This is a summary of one view that was presented to the NSW Inquiry Management of Cat Populations. During the hearing 1 April 2025, Stephanie Bates Westie Cat Support Services raised her concerns including the impact of groups, such as Invasive Species and the Threatened Species Commissioner that provide overstated estimates and significant negative consequences of cats which are published in a trail of repeated misinformation, leading to cruelty to cats.
We provide summaries and links to the full documents.
Summary of WCSS concerns raised at the hearing 1 April 2025
Stephanie Bates’ Westie Cat Support Services opening statement, included the following highlighted views (refer to a copy of the hearing transcript in this blog).
“I think there need to be some amendments to do with community members taking it upon themselves to trap cats—whether owned or unowned—and the investigation of this practice, the penalties for this practice and who is responsible for monitoring this practice. Is it the RSPCA cruelty inspectors? Is it a council animal ranger? Who is it? Is it an AWL inspector? The role and powers of the council need to be clearly defined and ascertained. My approach generally to this inquiry is coming from an animal welfare perspective, not necessarily threatened species protection in urban areas—or indeed other species protection in other areas. I also think that there’s a paucity of research on domestic and urban cats—owned, unowned and community—in urban areas. Even in the threat abatement plan, it’s stated that they’re talking about non-urban cats, yet they’re trying to extrapolate the data for urban cats and talk about urban cats in the same sentence, pretty much.
It’s quite ridiculous. We do need more solid, substantive and well-done research on urban cats. At the moment, it’s not really there. There’s a lot of crazy statistics put out there. The ANU, in 2023, stated that roaming pet cats kill 66 million native animals each year in Sydney. I would question that. There’s also not very much talk about what species are actually killing and exactly how many. A lot of their information is based on anecdotal reports from wildlife organisations. However, the anecdotal evidence given by people who actually rescue and TNR cats, for some bizarre reason, is never taken into account. That’s probably because they don’t even talk to us, so it’s great to have this investigation and this Committee.”
WCSS views, concerns and recommendations during the hearing session included the following.
“Certainly, particular lobby groups, like the Invasive Species Council, are very official, such as the Threatened Species Commissioner, have been heavily involved in lobbying, propagandising and, especially the Invasive Special Council, seeking funding. A lot of their propagandising is done on social media and a lot of it, I think, is having an actual negative impact on the safety of cats. I think there’s definitely an increase in demonisation.”
“With the mandatory containment, people think they’ve got a right, “Oh, this cat’s not on their property. They’re not contained. Good. I’m going to trap this cat and then I’m going to do what I like with this cat. I’m going to dump them in a suburb that’s 10 suburbs away. I’m going to kill them, or I’m going to take them to the pound, or I’m going to ring the ranger and they’re going to be taken to the pound”—in some sort of utopic nirvana of what needs to be done.”
“The problem with that is most of them don’t even contact the council rangers or the pounds about these cats. It would be interesting to correlate statistics of cat cruelty with what was going on in those councils—for example, the Yarra council. Having said that, there is a lot of animal cruelty that the RSPCA or the AWL inspectorate will not investigate, whether it’s about resource allocation or the probability of being able to prosecute. I’m not sure, but I’d be very interested to see. Certainly anecdotally, and from TNRers’ and rescuers’ experiences on the ground, the amount of cat abuse has increased in the last two to three years in what we’re seeing on the streets and on private properties.”
Towards the end of the hearing session, WCSS provided the following.
“My vision is that colonies will always exist. I think it’s incredibly unrealistic to suggest that they won’t, or that they shouldn’t exist, because you’re always going to have people in society that do not desex their cats, do not microchip their cats, dump their cats, people that are cruel to cats and dump owned or otherwise cats. Like I said in my submission, TNR is but one management strategy to deal with a public and private animal issue. You’ve got two options. You either kill the lot of them, which is what Professor Sarah Legge and others suggest, or you start doing TNR and you have responsible colonies as a way to humanely manage. Cats on the streets are always going to exist, particularly in certain suburbs, and to suggest otherwise is ridiculous. You can try to mass cull them, but you’re still going to have more cats emerging, because people will still do irresponsible things. I also think the education of the public is limited. You can educate till the cows come home with focused education about responsible pet ownership, but you will still have people being irresponsible.”
Summary of WCSS Answers to Questions On Notice
At the end of the hearing session, the following was raised with WCSS.
“Ms SUE HIGGINSON: Can I ask one last thing on notice? Ms Bates, you made a number of statements about your understanding and observation that the Invasive Species Council and its propaganda—I think you referred to it as propaganda—is responsible for the increase in cruelty to animals. If you could provide the Committee any evidence or anything to suggest that’s the case, that would be of assistance.”
The following is included in the answer to question on notice. The document provided may be downloaded at the end of this article.
“I provide the following facts and factors, and examples as evidence of the links between Invasive Species Council (ISC) activities, specifically social media posts and website information, that appear as misleading information that overstates the impacts of cats. As a cat rescuer I believe this is fostering cruelty towards cats.”
“Publishing flawed views is ethically dubious and may breach social licensing obligations for organisations that are often assisted with funding by our governments (taxpayers) and donations from citizens/ community members. The impacts of flaws in overstated impacts and significant negative terms become highlighted in the unmoderated comments against cats which include forms of violence towards cats.
“Assessed examples as evidence [examples are located in the detailed document]
A small range of the examples from traditional and social media is provided where includes:
overstated impacts and misleading information is provided by ISC and others,
estimates are interpreted/ presented as “facts”,
the use of demonising language is used to leverage negative emotions,
the same original misleading item is reproduced by others, often where no improvements are included with evidence/ proof nor context,
the “flooding” of media/ websites with the same or similar misleading items,
angry and violent social media comments against cats by the public/ followers which are not moderated, including actions taken by the public.”
“The ISC and cohort cat impact articles are seldom in context of other significant factors. It appears national generalisations are preferred to present a dramatic view that does not match evidence in separate locations across our nation. These items do not include: land clearing (habitat loss), climate change impacts (bushfires, floods, droughts), and impacts from other invasive species.”
