pts, maybe another post after few days. Time's up.
