Kolkata’s rabies-control challenge is no longer only a question of how many people are bitten. The figures in the Kolkata Municipal Corporation’s 2026-27 budget show a city treating the consequences of exposure at a far greater scale than it is preventing the risk among street dogs. Between January and October 2025, KMC clinics administered anti-rabies vaccine to 30,688 animal-bite patients, while the civic body vaccinated 3,087 street dogs and sterilised 932 male dogs.
The gap is significant because rabies prevention in an urban setting depends on linked systems rather than a single medical intervention. Human vaccination protects patients after exposure. Canine vaccination is intended to reduce transmission at source, while sterilisation is part of population management. Catching, transporting, housing, vaccinating and returning dogs requires municipal infrastructure spread across neighbourhoods. Kolkata’s data suggests that these systems are not operating at the scale required by the city’s estimated street-dog population.
The human-health burden is substantial. The 30,688 patients recorded during the first 10 months of 2025 represent nearly 3,100 visits a month to KMC clinics. Of them, 5,806—almost one in five—also required equine rabies immunoglobulin, generally used for severe Category III exposures, according to an animal activist working in the field of stray-dog immunisation. The figures indicate that the municipal response is dealing not only with routine post-bite care but also with a sizeable number of serious exposures.
The trend predates the latest budget figures. More than 34,000 bite patients required vaccination in 2023, while 34,430 were treated between January and November 2024. Against this continuing demand, canine vaccination has moved in the opposite direction. KMC vaccinated 15,296 dogs by December 14, 2024, compared with 13,711 in 2023. The 3,087 dogs recorded between January and October 2025 therefore point to a sharp loss of momentum, although the periods and reporting cut-offs are not identical.
The World Health Organisation considers sustained vaccination of around 70% of the dog population critical to interrupting dog-mediated rabies transmission. KMC estimates Kolkata’s street-dog population at 84,000. The 3,087 dogs vaccinated during the 2025 period represent only a small fraction of that estimate, and the supplied data does not establish how many dogs were vaccinated more than once, where they were vaccinated or whether coverage was concentrated in high-risk areas. Those missing details matter because an aggregate citywide count cannot show whether protection is reaching the neighbourhoods where bites are most frequent.
KMC’s operational constraints help explain why the gap persists. The Dhapa dog pound is the city’s only government facility for holding street dogs during sterilisation, vaccination and treatment, but it can accommodate only around 250 animals at a time. The facility’s capacity limits the number of dogs that can be processed through the municipal programme at any one time. Civic officials have also cited waterlogging at Dhapa as one of the problems affecting implementation.
The field operation is constrained further by manpower and equipment. Of 19 sanctioned dog-catcher posts, only nine are presently available. Three of KMC’s six catching vans are reportedly out of operation because of technical problems. One KMC official described catching strays across the city’s 144 wards with nine dog catchers as an “uphill task” and identified the shortage of dog-catching vans as another issue.
This is an administrative problem as much as a veterinary one. A vaccination programme cannot reach the target population unless the civic body can locate dogs, catch them safely, transport them, provide the required intervention and maintain records. When capacity is weak at any point, the number of animals vaccinated falls. The constraints also complicate the management of dogs around hospitals, schools, railway stations, bus terminals and government offices—locations where the municipal response has to balance public safety with the operational requirements of animal handling.
KMC had recognised the need for a citywide intervention earlier. In March 2022, it launched a special time-bound vaccination and sterilisation programme intended to vaccinate the entire estimated street-dog population and sterilise about 60% of it. The state sanctioned Rs 88 lakh and the Centre Rs 14 lakh for the programme, which initially carried a one-year deadline. Civic officials later said the project encountered infrastructure and manpower shortages, inadequate pound capacity, waterlogging at Dhapa and mismatches in borough-wise dog-population records.
The funding structure shows that the programme was not designed as an isolated KMC activity. State and central allocations were combined with municipal implementation, placing the outcome on the coordination of multiple levels of government. But the figures supplied in the report do not show whether the sanctioned funds were fully spent, how procurement was organised, whether additional funding was requested or how performance was measured after the initial deadline. What is clear is that the original time-bound plan did not translate into sustained coverage at the level required by the estimated dog population.
The absence of ward-level data is another institutional weakness. In an RTI response in August 2025, KMC said it was “presently not in a position” to provide ward-wise figures for vaccination and sterilisation. Without such information, the civic body cannot readily identify bite hotspots, compare coverage between wards or demonstrate that its limited catching teams are being deployed where risk is highest. It also makes it difficult for residents and elected representatives to assess whether the programme is progressing beyond citywide totals.
The data gap has practical consequences. A citywide estimate of 84,000 dogs is useful for setting a broad target, but operational planning requires more granular information: where dogs are concentrated, where bites are being reported, which animals have already been vaccinated or sterilised, and which facilities can process them. The supplied material does not establish that KMC has a functioning ward-wise assessment. Its RTI response indicates the opposite. This prevents a clear evaluation of whether the programme is under-resourced everywhere or failing most sharply in particular parts of Kolkata.
The comparison between human and canine numbers should also be interpreted carefully. Patients and dogs are counted through different systems and over different time periods, so they are not directly comparable as equivalent units. But the contrast is still revealing as a measure of municipal effort. Nearly 31,000 people received post-exposure vaccination in 10 months, while just over 3,000 dogs were vaccinated during the same period. The city has a visible treatment network for people, but the preventive animal-health system remains constrained by the ability to reach and process dogs.
That imbalance shifts the burden towards residents and the health system. Each bite initiates a response involving clinical assessment and, in severe cases, anti-rabies vaccine and equine rabies immunoglobulin. The report does not provide the financial cost of this treatment or the number of facilities involved, so the wider resource burden cannot be quantified from the available evidence. It does establish, however, that KMC clinics are handling a sustained volume of animal-bite cases while the source-control programme is operating below the scale implied by the city’s own population estimate.
The broader urban question is whether Kolkata treats street-dog management as a periodic campaign or as permanent civic infrastructure. The 2022 programme’s one-year deadline, the subsequent capacity constraints and the absence of ward-wise figures point to a system that has struggled to move from an announced target to routine delivery. Vaccination, sterilisation, catching equipment, holding capacity, staffing and data are not separate concerns. Together, they determine whether a city can maintain the coverage needed for rabies control.
Kolkata’s latest figures therefore confirm two realities at once. The municipal health system is providing post-bite protection to tens of thousands of people, but the preventive programme for street dogs has not kept pace with the city’s estimated need. The scale of the remaining gap, its distribution across wards and the current status of the 2022 programme cannot be fully established without updated, ward-level records. Those records, along with functioning catching vehicles, adequate staffing and greater holding capacity, will determine whether KMC can convert rabies control from a reactive service into a sustained citywide programme.