“Community cat rescuers and carers are volunteers from a range of career backgrounds. The flawed views are a form of secondary trauma that rescuers experience alongside the cases of physical cruelty to cats. I strongly recommended that a relationship is established between the NSW state government, councils and community cat rescuers/ carers, with One Welfare solutions to proactively minimise the impacts of cats, and reduce the impacts to wildlife.”
It is noted that in the examples of evidence provided, the Inquiry committee has heavily redacted the specific words in the following item:
The Guardian Nov 2023 re cats from Australian Wildlife Conservancy Trevor Bauer & Biodiversity Council ANU Sarah Legge media item: “From beloved pet to biodiversity villain: what now for Australia’s cats?” In the lead up to the end of consultation of the draft Threat Abatement Plan, there were several articles in media, published it appears to promote all cats as “villains” and which proposed just two categories being pet (owned) and feral cats.
The rally was successfully held. As an inaugural event it attracted 150 attendees on a Saturday when many rescuers are busy with adoption interviews and events.
This short video is an interim update.
Audio and text support messages from domestic cat experts will be uploaded soon,
OVERVIEW
SAVE COMMUNITY CATS is a peaceful public assembly 11am Saturday 23 August Sydney to raise our voices for community cats and their rescuers and carers.
COMMUNITY CATS is a widely accepted term for STRAY cats. Most stray cats are domestic semi owned, meaning a person or people are involved in providing food and care.
The volunteers represent an “army” across NSW seeking to work with the state and council governments to improve outcomes for community cats.
We seek One Welfare solutions for better outcomes for community cats, & for rescuers and carers to be integrated with NSW state and local government cat management strategies, plans, delivery of desexing programs, research, and critical education programs with communities.
distribute our online posts and physical flyers (see next section to download)
Save Community Cats Movement – Background & Press Release
SAVE COMMUNITY CATS is a peaceful public assembly 11am Saturday 23 August Sydney to raise our voices for community cats and their rescuers and carers.
We seek One Welfare solutions for better outcomes for community cats, and for rescuers and carers to be integrated with NSW state and local government cat management strategies, plans, delivery of desexing programs, research, and critical education programs with communities.
Our top priorities include high intensity desexing for community cats, promoting not mandating cat containment, a moratorium on pet registrations, and enabling other legal obligations to support rather than hinder the rescue and rehoming of community cats.
BACKGROUND
Are you aware there is a “cat crisis” across Sydney and other major urban areas? Cats are being abandoned at a higher rate than before, mainly driven by cost-of-living concerns with owners struggling to afford increases in vet costs.
While some councils assist owners on welfare with desexing and pet registration, many owners are not aware of this, or it is a subsidy or the owners may not have transport, or commitments to much needed jobs. This becomes a bigger burden when one owns multiple cats, or when their young cat becomes pregnant and within two months there are now several kittens.
The burden of abandoned cats and kittens most often falls on community cat rescuers and carers – kind people, volunteering their time and effort, and resources and finances. These Good Samaritans help feed, care, desex, cover vet bills for treatments for illnesses too, and they rehome cats and kittens to new caring families.
Council pounds are often at their limited capacity and there has been a challenge to the councils’ understanding of taking in and caring for “stray” cats. For years, many councils have claimed they are not able to take in stray cats as cats are allowed to roam under the Companion Animal Act in NSW.
The burden on community cat rescuers and carers has recently increased further with RSPCA NSW also recently indicating their shelters will not be taking in stray animals.
Under Labor, over the last few years the NSW government has been operating a number of reviews and inquires for animal welfare and management, with a specific focus on cat management to better understand the concerns and recommended steps forward for improvements. Just this week, the report including findings and recommendations was published for the Management of Cat Populations.
One area that is of great concern is the lack of recognition of community cat rescuers and carers, and the integral role played as part of the holistic animal welfare system. Without recognising the efforts of thousands across the state, how will adequate planning and funding be achieved for improvements?
SAVE COMMUNITY CATS RALLY FORMATION
Rescuers and carers have provided submissions and emails to our NSW government. However, we felt that a collaborative rally was the most appropriate way to raise awareness of both the efforts and the burden carried by volunteers. Many independent and groups of rescuers and carers are taking part in this event.
We have support from a number of domestic cat experts. This includes:
Emma Hurst Animal Justice Party NSW, and Chairperson for the Inquiry Management of Cat Populations NSW
Jacquie Rand Australian Pet Welfare Foundation, Community Cat Programs and relevant Research
Kristina Vesk Cat Protection Society NSW, Subsidised Desexing and DIVA programs
Gemma Ma RSPCA NSW Keeping Cats Safe at Home and the Stray Care programs
We are receiving their messages of support that we will share at the rally. Their experiences, scientific knowledge and recommendations is greatly appreciated.
The rally will also include key messages from a small number of experienced rescuers with hands on experience over many years. They have been helping to rehome many hundreds of cats and kittens alongside the rally attendees.
COMMUNITY CATS is a widely accepted term for stray cats. Most stray cats are domestic semi owned, meaning a person or people are involved in providing food and care.
The volunteers represent an “army” across NSW seeking to work with the state and council governments to improve outcomes for community cats.
Rally Overview
Location
East top of Martin Place (near Macquarie Street & Parliament House) Sydney NSW
Purpose
To raise to NSW Minister for Companion Animals and Councils the need for recognition, respect and support for community cats and their rescuers / carers, and appreciation of all those who have adopted a once abandoned kitty.
We seek One Welfare solutions for better outcomes for community cats, & for rescuers and carers to be integrated with NSW state and local government cat management strategies, plans, delivery of desexing programs, research, and critical education programs with communities.
Objectives
Establish a respectful working relationship between the NSW state and local governments with grassroots community cat rescuers/carers, to leverage their valuable lived experiences, resources and community contacts with formulating cat management strategies and plans, at state and local levels.
FACTS: Across NSW hundreds of rescuers/ carers collectively assist thousands of community cats, delivering care, desexing & rehoming for the once abandoned cats, with contacts with the public in local areas to deliver education & welfare improvements for cats.
Encourage and promote funding and support for the highest priority One Welfare initiatives to effectively manage cat populations where rescuers/ carers are already involved. Critical proven successful initiatives include to promote cat containment (don’t make it mandatory), community cat programs, high intensity desexing programs, vaccinations, resolving registration processes, assistance for rehoming programs, community engagement, education & cultural change programs.
