31–40 of 175 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article says they've been doing it for 15 years, so there's something odd about their numbers.
It's not odd. Sterilization without any additional measures is useless. People will keep buying and abandoning dogs. And if there's enough food, they will reproduce faster than you can catch and sterilize them
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> For now, if they catch a dog the chances are high its already treated. Wouldn't there be basically no dogs left in a couple year? So just keep the program going for another 5 years or so and they wouldn't be catching very many dogs in the first place.
> Wouldn't there be basically no dogs left in a couple year? You may be amazed how many people don't see pets as responsibilities and either discard them for trivial reasons (like moving house) or let them breed and then dump the litter out to fend for themselves.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Compared to “only” 500 millions pigs, the number of dogs is astounding. No wonder many countries also use them as food.
Dogs as food?
next up the street rats
I know yours is a joke comment, but without the dogs eating the food (the garbage), some other animal is going to eat it instead. I predict an explosion of rats in another decade.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dogs as food?
Yes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_meat
It's tempting to imagine that they didn't actually get to 100%, and there are some hidden holdouts who have escaped the program and will re-establish the street dog population covertly.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get it. Why not just euthanize them? Surely that would be cheaper than sterilizing and vaccinating them all, and the benefits would be seen sooner.
Bhutan is deeply buddhist