Stray Dogs.. Why Do We Wait for a Victim Before the Responsible Authorities Act?

The phenomenon of stray dogs in Kuwait is no longer just an annoying sight on some streets or squares, nor is it merely a fleeting fear experienced by citizens or residents when they find themselves facing a pack of dogs on their way. It has transformed into a real threat endangering people’s safety and lives, particularly children, the elderly, and visitors to residential areas, parks, and open roads. The question that imposes itself today, with complete frankness, is: Why did we wait for a tragedy to occur and for a citizen to lose his life before we heard about action from the relevant authorities?

This is not a problem that emerged yesterday, nor is it an unknown phenomenon to the responsible authorities. Journalistic reports had previously warned about the spread of stray dogs. Al-Qabas published in September 2025 that the Public Authority for Agricultural Affairs and Fish Resources had requested the allocation of sites to establish shelters for stray dogs, after noting the increasing numbers and the accidents and health risks they cause. According to the report, bite cases reached approximately 60 per month.

Even more puzzling is that Al-Qabas published a report just days ago, on September 24, 2026, titled “Stray Dogs: A Chronic Threat and Missing Solutions,” which included complaints from citizens about their spread near residential areas, schools, farms, and gardens. The report confirmed that the problem is no longer confined to a specific location and that citizens had submitted repeated complaints demanding a comprehensive solution.

Then comes the latest statement from the Director of the Animal Health Department, who said the Authority is following the phenomenon “with interest,” monitoring gathering spots for dogs and handling reports, and working on preparing a more comprehensive and organized program. Here, we must ask: If the relevant authorities are monitoring the problem, know the gathering spots of the dogs, and receive complaints, why has this phenomenon continued to expand until it became a daily source of fear for citizens? Why haven’t previous complaints been translated into a comprehensive field plan that prevents the danger before it occurs?

The Crisis Management Department should not wait for a citizen’s call after he sees a group of dogs in front of his house, nor wait for an accident to occur before specialized teams move in. True management begins before the incident: by counting the number of dogs and identifying their gathering spots, understanding the causes of their reproduction and spread, eliminating random food sources, monitoring areas with large gatherings, and dealing with them according to a continuous and organized program that considers public safety and animal welfare simultaneously.

It is not enough for a government entity to announce that it receives complaints via WhatsApp or to say it is monitoring the phenomenon. Citizens want to see tangible results on the ground. They want to walk in their neighborhoods without fear, and they want their children to go to school without parents having to change their routes due to dog gatherings. They want the elderly to be able to exercise or walk in open areas without it turning into a risk.

The most important question is: Has the occurrence of harm become a prerequisite for government authorities to act? If citizens have complained and warned, if the relevant authorities know the gathering spots of the dogs, and if official and journalistic reports have discussed their risks for years, what was missing to take more effective action?

The death of a human being is not just a number in a news report, nor should it become an occasion to launch a temporary campaign, after which the situation returns to normal. A citizen’s life is too precious to be an alarm bell that is only heard after a tragedy occurs. We need a clear and announced national plan that defines the responsibility of each entity, a timeline for implementation, a procedure for following up on complaints, an inventory of dangerous areas, and the establishment of suitable facilities for shelter, treatment, and sterilization according to approved standards, while addressing the causes that lead to the continued reproduction and spread of dogs.

The time has come for the relevant authorities to move from “monitoring the phenomenon” to eliminating its causes, from waiting for complaints to preventing danger, and from reactive measures to proactive action. May God have mercy on the citizen who lost his life, and grant his family patience and solace. But the greatest honor we can pay him is that his death should not be merely an incident that moves the responsible authorities for a period, after which the campaign ends and the danger returns anew. Do we need a new victim every time to convince ourselves that there is a problem?

Waleed Ibrahim Al-Khubizi