Düzce Mayor Özlü reacts to the stray dog regulation: This law is not enforceable.

The regulation, which is being prepared to solve the stray dog problem in Turkey, is expected to come to the Parliament in the coming days after being approved by the commission. Faruk Özlü, the AK Party Mayor of Düzce, who is cited as an example with his work on stray animals, made remarkable evaluations in a live broadcast he attended.

Özlü stated that the law does not contribute to the solution of the problem and said that he is against taking stray animals, who do not harm anyone, to shelters. Özlü stated that the existing law can solve the problems, but municipalities and the ministry did not fulfill their duties.

"A WORK SHOULD BE DONE THAT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE DEMANDS OF BOTH SIDES"

Here are some highlights from Düzce Mayor Faruk Özlü's statements: "Let me talk about a mistake. It is a wrong idea to see all stray animals as a threat. Because there are animal lovers and those who do not love animals in this country. Now, we cannot make a work by only considering the demands and requests of those who do not love animals. As a state, we actually need to make a work that takes into account the demands and requests of both sides, values them. We need to prepare a law. The problem is that both the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and the municipalities did not fulfill their duties given to them in both laws. Neither the Ministry of Agriculture fulfilled its duties nor did the municipalities. Of course, when the duties given in the laws were not fulfilled, the population increased. The solution here is actually not a problem in the laws but in the implementation."

"IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO KEEP STRAY ANIMALS IN SHELTERS"

There is a clause in this draft that states that stray animals should be kept in shelters until they are adopted. This is practically not possible. In other words, our friends who prepared this law should think about where they can keep 4 million stray animals until they are adopted. Look, our shelter is an exemplary shelter, but its capacity is 500. There is an evaluation like this, it is said that there can be stray animals up to 10% of the population of cities. Let's say it is 5%, now think about it, if we take 5% of Düzce's population, which is around 400,000, it makes 20,000 stray animals. In other words, when we enter the numbers, it is not practically possible to take care of and keep 20,000 stray animals in one shelter, especially for Düzce."

"THIS LAW DOES NOT SOLVE THE EXISTING PROBLEM"

Therefore, I believe that this law does not solve the existing problem. I have also said this to our relevant friends. Because it has no practice. What needs to be done here is to keep those who are aggressive, who have the capacity and risk of harming our children and the elderly, in shelters. However, this can be done practically. Think about it, there are 4 million stray animals in Turkey. Taking care of and keeping 4 million stray animals in shelters requires investment, it is not practically possible. I believe that this draft law is not applicable. A draft law that has no practice does not provide a solution to the existing problem. Because it makes a generalization. Now let me ask you. There are dogs in our neighborhoods, in our residential areas. Now, there is no harm to anyone, there are people who take care of them because they are cute and sympathetic. Now, why should we take an animal that does not harm anyone and keep it in a shelter, feed it? Does this make any sense? I believe that a draft law that imprisons a breed or a race collectively in shelters and expects them to be taken care of in shelters is not applicable. I shared this with my relevant friends, let me express that. There is nothing encouraging adoption in this law. I wish there was encouragement in this law. I expected municipalities to give water discounts to those who adopt stray animals."