A statement published by AK Party Deputy Chairperson Mustafa Çiftci has provided one of the clearest official updates yet on the implementation of Turkey’s street dog collection programme.
Following a consultation and evaluation meeting involving senior AK Party figures, including Group Deputy Chairperson Özlem Zengin and National Defence Committee Chairperson Hulusi Akar, Çiftci stated that street animals have been collected in full across 51 provinces and that collections have reached 83 percent nationwide.
The statement also provided collection figures for metropolitan municipalities, where the reported average collection rate stands at 74 percent.
According to the figures released, collection operations have reportedly been completed in Erzurum, Mardin, Manisa, Mersin, Şanlıurfa, Kayseri, Sakarya, Denizli, Konya, Balıkesir, Gaziantep and Kahramanmaraş.
The statement further claims that collection rates have reached 99 percent in Ankara, 91 percent in Van and Malatya, 89 percent in Muğla, 87 percent in Tekirdağ, 82 percent in Samsun, 80 percent in Trabzon, 76 percent in Hatay, 71 percent in Kocaeli, 68 percent in Antalya, 64 percent in Adana, 59 percent in Eskişehir, 58 percent in Bursa, 49 percent in Istanbul, 47 percent in Aydın, 38 percent in Ordu, 35 percent in İzmir and 27 percent in Diyarbakır.
Perhaps the most significant part of the statement was not the percentages themselves but the objective that accompanied them.
Çiftci stated that the government’s goal is for all street animals to be taken into care homes and natural habitats by the end of the year, describing this as part of an effort to establish a permanent system that protects both public safety and animal welfare.
For observers outside Turkey, the figures will likely come as a surprise. Much of the international discussion surrounding the law has focused on individual incidents, local disputes and reports from particular municipalities. The statement suggests that, from the government’s perspective, the collection programme is already well advanced across large parts of the country.
At the same time, the figures raise a number of important questions.
The statement does not explain how collection percentages are calculated, what baseline population estimates are being used or how many animals the reported percentages represent in absolute terms. Nor does it provide a breakdown showing how many collected animals are housed in municipal shelters compared with the natural habitats referenced in the statement.
Those questions are important because the scale of the programme is unprecedented. If collection rates are indeed approaching the levels claimed, then large numbers of dogs have already been removed from the streets. Understanding where those animals are now, how they are being cared for and what long-term arrangements exist for them becomes increasingly important.
For organisations working directly with dogs in Turkey, the statement is also notable because it provides a clearer indication of the government’s expectations for the months ahead. The objective remains the same as it was when the law was introduced: the removal of street dogs from public spaces and their transfer into managed facilities.
Whether the reported figures accurately reflect conditions on the ground is likely to remain the subject of debate. What is not in dispute is that the collection programme continues and that the government is signalling its intention to press ahead.
For those monitoring the future of Turkey’s street dogs, this is one of the most significant official updates released in recent months. The figures themselves will attract attention, but the broader message may be even more important. The government is presenting the collection programme not as a future objective, but as a process that is already approaching completion in much of the country.