Cat ownership limit criticised by SPCA

A new cap on cat numbers in urban areas, recently introduced by the Mackenzie District Council, has been labelled as ‘‘unnecessarily restrictive’’ by the SPCA.

New provisions in the council’s Keeping of Animals Poultry and Bees Bylaw create a limit of two adult cats per household in urban areas, possibly the lowest limit in New Zealand.

According to a submission from Forest and Bird to the council’s bylaw review, 10 territorial authorities limit cat ownership to three per household, including Buller and Invercargill. Four more limit ownership to four cats per household, and three others cap numbers at five cats.

The SPCA has raised concerns about the Mackenzie restriction provision, which it does not support, except where there are issues with nuisance behaviours, or in instances such as hoarding which affects animal welfare.

SPCA scientific officer Dr Alison Vaughan told The Timaru Herald the organisation does not advocate for blanket limits on the number of cats allowed per household and considers limiting the number of cats per household to two is ‘‘unnecessarily restrictive and could create a barrier to adoption of cats to responsible homes’’.

‘‘SPCA is also concerned about the potential impact of limiting cat numbers per household on approved cat fosterers who volunteer for the SPCA or other reputable animal charities,’’ Vaughan said.

She said the organisation

advocates for all cats (except those belonging to registered breeders) to be desexed, microchipped, and registered, and supports keeping companion cats at home to ‘‘keep them safe from harm’’ while minimising negative impacts on wildlife and the community.

However, Forest and Bird regional Canterbury West Coast conservation manager Nicky Snoyink said the limit is a great step in the right direction, and commended the council for the move.

‘‘Mackenzie joins an increasing number of district councils to include some sort of domestic cat management provisions in its Keeping of Animals Bylaw which is good to see,’’ Snoyink said.

She said Forest and Bird would have liked to see the cap apply district-wide.

‘‘Controlling cats in an urban area is a great start, but it would be great to see it extended to the whole district, purely because it has that co-benefit of dealing with the feral cat problem and biodiversity.’’

Snoyink said the Mackenzie bylaw relates to cats as a public nuisance rather than a commitment to conservation or biodiversity.

‘‘It would also be really good to keep cats inside at night, because that’s when they roam around the neighbourhood and get into fights and come home all broken and scratched, and the co-benefit is that our biodiversity gets a bit of a break,’’ she said.

‘‘They are a real threat to our native wildlife, they kill birds, lizards, insects and bats.

‘‘Forest and Bird advocates for a limit on the number of cats and compulsory de-sexing and microchipping in the interests of cat welfare.

‘‘There is a proposed national cat management strategy that’s come from Local Government New Zealand that captures all of those things – the public nuisance aspect, the cat welfare aspect and the biodiversity aspect as well.

‘‘National direction on cat management would be useful for consistency,’’ Snoyink said.

Council spokesperson Chris Clarke said at this stage the bylaw will be monitored on a complaints’ basis only.

The bylaw allows for a license to own more than two cats to be granted or refused at the discretion of ‘‘an authorised officer’’.

Applicants must fill out a form, pay application and inspection fees where relevant and allow for an inspection of their property.

‘‘Controlling cats in an urban area is a great start, but it would be great to see it extended to the whole district, purely because it has that co-benefit of dealing with the feral cat problem and biodiversity.’’

Nicky Snoyink Forest & Bird