FACTS: Refer proven examples from RSPCA NSW stray cats programs, APWF Community Cat Programs, CPS NSW DIVA & desexing programs, Banyule Council research where 4 times the financial savings were achieved for the costs with funded desexing, and Rosewood Council NSW research.
Ensure rescuer/ carers will assist and be integrated with new localised programs and research for managing cat populations, to enrich the knowledge base and clarify financial justifications with local evidence. This includes local research on cat impacts including on wildlife and council resources. Further, to actively decrease the significant risks of cruelty associated with demonising roaming and abandoned cats, and those who care for them.
FACTS: The lived experiences of rescuers/ carers will provide insights to local communities, and they are able to effectively work with council Animal Management Officers, vets and local communities, providing an “army” of volunteers and experiences. Refer APWF, AIAM, RSPCA.
Aligned with APWF, RSPCA Aust, RSPCA NSW, CPS NSW, AIAM
We strongly support the research, findings & recommendations from domestic cat experts including Australian Pet Welfare Foundation, RSPCA Australia and NSW, Cat Protection Society NSW, Australian Institute of Animal Management & more.
After preliminaries, the rally will kick off with messages of support, first from domestic cat experts, and then local representatives of community cat rescuers & carers.
Domestic cat experts include:
Emma Hurst, NSW Legislative Council & Animal Justice Party NSW
Jacquie Rand, Australian Pet Welfare Foundation
Kristina Vesk, Cat Protection Society NSW
Gemma Ma, Project Manager, RSPCA NSW Keeping Cats Safe at Home
A number of rescuers and carers will also speak at the rally, bringing their lived experiences that will be relevant to all community cat rescuers and carers. These include:
Steph Bates Westie Cat Support Services
Margaret Dalziel, Catmint Cottage and Street Cat Rescue
Compelling evidence on desexing programs for owned and community cats
The following summary may be downloaded and shared with interested councils and organisations. It focuses on Australian based desexing programs by a number of organisations and inclusion of community cats and their rescuers/ carers.
Read just one of the related Australian research items on successful strategies here: Urban Cat Management in Australia—Evidence-Based Strategies for Success https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/15/8/1083
Issues with poorly defined categories of cats – especially “stray” cats
Don’t stop rescuing, desexing, rehoming of thousands of cats every year
There is a risk that stray cats may be deemed “illegal” under mandatory cat containment rules, and/ or as a subset of feral cats (refer national Threat Abatement Plan for predation by feral cats). Don’t allow either of these to occur when thousands of cats are being loved and rehomed every year.
Community Cat rescuers and carers have valid lived experiences. APWF has included a view on these in their submission to the inquiry into the Management of Cat Populations NSW, including
“Multi-cat sites (colonies)
For semi-owned and unowned cats at sites with multiple cats (colonies), management involves working with the carers and trapping, desexing and then returning semi-owned cats to their carer to continue to support them (TNR). As soon as possible, friendly cats and kittens are transferred to rescuers, foster carers or permanent homes, or to other larger rescue groups and rehoming organisations, or even to groups intrastate or interstate if they have capacity. Priority is generally given to highly sociable cats, heavily pregnant cats, kittens, and sight or hearing impaired cats. Cats with significant injuries or other health issues affecting their welfare such as severe dental disease should be a priority for veterinary care. Caretakers typically provide food twice daily, shelter and monitoring of the cats. When done strategically and sustainably, these programs stabilise and reduce populations over time (Swarbrick 2018; Tan 2017; Levy 2014; Boone 2019, Rand 2024b).”
“In NSW, with 76.21% of the 8,186,000 residents over 18 years of age (and using 5% of adults being semi-owners feeding an average of 1.5 cats each) means that more than 311,900 adults are feeding over 467,800 semi-owned cats each day in NSW.”
“trapping, desexing… As soon as possible, friendly cats and kittens are transferred to rescuers, foster carers or permanent homes, or to other larger rescue groups and rehoming organisations, or even to groups intrastate or interstate”
APWF Submission
Stray cats are at risk of being a subclass of feral cats. Feral cats are to be destroyed and there exists a risk that rescue & rehoming for stray cats may be deemed illegal.
A3 landscape
Stray (Community) cats are not Feral cats and should not be treated in the same way
Our stray / community cats deserve the opportunity to be rescued and rehomed, stray cats should NOT be treated as a subclass of feral cats to be destroyed.
We need our Companion Animal Act NSW to be updated with terms and definitions for the different classes / categories of cats. It is critical for cats to be recognised and treated in ways that are appropriate to their category.
“Cats should be categorized based on how and where they live This will enable the implementation of effective domestic cat management strategies, supported by the community. Research shows that pet cats can react with more aggressive behaviours to humans than feral cats when highly stressed.” https://petwelfare.org.au/position-statements/cat-definitions
Funded desexing for community cats is needed and to relieve the burden on rescuers / carers
In the past the traditional methods for fining, trapping & euthanasing meant cat death rates at council pounds of 70% to 90% with devasting impacts on all people involved without solving the cat crisis.
Read more recent research: Rethinking Urban Cat Management—Limitations and Unintended Consequences of Traditional Cat Management
“…enforcement-driven policies face significant challenges. They are costly for local governments, resource-intensive, and fail to address the root causes of free-roaming cat populations, such as financial barriers and the prevalence of semi-owned or stray cats, particularly in disadvantaged areas. Animal management officers are central to enforcing these measures, often issuing fines and trapping cats identified as causing a nuisance. Despite these efforts, compliance remains low, and issues like high shelter intakes, cat-related complaints, and euthanasia persist. Moreover, the punitive nature of these policies can place additional financial strain on vulnerable communities and negatively impact the mental health of animal management officers and shelter staff. This approach, focused on penalties, addresses symptoms rather than systemic issues. A shift toward addressing the root causes—through financial support, including support for cat sterilization, resource accessibility, and community engagement—presents a more effective and compassionate solution. Such strategies benefit both the cats and their caregivers while reducing the burden on local governments, promoting sustainable and humane outcomes for communities while better protecting wildlife.”
Urgent need for high intensity desexing for owned & semi owned cats
Community cat rescuers / carers struggle under the burden of undesexed cats being abandoned by owners and multiplying rapidly. The costs are high and unfairly reliant on good Samaritans to donate their personal resources.
