WA Cat Act – results year #1

The WA Cat Act is the jewel in the ‘mandatory desexing’ zealot’s crown. As legislation it included everything that a cat-law advocate could have dreamed of;

– it was enacted state-wide and every council was required to make provisions for it; to include it in their operations and to resource the enforcement of it. It was well-resourced by the state, with a $3.4m tax-payer funded gift to councils and local cat charities, to be used for both desexing programs and new cat pound facilities.

– it was retroactive; ALL cats are subject to the laws. They are also extremely comprehensive with cats needing to be desexed, microchipped, to wear a collar and registration tag, be registered with the local council. Also includes a ‘breeder licence’ element with cat sellers required to microchip all cats, and desex (or provide voucher) before sale.

– they give animal agencies almost unprecedented powers. Authorised officers can enter property, take photos and request paperwork… and all simply under the suspicion that a cat is being kept ‘illegally’. Cat pounds can have a cat microchipped and sterilised at the owner’s cost, while the fines for breaching the laws are considerable – $200 per offence, and up to $5,000.

Having nailed every element, the laws should have done what the advocates for the laws said they would do; reduce impoundment (and the subsequent killing) of cats. 

These laws were suppose to ‘get’ the bad owners. That was the design. If we ‘got’ the bad owners, in theory, our cat problems would be solved. However, despite tens of millions of dollars being spent on their implementation, reports have shown “out of three of Perth’s larger councils, only one had issued fines since the laws came into place.” Unfortunately, cat laws simply don’t work how advocates claim they do – pounds get bigger, more cats are impounded, but laws do little to address the community’s cat issues.

To record the first year of the law’s implementation, I’ve done what advocates for these laws (including the government agencies responsible for implementing them) has NOT done – I’ve surveyed local councils on their cat impoundment numbers leading up to and since the passing of the Cat Act in November 2013.

Now, compared to the eastern states, increasing cat impoundments by around 3,000 individual animals might not be like much of a big deal. Because cats, who cares right? But to do it in just 8 months, and using the exact tools sold to the community as they key to ‘reducing cat impoundments’ is contemptible.

Thankfully community cat rescue groups have largely stepped up to take on the load, and its their compassion that is keeping this from being an all out bloodbath. But stuffing your charity pet groups to their limits with strays newly plucked from the street can hardly be considered a good outcome.

Of cource, there are two other sources of cat intakes stats missing from this information. Coincidentally, the two biggest advocates for the Cat Act passing in WA;

– In the last available year the major animal welfare charity in the state – the RSPCA WA – placed just 250 cats. They also closed their doors to cat intakes, so their input into managing these numbers will be minimal.

– The Cat Haven has been unable to provide me statistics for the financial year, with their year to date stats being released in the new year. I will update the blog when this new information becomes available.

There is a very good reason why practically all groups advocating for No Kill aims, reject mandatory desexing laws – because in execution, they fail in their aims and drive up shelter kill rates. Sadly, for the cats of WA, those who claim to advocate for cats have stubbornly refused to look at the science and experience of other cities and will be forced to learn about these failings first hand, at great detriment to the animals they claim to protect.

UPDATE: New stats

The WA Cat Act – year #1.

– The highest cat intakes in five years.

– Five times more cats entering the shelter population via council facilities than the year prior (and many WA councils aren’t processing cats yet, so this number likely to rise).

– Still only relatively small numbers of intakes – less than 10k pa – meaning zero influence on the overall cat population (taking around 1% of the overall population will not reduce that population)

– Only a nominal reduction in the number of cats entering the Cat Haven (464), despite many cities now taking their cat management in-house.

#urgh
 

See also: Wanna a little glimpse into the future WA? Check out what happened in Victoria.