Goa, a small coastal state in western India, cannot currently agree how many street dogs live within its borders.
The figures range from 27,864 to almost 150,000.
This is important because Goa has established a target of sterilising 70% of its street-dog population within five years. Municipalities are also being required to manage dogs removed from specified public and institutional locations, creating additional pressure for shelter space, veterinary services and long-term care.
None of that can be planned properly without a credible population figure.
The last published livestock census, conducted in 2019, recorded 27,864 street dogs in Goa. Another government estimate has placed the population at approximately 56,000.
A figure recorded in November 2022 suggested that street dogs represented 9% of Goa’s human population. Based on the population used in reporting on the policy, that would mean Goa had almost 150,000 street dogs.
By July 2023, however, another government figure had reduced the estimated proportion to 4.5%, implying a population closer to 72,000.
Within a matter of months, the estimate had apparently been cut in half.
The Bombay High Court at Goa has now questioned how that happened. During its latest hearing, the court asked whether an actual census existed and why the available population data had not been included in the Union government’s affidavit.
India’s 21st Livestock Census was conducted between November 2024 and April 2025. The exercise included information relating to Goa’s street-dog population, but those figures have not yet been published.
The High Court has directed the Union government to place the Goa data before it by 8 September 2026, even if the national census remains unfinished and the figures are still provisional. The case is expected to return to court on 9 September.
The difference between the available estimates completely changes the scale of Goa’s sterilisation programme.
If the 2019 figure of 27,864 dogs is used, reaching 70% would require approximately 19,505 sterilisation procedures. If the population is 56,000, the target becomes 39,200 dogs. If it is approximately 72,000, more than 50,000 dogs must be sterilised. If the population is close to 150,000, Goa would need to sterilise approximately 105,000 dogs.
The difference between the lowest and highest versions of the target is more than 85,000 procedures.
It determines how many veterinary teams are required, how many surgeries must be completed each year, how much post-operative accommodation is needed and how much the programme will cost.
It also changes the meaning of every progress figure.
Ten thousand sterilisation procedures would cover approximately 36% of a population of 27,864 dogs. The same work would reach about 18% of a population of 56,000, 14% of a population of 72,000 and fewer than 7% of a population of 150,000.
The number of procedures has not changed. The apparent level of progress has. The uncertainty also affects shelter planning. Goa’s municipalities are being required to comply with court directions affecting dogs found in specified institutional and public locations. Where those dogs are removed and cannot be returned, authorities must provide somewhere suitable for them to go.
Information supplied by individual councils suggests that much of this infrastructure does not yet exist.
Margao Municipal Council has identified a site and requested ₹80.38 lakh in government funding for a shelter and sterilisation work. Pernem has proposed a shelter for 100 dogs. Ponda says that a lack of available land has delayed its plans, while Valpoi is seeking funding for temporary accommodation. Other councils are preparing estimates or waiting for approvals.
Mormugao has an existing arrangement for sterilisation and immunisation, but shortages of shelter space, cages, vehicles and equipment have been reported. Municipal infrastructure report
A shelter for 100 dogs may provide useful local capacity. It cannot answer the wider question of how Goa will manage a population that may number 28,000, 56,000, 72,000 or almost 150,000.
The authorities need more than a statewide estimate. They need figures showing where the dogs are, how populations differ between talukas and municipalities and where sterilisation, vaccination and shelter resources are most urgently required.
They must also explain how the 2025 count was conducted. The public needs to know what definition of a street dog was used, whether dogs were directly observed or statistically estimated, how repeat counting was prevented and how the final total was calculated.
An estimate, an extrapolation and a completed census are not the same thing. Figures produced at different times using different methods cannot be presented together without explaining what each one represents.
Publishing the census will provide a starting point, but counting dogs on the street will not be enough.
Authorities must also account for what happens after dogs are collected. Figures should show how many dogs are sterilised, vaccinated, returned, permanently confined, reclaimed, adopted, transferred, recorded as dying in care or euthanised.
Every collected dog must remain connected to an individual record. A population total cannot tell us whether a particular dog received treatment, where they were taken or whether they left the system alive.
Dog Desk Animal Action already classifies India as a Crisis country on the Global Stray Dog Crisis Map. The situation in Goa strengthens the evidence supporting that classification.
Goa is being asked to expand sterilisation, collection and accommodation while the size of the population remains unresolved and several municipalities acknowledge that the necessary infrastructure is still being planned.
The 2025 census data must now be published. Until it is, Goa cannot credibly measure progress towards its 70% sterilisation target or calculate how much shelter and veterinary capacity will be required.
You cannot build a humane system around a population nobody has reliably counted.