Ludhiana’s stray-dog management challenge has reached an uncomfortable point: dog-bite numbers are rising, sterilisation remains too slow for the scale of the problem, and the Municipal Corporation is still planning around population data collected more than six years ago.
The 20th Livestock Census, conducted in 2019–20, recorded 29,998 stray dogs in Ludhiana district.
The next census has already been conducted, but its figures are still awaiting authentication from the Union Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. That leaves officials without a current, verified estimate of the free-ranging dog population.
The data gap is especially significant because Ludhiana reported 37,200 dog-bite cases in 2025, up from 31,054 in 2024, according to figures cited by Municipal Health Officer Dr Vipan Malhotra.
That represents an increase of more than 19% in a single year.
A new ₹4.95-crore plan aims to cover 30,000 dogs
The civic body is now proposing a much larger response.
On September 4, the Ludhiana Municipal Corporation placed before its Finance and Contracts Committee a ₹4.95-crore programme to sterilise at least 30,000 stray dogs.
The proposal covers more than surgery.
It also includes anti-rabies vaccination, deworming, catching, transportation and required post-operative care.
The proposed rate is ₹1,650 per dog, based on the rate prescribed by the Animal Welfare Board of India.
On paper, 30,000 dogs is a major target. But Ludhiana’s last authenticated district-wide count was itself just under 30,000 and is now more than six years old, making it difficult to judge how much of the current population the new programme would actually cover.
Bite cases are rising faster than sterilisation coverage
The urgency is visible in the bite data.
Ludhiana recorded 31,054 dog bites in 2024 and 37,200 in 2025, according to the Municipal Corporation health officer.
During 2025, the MC sterilised around 12,000 dogs.
Animal-welfare groups argue that this pace is not enough to create population-level impact quickly, particularly if large numbers of unsterilised dogs remain in surrounding areas.
The problem is not simply the number of surgeries completed in one year. ABC works best when a high proportion of dogs in a defined area are sterilised and vaccinated in a coordinated manner; patchy coverage weakens population-level impact.
The Central Government has repeatedly urged urban local bodies to expand sterilisation programmes and has cited coverage of at least 70% of a local stray-dog population as an important benchmark for effective population management.
The missing census makes planning much harder
Officials themselves have acknowledged why updated population data matters.
The census matters because it determines how much money, manpower, kennel space and veterinary capacity the programme actually needs.
The 20th Livestock Census figure of 29,998 stray dogs applies to Ludhiana district, while the Municipal Corporation’s ABC programme is limited to areas under its own civic jurisdiction.
That distinction matters.
The district also extends beyond MC limits, so officials are effectively working with an outdated district figure and no authenticated current city-level baseline.
Funding has been a persistent point of friction
Animal-welfare groups have also questioned whether municipal rates are high enough to support quality ABC work.
A member of the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals told Hindustan Times that private-clinic sterilisation can cost around ₹7,000 per dog, while older MC tender rates offered roughly ₹1,200 to ₹1,500 per animal.
The same activist said consumables alone can exceed ₹1,000. The newest proposal raises the municipal rate to ₹1,650 per dog, but ABC costs also include capture, transport, anaesthesia, medicines, vaccination, recovery and return to the locality — which is why welfare groups continue to question whether low per-dog rates can support quality implementation.
Post-operative care creates a real throughput limit
Dogs may need around five days of observation and treatment after surgery, according to animal-welfare representatives in Ludhiana. That makes recovery space just as important as surgical capacity and naturally limits throughput.
This is one reason the city’s infrastructure has repeatedly come under scrutiny.
Hindustan Times reported that the Haibowal Animal Birth Control centre was able to handle around 18 dogs at a time in the context of the programme being discussed.
Other reports have cited higher overall kennel occupancy at the Haibowal complex, suggesting that figures vary depending on whether they refer to surgery slots, recovery space or total animals housed. Either way, infrastructure remains a bottleneck.
City limits do not match the way Ludhiana is growing
Jurisdiction creates another bottleneck.
The Municipal Corporation’s sterilisation work is carried out within MC limits.
But Ludhiana’s urban footprint does not stop neatly at that administrative boundary.
Areas on the outskirts have urbanised rapidly, and animal-welfare groups say complaints about dog aggression and bites are also increasing there.
South City has been cited as one example.
When one locality falls under an active ABC programme while a neighbouring urbanised area does not, dog-population management becomes fragmented.
Because dogs and food sources do not follow administrative boundaries, a programme that stops at the MC border can struggle to match conditions on the ground.
Allegations over sterilisation records need independent scrutiny
Animal activists have also raised more serious concerns about implementation.
Some have alleged that dogs may occasionally have been recorded as sterilised even when the procedure was not actually carried out.
These are allegations, not established findings, but they underline why transparency matters.
Earlier this year, the Punjab State and Chandigarh Human Rights Commission also sought detailed information from the Ludhiana Municipal Corporation on sterilisation and vaccination work after complaints over rising dog attacks and inadequate documentation.
The Commission noted that supporting records on the number of dogs covered, medical details and monitoring had not been adequately provided in an earlier response.
For a programme involving public money, surgery and public-health outcomes, clear records are essential.
Sterilisation and vaccination have to move together
The debate cannot be reduced to sterilisation alone.
Under India’s Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023, local bodies are responsible for implementing humane sterilisation and anti-rabies vaccination programmes.
Sterilisation addresses population growth, while vaccination addresses rabies risk. The two interventions need to be planned together, neighbourhood by neighbourhood, using reliable population data.
The 30,000-dog proposal is significant — but execution will decide everything
Ludhiana’s new ₹4.95-crore proposal is substantial.
A target of 30,000 dogs could represent a major expansion, but execution will depend on authenticated population data, trained teams, transport, recovery space, realistic funding, cross-jurisdiction coordination and verifiable records.
Ludhiana’s real problem is not a lack of solutions
The tools for humane stray-dog management are already known.
The tools are already known: count accurately, sterilise at scale, vaccinate against rabies, monitor outcomes, manage waste and maintain transparent records. The challenge is getting all of those pieces to work at the same time.
For now, the city is attempting to expand its sterilisation programme while still waiting for the latest census to tell it how large the problem has actually become.
That disconnect may be the clearest sign of why progress has been so difficult.
Ludhiana does not simply need more sterilisation.
It needs data-driven, adequately funded and independently accountable Animal Birth Control at a scale that matches the city’s current reality.
Pets News Network is India’s first dedicated media platform for the pet and animal industry. For breaking global pet news, brand coverage, and advertising enquiries, contact: info@petsnewsnetwork.com