The APWF views include: “High intensity desexing initiatives This is critically important to address the number of free-roaming domestic cats, because more than 50% of cats entering shelters and pounds in Australia were born in the last 6 months (Albertson 2016; Kerr 2018), and recent modelling from the UK found that owned cats are the substantial contributor to domestic cat populations (McDonald 2023). Australian research suggests that in areas of high cat impoundments and cat-related calls to councils, owned cats and semi-owned cats contribute similarly to number of kittens being born (Rand 2024a). Programs for free and highly subsidized cat registration, microchipping and desexing for owned cats, especially in areas of socioeconomic disadvantage are essential. However, stopping litters from semi-owned and unowned cats is also essential.” APWF submission to Inquiry Management of Cat Populations NSW. https://petwelfare.org.au/publications
Banyule Council highly successful desexing program
Are you aware of the highly successful & researched Banyule Council desexing program that ran for several years? We ask: why aren’t more councils following this program?
The Banyule Council in Victoria operated their own self-funded desexing program over several years, where the investment was returned 4 times in terms of savings over costs. For owned and semi-owned cats this included several benefits “decreases in impoundments by 66%, euthanasia by 82%, and cat-related calls by 36% over 8 years, with savings to council of AU $440,660 for an outlay of AU $77,490”.
The research also concluded:
“the traditional methods of trapping wandering and nuisance cats have not resulted in long-term reductions in cat-related calls to councils. However, following the implementation of a microtargeted free sterilization program for owned and semi-owned cats, marked reductions in cat-related calls, impoundments, euthanasia, and costs were realized, similar to that reported in US programs. It is recommended that urban cat management policies and programs are revised and, instead of being focused on a traditional compliance-based approach, are focused on being assistive, helping owners and semi-owners have their cats sterilized and identified with a microchip. Legislative changes need to be implemented to facilitate this approach to assist people caring for multiple stray cats, instead of the current approach to trap and euthanize most of these cats which are poorly socialized, which is documented to damage the mental health of shelter and pound staff and cat caregivers”
The value of rescuers & carers saving & rehoming thousands of abandoned cats every year
Rescuers & carers are a force for community cats & desexing programs
Promote Cat Containment don’t make it mandatory
The increase in cruelty if roaming cats are seen as illegal
Love Rescue Collaborate: The Darkside of Mandatory Cat Containment, includes
“We promote cat enclosures to keep cats and wildlife safe.” “Cat enclosures may involve significant costs for cat owners, difficult to erect due to other resident complaints, and difficult and costly for a council to enforce. We also see the dark side, which may include to incite or encourage violence to cats.” https://loverescuecollaborate.org/2022/09/27/the-dark-side-of-mandatory-cat-confinement/
APWF Position Statement on Cat Containment: APWF encourages cat containment, but not making it mandatory. “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.” “Criminalises cat ownership for low-income households and people with ‘door dasher’ cats” “Places semi owned stray cats being fed by people who have an emotional attachment to the cat at significant risk of being impounded and killed.” “Increases risks of cruelty towards cats, increasing animal pain and suffering.” https://petwelfare.org.au/position-statements/cat-containment
A3 Landscape
A3 portrait
The issues with NSW registration system & why it deters owners
Moratorium on Punitive Registration Charges
Rescuers & carers are carrying a burden for desexing and registering cats older than 4 months of age, anecdotally older cats are more often abandoned in urban areas due to costs to owners.
APWF raised concerns their submission to the NSW government for Management of Cat Populations:
“To reduce free-roaming domestic cats, legislation and policy need to reflect an understanding of the true causes of the problem and must pursue solutions that are shown scientifically to be effective.”
“In NSW, the registration and breeder-permit fees are cost barriers to taking ownership. If a domestic cat is acquired that is older than 4 months and is not desexed, there is an annual permit fee payable ($96) as well as life-time registration ($69) These fees apply even if the cat was desexed, microchipped, and registered immediately at, or soon after, acquisition (NSW Government 2024 a, b.)
In NSW, return to owner rates are almost half those in Victoria and Queensland (3% versus 7%) (Chua 2023). This might reflect that the state microchip register can be used to identify cat owners who have not paid for registration, creating a financial disincentive to microchipping.
In NSW, costs to local governments for managing cats, not including administration costs for registration, are approximately 7 to 10 times the income to the state government from registration fees (NSW Gov. Pet Registration Fees 2024). Therefore, it makes little fiscal sense to create cost barriers which discourage cat owners from microchipping and thereby reduce return to owner rates. It is recommended instead that mandatory registration be abolished and microchipping made affordable and included with free or affordable desexing. The effectiveness of microchips for facilitating reuniting cats with their owners can be increased by sending regular SMS messages or email messages reminding owners to update contact details if they have changed (CIE 2022).”
A3 landscape
Wildlife impacts by domestic cats are flawed estimates & overstated
This summary is based on our view of the misleading information on the impacts of Aussie domestic cats and how this influences cat hate.
Cats do hunt, but not all cats, and cat containment should be promoted rather than legislated for more successful outcomes.
This assessment is based on contents and features of traditional and social media artefacts. The assessment is summarised in five steps to show the trail that contributes to increased cat hate, animal cruelty to roaming cats, and abuse to the volunteer community members who care & rehome abandoned cats.
The trail starts with studies on the impacts of domestic cats which contain flaws and are heavily estimate based.
There are also flawed statements on the number of native animal extinctions attributed to cats, usually phrased in a misleading manner.
Often the differentiation between domestic cats owned (pets), semi owned and unowned (strays) and feral cats is blurred and challenging for the public to ascertain.
More studies are required for domestic cat impacts. The current studies are flawed in several ways. These studies are reliant on feral cat studies and heavily assumption based.
“While the impact of feral cats on Australian native wildlife populations in natural environments is well-documented, there is no scientific evidence that domestic cats (cats that live in the vicinity of people), have any viability or conservation impacts at a population level on native wildlife. In fact, Australian population studies have not found a measurable effect of domestic cats on native wildlife (Barratt 1998, Grayson 2007, Lilith 2010, Maclagan 2018).”
