TWO-THIRDS OF US SUPPORT BANNING PET CATS FROM ROAMING. A BAN WOULD SAVE MILLIONS OF NATIVE ANIMALS – AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS

Australians have more pet cats than ever before — more than 5 million in total. With the growing number, expectations on pet owners are shifting.

An increasing number of cat owners are choosing to keep their feline companions indoors or within secure enclosures, a practice that some local governments have made mandatory in certain regions. However, the majority of pet cats in Australia still freely wander the streets and gardens of their neighborhoods.

The widespread adoption of keeping cats safely confined at home would yield significant benefits for cat welfare, human health, local wildlife, and even the economy. Therefore, the question arises: should pet owners be obligated to ensure their cats remain contained within their property, similar to the regulations imposed on dog owners?

To address this query, we conducted a national survey in late 2023, querying thousands of individuals, and have recently unveiled the findings.

The survey revealed strong support for mandating cat containment among the populace. Merely one out of every twelve respondents (8 percent) expressed opposition to the idea. With such widespread endorsement, the moment may be ripe for implementing nationwide reforms in how we oversee our pet cat population.

Local councils are embracing cat containment

Starting from November 1st, the Geelong City Council will become part of a rapidly expanding cohort of local governments, both urban and regional, that mandate the secure containment of pet cats round the clock.

More than a third of local councils in Australia now require cats to be contained overnight or 24 hours a day. Most are in the ACT and Victoria.

Given how good cats are at climbing and jumping, containing cats usually requires keeping them indoors or in secure runs.

The main reasons cited by local governments for these regulations are:

• Improving pet welfare: Cats that are securely contained enjoy longer and healthier lives, resulting in fewer veterinary expenses. This is due to their protection from various hazards such as car accidents, dog attacks, cat fights, infections, diseases, and other potential misfortunes.
• Saving wildlife: Statistics reveal that four out of five cats permitted outdoors engage in hunting and, on average, kill two to three animals per week. Extrapolating this data with the millions of pet cats in Australia, the yearly toll amounts to a staggering 6,000–11,000 animals per square kilometer in our suburbs alone, and a national total of 323 million native animals killed annually. It’s worth noting that night curfews only offer protection to nocturnal species like possums, leaving diurnal creatures vulnerable to predation during the day.• By containing cats, the nuisance to neighbors is significantly reduced.
• This measure leads to fewer disturbances stemming from cat fights and prevents neighbor cats from preying on the birds and lizards inhabiting your backyard or nearby parks – creatures that hold value for many members of the community.

The public health toll of roaming cats

Another significant benefit, often overlooked, is the reduction in rates of cat-borne diseases resulting from preventing pet cats from roaming.

Various diseases that are exclusive to cats can be transmitted to humans. The economic burden of these diseases on Australia exceeds $6 billion annually, encompassing expenses related to medical care, lost income, and other associated costs.

Among these diseases, toxoplasmosis stands out as the most prevalent. This parasitic infection can be transmitted to humans but requires completion of its life cycle in cats. Studies in Australia have indicated human infection rates ranging from 22 percent to 66 percent within the community.

Cat-borne diseases contribute significantly to community harm, with an estimated 8,500 hospitalizations and 550 deaths annually from acute infections. Moreover, these diseases also correlate with elevated rates of car accidents, suicides, and mental health issues among infected individuals.

Pet cats play a pivotal role in the prevalence of these diseases within the community. In areas without containment requirements, the density of roaming pet cats can reach up to 100 per square kilometer.

Eliminating stray cats from our suburbs is crucial for reducing disease rates. This underscores why individuals should refrain from feeding stray cats, as it perpetuates their presence and exacerbates the associated health risks.

Most of us support containment

Implementing a policy mandating cat containment undoubtedly offers significant advantages. However, the success of such regulations hinges on public support and compliance.

To gauge public opinion on this matter, my colleagues at Monash University and I conducted a survey involving over 3,400 participants. We posed the question of whether they would endorse policies necessitating cat owners to confine their feline companions to their property.

The results were strikingly clear: a substantial majority, comprising 66 percent of respondents, voiced their support for cat containment. Conversely, only a small fraction, approximately one in 12 individuals (8 percent), expressed opposition to the idea. The remaining 26 percent adopted a neutral stance, selecting “neither support nor oppose.”

Furthermore, findings from other surveys indicate that nearly half of Australia’s pet cats, totaling 42 percent or 2.2 million, are already subject to containment by their owners.

These statistics underscore a significant level of public backing for cat containment policies, suggesting a promising foundation for their implementation and enforcement.

Some councils can’t legally require cat containment

Our findings suggest communities would broadly support their local councils if they moved to require cats to be contained.

While councils are responsible for pet issues, state and territory laws greatly influence what councils can and can’t do.

In New South Wales and Western Australia, state laws actually prevent local councils from requiring cat containment (except for in specific circumstances, such as in declared food preparation areas in NSW).

Rules are just the start

To boost compliance, councils need to invest in communicating new rules and the reasons for them. After a grace period, council officers will also need to monitor and enforce the rules.

Communities may need support too, especially if there are costs involved. Councils could, for example, offer rebates for flyscreens to stop cats slipping out of open windows.

Working with other colleagues in 2020, we surveyed Australia’s local governments about their approaches to cat management. Most reported tiny budgets for cat management.

Local governments should not be left to shoulder the cost alone. Federal, state and territory governments are also responsible for Australia’s wildlife (and human health). These governments have a range of projects covering both feral and pet cats.

The Australian government collects $3 billion a year in GST from spending on pets. Diverting a small proportion into responsible pet ownership programs would make an enormous difference.

Containment has wide backing

Our research shows the community is ready for widespread reform of how we manage all these cats.

Requiring pet cats to be contained is a sound policy choice. But to realise the full benefits, we also need to invest in effective communication for communities, provide rebates to help contain cats, and make sure the rules are followed.