#Title

City tails: Coexisting with stray animals
VISUAL: ALIZA RAHMAN
Most of us who live in Dhaka city are invisible. The moment we become visible, we are either in trouble or become a problem. In some cases, we become news. This applies to both human and non-human species that coexist in urban areas. We often tend to forget that humans are not the only species that inhabit the world. Even our space, which we have curated by manipulating nature, doesn’t solely belong to us. However, anthropocentric human perspectives define the relationship between humans and non-humans in urban spaces in hierarchical terms. We assume that, as humans, we have the natural superiority that gives us the moral right to exploit or annihilate others.
The recent poisoning of stray animals in a gated community in Mohammadpur, along with the government’s subsequent actions and the ensuing public outcry, highlight the urban dynamics related to human-non-human interactions. The owners’ association of the apartment complex considered the feral animals as pests and decided to cull them. However, some residents had earlier reportedly taken these animals under their care, vaccinating and sterilising them. The creatures relied on scraps of food and the occasional act of human generosity. These acts of kindness represent trust and hope that allowed the animals to thrive. To betray this trust with poisoned meals not only highlights the darker side of human behaviour, but also underscores a systemic failure to address the needs of stray animals in urban environments.
The owners’ association viewed the animals as a “problem.” I suspect they belong to my generation, having grown up witnessing the capture and culling of stray dogs by the city corporation up until the 1980s. Unlike Gen Z, they would not find it unacceptable to remove street dogs. We cannot expect them to understand interspecies dependency and the ethical imperative for shared urban spaces. Hardly would they realise the benefits communities have from the presence of stray dogs and cats. Urban strays not only inhabit our city but also participate in our ecosystem, aiding in pest control and promoting emotional well-being. For the owners’ association, the nuisance value of stray animals was perhaps more pertinent, as these animals barked at night or allegedly posed threats to public health. The annihilation of marginal characters serves as a poignant reminder of our treatment of other peripheral groups, such as vagabonds or beggars, who often live and die unnoticed in public spaces.
It was refreshing to see one adviser of the interim government write to another, reminding her of animal rights, and to see prominent lawyers volunteer to pursue legal actions in support of the cause of the dead animals. Then again, the questions remain: do we apply the same agility in responding to other fringe groups? Do we really know how many members of our floating population suffer or die as a result of our negligence? We hear of forced removal of beggars ahead of some high-profile state visits, or we see signs of beggar-free elite zones. The programmes to rehabilitate our fringe population remain invisible unless they get involved in a newsworthy incident. Urban planning seems to consider some lives—both human and non-human—as expendable. The widespread cruelty towards stray animals reflects a broader indifference to suffering that transcends species boundaries.
When the members of the owners’ association in the gated community in Mohammadpur decided to cull the stray animals, they probably assumed a position of moral authority to execute their culturally rooted biases against dogs. People often view dogs as unclean and unholy. This is a limited view as religious teachings provide moral grounds for caring for animals. There are ample examples in the Quran and Hadiths that prescribe kindness towards animals. There are even instances where Prophet Muhammad rebuked a woman for starving a cat and forgave a condemned man for giving water to a thirsty dog. There are many Islamic scholars who have argued for kindness or care for dogs as sentient beings deserving respect. One solution to the problem must come through a religious awareness campaign against euthanasia or mistreatment of animals.
From an economic standpoint, we do not prioritise the issue of urban stray animals. Our economic constraints force us to prioritise other issues over animal welfare when allocating resources. Legal protection for animals will remain ineffective unless we shift our perspective to acknowledge the ethical consequences of inhumane culling practices like poisoning. We need to adopt a model of human-non-human relations that is both practical and moral.
We can learn from the experience of the capital of Türkiye. In Istanbul, municipalities tag animals to monitor their health and population. The city vaccinates and sterilises the stray animals to control diseases and population growth. It designates public feeding stations and uses apps like SemtPati to allow citizens to take an active role in caring for and monitoring stray animals. Istanbul has adopted an animal-friendly policy that allows safe feeding zones and accessible veterinary care. Turkish law, which prohibits the killing of stray animals unless medically necessary, also protects the animals. Currently, some local NGOs and voluntary organisations are working in this field.
There have to be visible steps to develop public awareness campaigns in Dhaka—and in the rest of Bangladesh—based on religious and ethical teachings. Additionally, we need properly designed community-driven feeding programmes, supported by local governments and NGOs, that could ensure sustainable care. However, we cannot ignore our fellow human beings while focusing on stray animals either. We must redesign and rethink the city to accommodate all human and non-human inhabitants.
Care for others indicates the moral health of a society. The basis of such a society is a culture of mutual care and respect. We need policies that integrate interspecies dependency insights and are humane. Addressing the needs of stray animals is not just about animal welfare—it is about envisioning a more inclusive and compassionate urban life for all beings.