Be wary of social media posts, traditional media, and webpages where lines are blurred between domestic owned (pet cats), domestic semi owned and unowned (strays), versus feral cats who are truly wild and avoid humans.
We provide just a few examples to illustrate how estimates, impacts, and the native animals most at risk are not clearly articulated.
Wildlife and domestic cat experts are concerned that these approaches divert attention and funding from the most appropriate actions and funding for wildlife.
Several organisations call out the disproportionate focus on domestic cats where it is obvious in large urban areas and peri urban areas that land clearing of native habitat has caused the worst impacts to native wildlife.
Rewilding native animals in urban areas needs to carefully consider conservation fencing to protect wildlife and natural habitat from all threats, including human developments, road accidents, dog attacks etc not just domestic cats.
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.
‘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.
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.”
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.”
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.”
The No Kill Advocacy Centre (NKAC) has provided a new document on the benefits and facts on community cats and Return to Field (RTF). This will be beneficial to rescuers & carers lobbying with all levels of government.
The LRC team strongly suggests this document is supplemented with the known Aussie desexing programs with stray cats & rescuers.
Please always add the source link (as above & in the image) when using any quotes.
“Where the alternative to return to field (RTF) is death, RTF is, without question, always the preferred outcome. moreover, RTF is a “quick fix”: it is less expensive than impound and killing and allows shelters to dramatically and immediately increase live release rates without the need for additional staff, resources, or infrastructure.“
“…the traditional sheltering dogma that cats should live exclusively indoors or risk great harm has been proven false, with outdoor cats living roughly the same lifespan as indoor pet cats. In other words, the risk of death is lower and the chance of adoption higher for cats on the streets than cats in the shelter. In a study of over 100,000 alley cats, less than one percent of those cats were suffering from debilitating conditions. As such, RTF meets the two goals of a shelter better than impoundment in a shelter does: reclaim by families or adoption into a new home.”
For animal shelters (& pounds) “The impact of not having to care for more than 3,000 additional cats annually allows staff and management to focus on other areas of the operation and pursue other welfare related strategies.”
“sterilizing rather than killing community cats is simply less expensive, with exponential savings in terms of reducing births“
“Used to living outdoors, community cats are stressed in a shelter and a stressed cat is more likely to get sick. thanks to fewer cat intakes, URI in a California shelter declined by 99%, reducing killing and length of stay thus resulting in a healthier cat population, more revenue (from adoptions), and lower costs (treatment, holding, and tragically killing).”
NKAC Model agreement with local governments
In the NKAC document, is included a model of legal agreement that may be established with local authorities.
In LRC’s opinion this model will be useful for establishing agreements with private businesses on which a colony may be managed.
LRC summary of Aussie desexing programs involving community cats & rescuers
Section 32 of the New South Wales (NSW) Companion Animal (CA) Act 1998 describes obligations for when a cat may be seized. But much of it is open to interpretation.
Community cat rescuers/ carers conform to these obligations when assisting abandoned cats. Unfortunately, the cat haters may also use some of the clauses for trapping roaming cats, even neighbours pet cats.
Concerns & Issues
The current legislation appears open to interpretation by community members and different councils. Worst situations are community members against roaming cats who appear to use these clauses to trap cats but often it is not known if they follow the legal obligations to assure a cat’s welfare. What happens to many cats being trapped?
Some councils are requesting through NSW Local Government to change section 32 (raised during the 16 December 2024 hearing for the NSW Inquiry Management of Cat Populations. However, we are unsure of the exact changes they are seeking. It is concerning if these changes are to make trapping easier by “concerned citizens” as there is already a significant risk to the welfare of all roaming cats being harmed or worse.
APWF Related Recommendations
Australian Pet Welfare Foundation (APWF) include recommendations to improve the nuisance cat obligations and processes, instead of mandatory containment.
RSPCA Australia
Councils not supporting community trapping
Examples of cats being trapped will ill intentions
Updated October 2025 Hate speech towards groups of people is well known, but how did it become disturbingly acceptable towards all cats in Australia and their rescuers & carers, and even cat owners?
Articles and social media posts with overstated impacts, misleading content and extreme language, followed with comments of hate/ violence towards all cats, are major factors which have influenced the physical violence towards cats and their rescuers/carers.
Tired of the overstated impacts of cats, the misunderstanding information, the demonising almost hysterics against domestic cats? We are starting to build a kitbag / tool kit to help cat owners, supporters, rescuers & carers raise their voices & call out where Aussie domestic cats are being targeted with cat hate.
Invasive Species misleading information influences cat hate and cruelty to cats
Feel welcome to download our view based on many examples and assessments based on facts and factors from experts. The trail commences with overstated and questionable studies, which are emotionally charged and demonising across media, and social media comments which are not moderated that fuel others with a freedom to express acts of cruelty to animals and people. Repeated copies and similar pitched articles are proliferated across internet pages which floods the searches and AI summaries providing a false narrative.
It is believed this wave of anger and violence has grown from the combination of the following:
the national “War on Cats” initiated a decade ago, now blurring the lines between feral and domestic cats,
articles providing overstated impacts, dramatised headlines, language demonising cats, and more misleading approaches,
that many councils will not acknowledge volunteer cat carers and rescuers in their local government area, and
the social media posts and comments of hate speech towards all cats.
Very recent research across hate expressed in online and in traditional media includes:
the significant negative impact published forms of hate may have on individuals and groups,
that unchecked forms of hate have the potential to “grow”,
the importance of responding to these findings within policymaking, prevention, and intervention strategies.
Exposure to hate in online and traditional media: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the impact of this exposure on individuals and communities https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11736891/
Facebook’s standards include prohibiting criminal or harmful activities targeted at people, businesses, property or animals.
However, we do not have great confidence in its ability to assess hate speech beyond simple single statements.
In traditional and online media, cat hate speech can be drawn from a single overstatement of impacts to wildlife through combinations producing misleading context and views.
Another issue, is that the Facebook etc tools do not or cannot distinguish when harming or killing animals is not acceptable.
We too often see FB pages and groups where the administrators/ moderators do not include automated tools, nor appear to respond to reports from viewers on valid concerns for harming or killing cats.
