Concerns and recommendations in relation to section 32 were provided to the Office of Local Government (OLG) New South Wales (NSW) 4 June 2025 by the Protect All Cats (PAC) team. Section 32 includes legal responsibilities and obligations for seizing (trapping) a cat, which currently is open to interpretation and improvements are needed to assure the welfare of roaming cats.
The covering email to OLG included:
‘We see section 32 of the Act is intrinsically related to the critical need for
- robust, reliable and fair cat definitions,
- managing negative outcomes of mandatory cat containment, and
- helping to minimise cruelty to domestic roaming cats be they owned, semi owned or unowned, and to the community cat rescuers and carers actively engaged on social media and “on the ground”.’
Download the PAC document
A copy of the attached document may be reviewed and downloaded here. Pages 5 through 10 contain the key information. Pages 11 onwards are appendixes.
Supporting concerns from Aussie experts
RSPCA Australia has highlighted their major concerns with the Threat Abatement Plan for predation by feral cats, reclassing strays as feral cats, includes:
“This means that thousands of domestic cats will be classed as feral, meaning at best it will add a greater burden to organisations that are seen as responsible for managing stray cats, and at worst, more cats will be killed — not to mention putting up an additional barrier to these cats being adopted or rehomed.”
“Vilifying cats and declaring ‘war’ on them shifts the focus away from what should be the key objective — to protect and conserve vulnerable native species — to instead promoting the killing of as many cats as possible.”
https://www.rspca.org.au/latest-news/media-centre/feral-cat-plan-targets-the-wrong-cats/
The Local Government NSW submission to Inquiry Management of Cat Populations includes:
“…powers to seize cats under the Companion Animals Act are unclear. Section 32 provides that a cat can be seized in order to prevent injury or death to an animal or person. Some interpret this as an indication that all cats are capable of killing and therefore can be seized if roaming. Others interpret this section as being applicable only if a cat attacks an animal or person. Laws enabling the use of cat containment policies would need to clarify the compliance and enforcement provisions available to councils and any other regulatory bodies.”
Australian Pet Welfare Foundation (APWF) research findings across Australian councils includes:
“Mandated cat containment has been proven to be an ineffective strategy; a failure at reducing wandering cats in the short and long term, both in Australia and internationally. Mandated cat containment is not an effective strategy to reduce wandering cats because most wandering cats are strays with no owner to contain them. Even for cats with an owner, containment is often not achievable due to factors such as housing limitations, lack of financial resources and concerns about the welfare of confined cats.”
https://petwelfare.org.au/position-statements/cat-containment
The NSW Government submission to the Inquiry Management of Cat Populations main issues include:
“welfare and behavioural concerns: mandated 24-hour cat containment policies may raise concerns relating to cat welfare and breaches of POCTAA. To enforce cat containment, there would need to be a program of trapping cats that are not currently contained. This would require specialist equipment and regular monitoring of the traps to ensure no breaches of animal cruelty laws, which would be a significant financial impact on councils, as the enforcement authority under the CA Act.”
“negative attitudes towards cats: media articles often condemn cats and the role they play in the destruction of native fauna, without also mentioning the impacts of other invasive predators, such as red foxes, as well as roaming dogs. Any introduction of cat containment laws will need to take this into account to ensure such measures do not inadvertently contribute to this narrative.”
LRC 