Mayor Jader de Jesús Clavijo of Quinchía, Risaralda, proposed imposing fines on people who feed stray dogs [1, 2].
The proposal marks a contentious shift in municipal animal control, pitting local government efforts to manage stray populations against animal welfare advocates. If implemented, the measure would criminalize basic care for homeless animals in the municipality.
Clavijo said the goal of the sanctions is to incentivize the adoption of animals and reduce the total number of dogs living on the street [2]. The mayor said that citizens should avoid providing water or commercial dog food, referred to as purina, to the animals [2].
The initiative has faced immediate pushback from animal rights organizations and political figures. Senator Andrea Padilla said that punishing those who help animals would be illegal [1]. Padilla said such a measure would divert attention away from the actual responsibilities of the government [1].
The debate in Quinchía highlights a growing tension in Colombia regarding the ethics of urban animal management. While the mayor views the removal of food sources as a tool for population control, critics argue it ignores the root causes of abandonment, and penalizes compassion.
Local advocates suggest that the administration should focus on sterilization programs and shelters rather than financial penalties for citizens. The legal viability of the proposal remains a point of contention, as critics suggest it may violate existing animal protection standards [1].
“No darles purina ni agua”
This proposal reflects a 'starvation' or 'deterrence' approach to urban animal management, which contrasts with the globally accepted Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) models. By targeting the providers of food rather than the owners who abandon pets, the policy risks legal challenges based on animal cruelty laws and may create social conflict between the municipal government and animal welfare volunteers.