Declaring a War on the War on Domestic Cats
The Aussie Threat Abatement Plan (TAP) for predation by feral cats is inappropriately grouping “stray” cats as a subclass of “feral” cats allegedly for documentation purposes. This blurs the lines between quite distinct categories of cats, and will likely cause much confusion, which likely will influence domestic cats being harmed / destroyed by community members who dislike cats.
Below we take a look at the TAP versus the appropriate and trusted definitions by Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) Australia.
Overstating all cat & domestic cat impacts on wildlife
There is trusted analysis by the Australian Pet Welfare Foundation (APWF) of the current weaknesses in the research which is proliferated on the national impacts of all cats and domestic cats on our precious wildlife.
The data gathered and methods are validly questionable.
Quotes from the APWF position statement include:
“impacts of feral cats on wildlife are often wrongly attributed to domestic cats, even though they are two distinct and geographically separate populations with different behaviour and ecology”
“impacts (if any) of domestic cats on native wildlife populations is largely unknown …there is actually no definitive scientific evidence demonstrating viability or conservation impacts at a population level on Australian native wildlife by domestic cats living around people”
“Australian studies were unable to detect a measurable impact in urban areas of domestic cats on native mammals (Maclagan 2018, Lilith 2010), or birds (Barratt 1998, Grayson 2007), but found that vegetation quality, housing density, distance from bushland and size of bushland were significant factors”
“studies demonstrate the positive impact cat predation has by reducing the numbers of rats that predate bird nests (Matthews 1999)”
“domestic cats that are obtaining food intentionally or unintentionally from humans predate significantly fewer animals than feral cats, which have to hunt to supply all their nutritional needs (Murphy 2019, Woinarski 2017)”
APWF’s recent submission to the NSW government included a number of concerns on the research that is widely published and publicised in traditional media articles and social media posts.
The APWF submission included specific examples of limitations, and flaws in the assumptions applied to overstate national and average totals of the impacts of domestic cats and then all cats (where feral and domestic cats impacts are combined).
LRC are building up references to examples of cat colonies being maintained on university campuses – from NSW Australia running a program for well over 10 years, through USA and other countries. This “model” works well on private campus grounds where cats may roam, an understanding private organisation, and with kind young volunteers helping out.
“The aim is for the Act to strengthen the social licence for keeping companion animals, while also holding pet owners accountable for the care and management of their pets. The Act must also address the urgent need to prevent companion animals from needlessly entering the council pound and rehoming system.” Discussion paper
Please note, that this blog is a WIP, adding information as developed.
Compelling evidence on Australian desexing initiatives involving community cats & their rescuers
We provide a summary of initiatives from RSPCA NSW, CPS NSW, APWF, Banyule Council Vic, plus others and vet programs. This has been produced as a flyer which may be downloaded in PDF format.
APWF Analysis & Questions re common misconceptions of numbers etc
Note, the leading explanation:
“An ongoing issue is that feral cat impacts are often wrongly attributed to domestic cats, even though these are two distinct and geographically separate populations of cats with different behaviour and ecology. In addition, the estimates of pet and stray cat predation of wildlife are based on flawed theoretical calculations that assume all pet cats predate similarly, even if contained inside, and that stray cats being fed by people predate similarly to cats in rubbish dumps in small rural towns or in parks with bushland (Woinarski 2017, Coman 1972).” APWF Inquiry into the Management of Cat Populations in NSW https://petwelfare.org.au/government-submissions
LRC Summary of APWF points for questioning XXL estimates
Latest research on sterilizing abandoned cats: Rethinking Urban Cat Management—Limitations and Unintended Consequences of Traditional Cat Management
This latest research brings together many key topics, such as the failures of mandatory containment and desexing, and the benefits of desexing under community cat programs including TNR and RTF. The research also recognises the impacts to all of those involved including the community and cat rescuers/carers with mental and emotional impacts, not just the council and etc staff.
Q group 1: Strategic framework for encouraging responsible ownership of companion animals
Q 1.a Do you support the Companion Animals Act being amended to focus more on encouraging responsible pet ownership outcomes over strict compliance processes?
A proactive approach over punitive legislation is supported, However, there are significant concerns to ensure that every NSW council adheres to humane treatments for domestic cats in urban environments. Domestic cat experts should be respected and their advice incorporated. It is essential the roles of community cat rescuers and carers are included in thie framework (not just Rehoming Organisations).
[WIP]
Q 1.b How can responsible pet ownership education be used to manage menacing or dangerous dogs?
Once a dog has been declared menacing or dangerous, then training and reconditioning, and the owner’s behaviour need to be addressed under the council AMO and Police roles.
Q 1.c How could the legislation be improved to motivate better dog owner behaviour and encourage owners to manage their dogs more responsibly? (For example, what does responsible dog control in public look like?)
Similar for cats, the roles of AMO need to “grow” into proactive roles engaging with the communities face to face / on the ground. [refer APWF]
Stop Back Yard Breeding – refer Oscar’s Laws already implemented in Victoria… [tbc]
Breeders for dogs and cats need to be regulated – not self-regulated.
Dog trainers, especially for “security purposes” need to be regulated, not a self-regulated industry.
Allocate funding and more resources to dog and puppy training, which should be a mandatory activity / responsibility for dog owners.
Allocate funding and more resources to NSW Police to break illegal dog fighting rings.
Allocate funding and more resources to NSW Police to break illegal live animal baiting in the greyhound racing industry.
Q 1.d How could the legislation be improved to motivate better cat owner behaviour and encourage owners to manage their cats more responsibly? (For example, cat containment).
Mandatory containment is ineffective, and this has been proven across Victorian councils who have backed out or not taken up this policy. The costs in council staff labour (addressing complaints, intakes to pounds, high euthanasia rates) outweigh the benefits.
Better outcomes may be achieved by proactive One Welfare solutions, including funding desexing programs offered free to residents (owners and semi owners), and promoting, offering assistance with acquiring (e.g. subsidies in Bunbury and Bayside councils WA) and installing cat enclosures with advice and support from council AMOs.
Refer APWF research in this topic which is supported: Rethinking Urban Cat Management—Limitations and Unintended Consequences of Traditional Cat Management https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/15/7/1005
Q 1.e Are there other matters that should be considered?
Cat definitions and terms
The NSW framework needs to follow and incorporate the 2018 RSPCA definitions for feral versus domestic cats, the latter being owned, semi owned and unowned.
