Udupi: Residents of Uppoor, Havanje and Aroor staged a protest outside the Deputy Commissioner’s office on Friday against the proposed construction of a dog shelter at Uppoor. The protesters alleged that the Udupi City Municipal Council (CMC) selected nearly 9.9 acres of government land for the shelter without consulting local residents and gram panchayat representatives, and raised concerns over possible health and social impacts.
The demonstration saw participation from villagers, local leaders and social activists, who submitted their objections and demanded that authorities identify an alternative site away from residential zones.
Protesters cite lack of public consultation
According to the protesters, the land was selected following directions linked to a Supreme Court mandate on establishing adequate animal shelter and care facilities. However, residents argued that the decision was taken without prior consultation with people living in the surrounding areas.
They said local communities should have been informed and their views considered before finalising the location for such a facility. Protesters maintained that participatory decision-making is essential when projects may directly affect neighbourhoods.
Speakers at the protest said they were not opposing animal welfare measures in principle but objected to the chosen site due to its proximity to habitation and future development potential.
Health and social concerns raised
Residents expressed apprehension that a large dog shelter close to residential layouts could create sanitation, safety and public health concerns. They said movement of stray and rescued dogs, waste disposal and odour could become issues if the facility is located near homes and community spaces.
They also voiced fears about the possible impact on children, elderly residents and daily public movement in the area. Some protesters said the presence of such a shelter might affect property values and planned residential growth nearby.
The delegation urged officials to conduct a detailed impact assessment and hold a public hearing before proceeding further.
Land better suited for development, say locals
Protesters argued that the identified land parcel is more suitable for long-term development projects rather than an animal shelter. They said the area has strategic value and could be used for educational, tourism or public infrastructure initiatives that benefit a larger section of people.
Social activist Sathish Poojary Keelinje, addressing the gathering, said Uppoor has nearly 25 acres of government land and that residents were earlier given to understand that a university or major educational project could come up there.
He alleged that the present decision to earmark a portion of that land for a dog shelter was taken without involving the local community or elected local bodies.
Call to shift project away from habitation
Fr Lawrence D’Souza, who also spoke during the protest, urged the civic body to select land away from densely populated areas for the proposed shelter. He said development-oriented projects should be prioritised in Uppoor while facilities that require isolation and buffer zones should be placed elsewhere.
Former Aroor gram panchayat president Rajiv Kulal said the presence of a nearby lake makes the broader area suitable for tourism-related development. He suggested that eco-tourism or recreation projects could generate employment and long-term economic benefits for local residents.
Protesters said that once such a shelter is established, it would be difficult to relocate, and therefore the decision should be reconsidered at the planning stage itself.
Memorandum submitted to district authorities
The protesting residents submitted a memorandum to the district administration outlining their objections and demands. They requested the Deputy Commissioner to direct the CMC to halt further steps at the proposed site until consultations are held and alternative locations are evaluated.
They also called for transparency in site selection criteria and disclosure of technical reports, if any, used to justify the choice of land.
Officials have not yet issued a detailed public response on the objections but are expected to review the representation.
Balancing animal welfare and community concerns
The issue reflects the broader challenge faced by urban local bodies in implementing animal welfare directives while addressing local community concerns. Dog shelters are often mandated to ensure humane handling, sterilisation and care of stray animals, but site selection frequently becomes contentious.
Residents said they support structured animal care systems but insisted that such facilities must be located with adequate buffer distance from residential clusters.
Further action is likely after administrative review of the memorandum and discussions between civic and district authorities.