Are free-living dogs causing conflict—or preventing it? From Ladakh to the Nilgiris, dogs have long acted as sentinels and guardians, buffering humans from wildlife. This piece challenges “dog menace” narratives and explains why removing dogs often worsens conflict instead of solving it.
A Rebuttal to the Article “Feral Dogs on the Roof of the World”: Evidence-Based Challenges to Media Sensationalism and Policy Implications
The New York Times’ “Feral Dogs on the Roof of the World” mistakes compelling storytelling for sound science. This evidence-based rebuttal shows why free-ranging dogs are not feral invaders, how human systems create conflict, and why culling and relocation threaten conservation, public health and rabies control.
You Cannot Read a Dog’s Mind — But You Can Prevent Dog Bites
Dog bites are not random. Science shows they arise from stress, hunger, and instability—and that prevention works by addressing conditions, not by removing dogs.
Why Citizen-care of Free-Living Dogs Is a Public-Health Necessity
India can eliminate rabies by supporting citizen care of free-living dogs. Science shows vaccination and ABC-AR succeed where removal fails.
Four Weeks in, the Quick Fix of Relocation is Failing India’s Public Health and its Professionals
The push to relocate dogs is proving to be an administrative and ethical absurdity, placing impossible demands on municipal bodies and thrusting dangerous, undue duties upon over-burdened professionals, like teachers.
The BHARCS Blog 