The NSW framework should incorporate further details definitions from APWF for…
Abandoned domestic cats are not to be treated as feral cats who are truly wild.
[APWF plus other links]
The advise of domestic cat experts needs to be followed, domestic cat knowledge and experiences are not to be defined by NSW government departments whose primary purposes ate to support primary industries or native environments.
[links]
Establish a NSW independent animal welfare officer & office
[links etc]
CA Act clause 32.1 seizing a cat
The CA Act needs to be improved to clarify the situations when and where community members may seize a cat – the current clause 32.1 is misinterpreted/misused, not controlled nor monitored, and the welfare of the cats is then not assured and at risk. Very few NSW council clarify that Rangers should be involved for nuisance calls.
Q group 2: Compliance and enforcement role of councils
What changes to NSW laws, regulations, codes or guidelines could be provided to councils and other enforcement authorities to better support responsible pet ownership?
How could NSW laws, regulations, codes or guidelines be improved to support councils to better manage dangerous and restricted dogs?
Are the current enforcement provisions under the Act (including penalties for offences – see Appendix B of the discussion paper) appropriate? If not, what enforcement provisions should be changed?
Are there other compliance and enforcement matters that should be considered?
Q group 3. Companion animal population and rehoming
What more could be done to reduce stray and homeless cats and dogs in NSW?
What changes can be made to NSW laws, regulations, codes or guidelines to reduce the number of companion animals entering the pound and rehoming system in the first place?
For companion animals needing to enter the ‘pound’ system, what could be done to increase rehoming?
Are there other dog and cat population and rehoming matters that should be considered?
The LRC team provides key up-to-date information related to Trap Neuter Return (and other variations), as we wait for the NSW government recommendations on the NSW Inquiry for managing cat populations. A number of organisations have provided views, research and recommendations in support of TNR etc as effective approaches for managing cat populations.
Large scale (mass / high intensity) desexing programs for owned, semi owned and unowned cats are supported for their effectiveness in minimising cat populations. This is achieved by significantly limiting the breeding of cats, which also benefits each cat and the communities.
The research and studies of highly successful free cat desexing programs were completed in a number of Australian councils including:
the APWF Community Cat Programs in Ipswich Queensland,
Banyule Council in Victoria, and
the Keeping Cats Safe at Home (KCSAH) program managed by RSPCA for the NSW government.
The semi owned cats were returned to managed colonies or groups.
The LRC summary of desexing programs assisting semi owned cats & rescuers
The Australian Pet Welfare Foundation (APWF) Community Cat programs in Queensland in a number of Ipswich suburbs have been operating since 2021 targeting stray cats, including:
“…desexing of urban stray cats… provided with other veterinary care, such as vaccinations and microchipping… if they are healthy and have been thriving outdoors, the cats are returned to where they live in their home territories… will also desex pet cats if their owners cannot afford to do so themselves… [and] adopting friendly cats and kittens found outdoors, increasing responsible pet cat ownership, decreasing abandonment and mediating resident conflicts involving outdoor cats”, “desexed over 2750 cats… achieved >30% reduction in cat intake & >50% less euthanasia”, and provided several evidence-based findings for research papers, international conference papers, a number of Australian submissions. https://petwelfare.org.au/community-cat-program-faq/, https://petwelfare.org.au/community-cat-program-news-2/, https://petwelfare.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Aust-Community-Cat-Program-2024-Report.pdf
The highly successful Community Cat Programs operated over several years by the APWF which provide evidence with managing cat populations are supported:
“Community Cat Programs involve high-intensity free desexing, microchipping and registration of owned, semi-owned and unowned cats targeted to areas of high cat intake and complaints. CCPs are proven to be very effective at reducing stray cat numbers, pound intake and euthanasia, complaints and costs. CCPs are also very effective at assisting semi-owners to desex and adopt the stray cat they are feeding and continue to feed and care for their cat, significantly reducing the number of unwanted kittens born. Semi-owners represent a large pool of potential cat adopters, particularly for shy and timid cats, and are integral to resolving the stray cat issue and associated high intake and high euthanasia rates of cats in pounds and shelters. Community Cat Programs proactively manage stray cats in the community keeping cats with their owners, and because they are non-lethal they do not cause devastating mental health impacts to staff or community members, consistent with a One Welfare approach which optimises the well-being of people, animals and their environment.”https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/submissions/81381/0132%20Australian%20Pet%20Welfare%20Foundation.pdf
The Banyule free desexing program was cost effective by council funding offset by savings and achieved significant results in minimising the cat population. For owned and semi-owned cats this included “decreases in impoundments by 66%, euthanasia by 82%, and cat-related calls by 36% over 8 years, with savings to council of AU $440,660 for an outlay of AU $77,490”.
This program critically involved AMO roles in effective face-to-face, coal-face engagement with the community, and included owned and stray (semi owned and unowned) cats.
“The program proposed and approved by the city of Banyule was that sterilization, microchipping, and the first year of registration would be funded by the council. The purpose of this program was to increase ownership responsibilities for owned and stray cats being fed by residents (semi-owned cats) and to reduce unwanted kittens being born and, therefore, the number of cats and kittens killed in the council-contracted facility (CPS). This was provided at no cost for all owned cats and semi-owned cats in the target areas.”
“When the medium-intensity targeted program resumed in 2017/18, and the trapping process changed from enforcement-orientated to assistive, cats impounded city-wide decreased by 51% over four years, from 284 in 2016/17 to 134 in 2020/21”.
“…the traditional methods of trapping wandering and nuisance cats have not resulted in long-term reductions in cat-related calls to councils. However, following the implementation of a microtargeted free sterilization program for owned and semi-owned cats, marked reductions in cat-related calls, impoundments, euthanasia, and costs were realized, similar to that reported in US programs. It is recommended that urban cat management policies and programs are revised and, instead of being focused on a traditional compliance-based approach, are focused on being assistive, helping owners and semi-owners have their cats sterilized and identified with a microchip.”
The Keeping Cats Safe at Home (KCSAH) in NSW included key desexing programs where approaches under specific councils achieved high results with managing cat populations.
