The obligation to have chips on pets has been put into effect and the last day of chipping has been determined as 31.12.2022.
Those who did not have their pets fitted with a chip until this date would have to apply to the provincial and district agricultural directorates to register or pay a fine of 3,200 liras.
As far as I can see in my environment, pet owners have concentrated on chipping. However, enough chips could not be provided until the expiration date. As a result, the majority of people took action to have their pets chipped.
Few people were reluctant to have their pets chipped.
However, most veterinarians stated that they could not obtain chips even though they demanded chips from the relevant places, and the time for chipping was getting shorter and when the last day came, some animal owners, even though they were not in large numbers, especially released their dogs to the street.
As a result, chip plugging, which was brought to the agenda to find a solution to the problem of pets, gradually started to cause the problem to grow.
The subject started to be in the news under the headline of "They are leaving to avoid getting a chip" in the media. By the way, some animal owners may not have been able to have the chips installed because they do not have money. Because many pets were not registered with veterinarians.
As such, it was necessary to first contact the veterinarian, get the necessary vaccinations and get a chip inserted. Although this of course may vary from city to city, for example, in Ankara, it was around 250 lira per animal to have a chip fitted.
When undone vaccines are considered, it costs at least 500 liras. Maybe those who are salty can say 500 lira is also money. However, I think that this may have become a problem for families who are struggling to survive with their wages.
Therefore, it is difficult for people to understand that those who took this decision and put it into practice and those who limited the application to a certain period of time did not provide or could not provide enough chips at the beginning of the work.
Because the decisions taken to solve a problem should be put into practice with careful thought. If people declare that they will be chipped and cannot find enough chips in veterinarians, I think the responsible of this job is not those who have pets, but those who do not fulfill the requirements of their decision.
As such, the obligation to wear chips serves to increase the number of stray animals, not to decrease them.
If the rents in dog-free neighborhoods increase for this reason, I think there will be managers who do not fulfill the requirements of the decision they have taken. Moreover, if the search for a dog-free neighborhood to rent a house comes to the fore as a result of serious uneasiness, and therefore, an increase in rents is on the agenda, there is no solution to the existing problem, on the contrary, the problem increases.
We see in the news that have been reflected in the media lately that especially families with children experience distress and anxiety due to stray animals.
Especially the dog attack they experience in their region inevitably increases the uneasiness. In this respect, the fact that the obligation to have chips has increased the number of abandoned animals does not mean that the existing problem will increase, rather, such a problem should be prevented.
As a result, we can say that while the campaigns not to leave homeless families are put into practice, it is necessary to stop people from finding a house to rent, let alone owning a house. Otherwise, cities will become uninhabitable for people.