Debunking the myth of 'stray-free' countries

Every time a stray dog is beaten, poisoned, or “disappeared” in Bangladesh, a familiar line follows: “No other country has strays.”

It is said with certainty, and sometimes even with a sense of righteousness, as if cruelty is simply the price of progress.

But that statement is as wrong as it is dangerous.

Because it builds a myth, and then uses that myth to justify violence.

Let’s begin with the truth: most countries did not wake up one day to find their streets magically free of stray animals. Countries like the United States, United Kingdom, and Germany once had visible populations of stray dogs and cats, much like cities across South Asia today.

What changed was not the disappearance of street animals, but the existence of systems.

Read more

Why relocation of stray dogs is not the right way to go about it

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, stray animals in the US are routinely handled through structured systems involving animal control agencies and shelters, where they are collected, vaccinated, and managed rather than left on the streets. These systems did not emerge overnight; they were built over decades, backed by policy, funding, and public compliance.

Alongside this, large-scale sterilisation became the backbone of population control. Organisations like Humane World for Animals emphasise that spay and neuter programmes are the most effective way to reduce homeless animal populations by preventing births rather than reacting to them. This is the quiet, unglamorous work that reshaped urban animal populations in the West.

Shelters and rescue networks form another critical layer. According to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, millions of animals enter shelters each year in the US, where they are treated, rehabilitated, and placed for adoption. The animals do not disappear, nor are they brutally killed -- they are redirected into systems of care.

Even then, the story is not as neat as people assume.

In many western cities, free-roaming cats still exist; but they are managed through humane programmes. Research published in journals indexed by the National Institutes of Health highlights the widespread use of Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR), where cats are sterilised, vaccinated, and returned to their environment, stabilising populations without resorting to killing.

The difference, then, is not absence, it is management.

Now, let’s look at South Asia.

Across India, Pakistan, Nepal, and Sri Lanka, stray populations remain visible, embedded within urban ecosystems. According to multiple international animal welfare organisations working in the region, including World Organisation for Animal Health, this is closely tied to rapid urbanisation, inconsistent waste management, and the absence of sustained, large-scale sterilisation efforts.

Read more

Dog removal move sparks outcry in Baridhara

Bangladesh is not an outlier. It is part of a regional pattern.

But here is where the argument collapses entirely: even in countries that have reduced visible stray populations, mass killing has not been the solution, it never was.

The World Health Organization explicitly advises against culling or relocation as methods of stray dog population control, noting that it is ineffective in the long term. Remove animals without addressing food sources and reproduction, and new populations quickly fill the vacuum.

Yet, in Bangladesh, the myth persists. That “developed” countries have no strays. That we must “become like them”. And that the quickest way to do so is to eliminate the animals we see.

It is a seductive argument because it feels decisive, immediate and perhaps cheaper as it bypasses the harder, slower work of building systems.

Real change is not dramatic. It does not happen overnight, and it certainly does not happen through sporadic acts of brutality. It requires policy, funding, public awareness, veterinary infrastructure, and coordination between city corporations, NGOs, and communities.

Most of all, it requires consistency.

There are already glimpses of what works. Localised sterilisation drives, vaccination campaigns, and community-led care networks have shown that populations can be stabilised over time. Not eliminated; but managed humanely and sustainably.

That is the model the world has moved towards -- not eradication, but control with compassion.

So, the next time someone says “No other country has strays”, it is worth asking: do they mean no animals, or no visibility? No problem, or a system that has taken responsibility for it?

The truth is simple: stray animals exist everywhere. What differs is whether a society chooses to respond with infrastructure or with violence.

That choice says more about us.