The Weddin Council KCSAH desexing program offered free microchipping and desexing which included: collaboratively working to achieve results for over 100 cats, the view this approach “represents the future of local cat management, it is the answer to reducing cat euthanasia rates and keeping cats out of pounds and shelters”. https://weddinlandcare.com.au/milestone-for-keeping-cats-safe-at-home-project
The Parramatta Council KCSAH desexing program included: an aim “to locate unowned cat hotspots and engage with overwhelmed cat carers and volunteer cat rescue groups”; and results where cat-related nuisance complaints decreased by 49% and cats arriving at the council pound decreased by 41%.https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:AP:4d1d5b58-63b5-4a70-8196-212fded377d1
Anecdotally, Campbelltown and Hornsby KCSAH desexing programs also critically included local carers and rescuers for semi owned and unowned cats. With these community cat rescuers (volunteers) a high take up of desexing was arranged with cat owners, supported transport and scheduling. These roles are critical to achieve a high number of desexing procedures to minimise cat populations with community engagement.
At the AIAM conference a KCSH presentation was provided – noting pages 12-14 for targeted desexing including semi owned cats and semi owners (community cat rescuers and carers). https://aiam.org.au/page-18158
RSPCA SA Proposed TDAR
“In TDAR, unowned or semi-owned cats are trapped, heath checked, desexed, vaccinated and then either rehomed or returned to their original location. Cats who are unsuitable for rehoming, unhealthy and unfit for release are humanely euthanised.”
“Action 23: Reduce strays taken to shelters by helping community members understand that sometimes cats are better left where they are. Promote the approach of “leave a healthy cat where they are and monitor” to stray cats.
Action 24: Undertake a ‘trap, desex and adopt or return’ (TDAR) trial in a selected area of SA, as an attempt to reduce uncontrolled breeding in urban stray cat populations.
Action 25: Educate the public about semi-owned cats as a separate category of cats, helping members of the public who feed stray cats to understand the importance of desexing and microchipping.”
It is strongly recommended that Australian governments invest funding into more intensive programs of desexing including Trap Neuter Return, Trap Neuter Vaccinate Return, Return To Field, and Shelter Neuter Return which are adequately researched over years. The evidence gathered from NSW, Queensland, and Victorian councils indicated benefits with minimising cat populations including stray cats, and therefore continuing with similar efforts will provide benefits across NSW. It is noted that both the Qld CCPs and NSW KCSAHs involved semi owned and unowned cats under community cat rescuers. The success of TNR, TNVR, RTF, and SNR techniques have also been documented in a number of other studies.
Please refer to the earlier section for information on the Queensland, NSW and Victorian desexing programs. These included desexing of stray cats (semi owned and unowned) where these cats were under managed colonies operated by community cat rescuers. The following are just a small sample of the evidence-based research in these techniques.
“We conclude that trap, neuter and return associated with high desexing rates in colonies, and adoption of kittens and friendly adults substantially reduces colony size, and improves the welfare of cats and kittens. This model is cost-effective for municipalities, and should be legalized in Australia.”https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/7/6/46
“Colony populations, when grouped by the number of years enrolled in the program, declined by a mean of 54% from entry and 82% from peak levels. Results from coexistent TNR programs in the Chicago area are consistent with these findings.”https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29346278/
“Available evidence indicates that an estimated 300 free-roaming cats were essentially unmanaged prior to the commencement of the TNR program; a quick reduction of up to one-third of the cats on the waterfront was attributed to the adoption of sociable cats and kittens; the elimination of the remaining population; over a 17-year period; was ascribed to attrition.”https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/7/11/81
“New approaches, including return-to-field (RTF) and targeted trap-neuter-return (TNR) appear to have transformative potential. …formal RTF and targeted TNR protocols, collectively referred to as a community cat program (CCP), were added to ongoing community-based TNR efforts and a pilot RTF initiative. As part of the three-year CCP, 11,746 cats were trapped, sterilized, vaccinated and returned or adopted. Feline euthanasia at the Albuquerque Animal Welfare Department (AAWD) declined by 84.1% and feline intake dropped by 37.6%; the live release rate (LRR) increased by 47.7% due primarily to these reductions in both intake and euthanasia. Modest increases in the percentage of cats returned to owner (RTO) and the adoption rate were also observed, although both metrics decreased on an absolute basis, while the number of calls to the city about dead cats declined.”https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Impact-of-an-Integrated-Program-of-and-Targeted-Spehar-Wolf/473bbf487fce3cf6a3743f73e2c1ca7b431d25a1
Integrated Return-To-Field and Targeted Trap-Neuter-Vaccinate-Return Programs Result in Reductions of Feline Intake and Euthanasia at Six Municipal Animal Shelters
“In the past decade, two new variants of TNVR, return-to-field (RTF) and high-impact targeting, have exhibited the capacity to contribute to significant reductions in shelter intake and euthanasia. The present study examines changes in feline intake and euthanasia, as well as impacts on associated metrics, at municipal shelters located in six diverse U.S. communities after integrated programs of RTF and targeted TNVR (collectively termed “community cat programs,” CCPs) were implemented. A total of 72,970 cats were enrolled in six 3-year CCPs, 71,311 of whom (98%) were sterilized, vaccinated, and returned to their location of capture or adopted. A median reduction of 32% in feline intake, as well as a median decline of 83% in feline euthanasia occurred across the six CCPs; median feline live-release rate increased by 53% as a result of these simultaneous declines in cat admissions and euthanasia. The integration of RTF and targeted TNVR protocols appears to result in greater feline intake and euthanasia reductions than programs lacking such an integrated approach.”https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2019.00077/full
Association between a shelter-neuter-return program and cat health at a large municipal animal shelter
“RESULTS Number of cats admitted to the shelter each year decreased significantly over 8 years; beginning in 2010, duration of stay decreased. Proportion of cats euthanized decreased from 66.6% (28,976/43,517) in the pre-SNR period to 34.9% (11,999/34,380) in the post-SNR period, whereas prevalence of URI increased from 5.5% to 6.8%, and median duration of shelter stay decreased from 6 to 5 days for cats < 4 months of age and from 8 to 6 days for older cats. With implementation of the SNR program and a new treatment policy for cats with URI, more cats received treatment with less medication, yielding cost savings.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26799109/
LRC 
