Cat Laws in Our Suburb

Well, we live in what our council calls a "Fauna Protection Buffer Zone" which means that we live next to a cat prohibited area (the lake across from our house) and that we are only allowed one cat! To apply for more than one we must apply for a permit. They can choose to accept or decline this, what would happen if they decline? They would know where we live and be on the lookout for either of our cats. I would have checked before we got Ginga but I was sure that there was a maximum of two cats and that you needed to apply for a permit if you want three or more. I knew this because of a fellow cat owner in our street, she owns three cats and hasn't applied for a permit, nothing has happened to her but she is at risk! I also know of two renters down the road who own two cute baby kittens who I see walking around with them all the time and I just know they haven't got a permit... All so confusing! I have seen the local ranger around here quite a lot and always hope that our cats haven't done anything wrong but I am so sure he was looking for a cat, he kept driving around our street. If you'd like to read any more about this before I apply, here is our councils website if you'd like to read more on the laws:
http://www.stirling.wa.gov.au/Pets/

I'd love some advice,
Jackz, Jazzy & Ginga.

I would think the safest is to keep them inside... I am also one above the law here with Gracie now, no idea what I am going to do... Probably going to sign her as a foster of something like it... will deal with that when the time comes. I will no longer vaccinate her as she is now an inside only and already 12... So don't know if that will be an issue or not...

If people would keep their cats inside or in enclosures there'd be no need for laws like this to protect our lovely wildlife.

I'm sure if you applied for the required permit and stated the cats are indoor/enclosed they would have little reason to deny the permit.

Limiting each household to just one cat seems extreme. Do they make exceptions for indoor-only cats? You have to wonder if the license isn't (also) a way to fill the town's coffers. Our town does that with dog license fees, which are double for the second dog (hundreds of dollars).

It's not uncommon for an AR group (yes, even in other countries) to be behind local laws like this getting passed. Which is why the laws usually make little sense...

Originally Posted by strange_wings

It's not uncommon for an AR group (yes, even in other countries) to be behind local laws like this getting passed. Which is why the laws usually make little sense...

Click to expand...

I'm sorry to change the subject a bit but I just wondered what an AR group is? And as for the only one cat per home I think that is crazy and I would keep my cats strictly inside for their safety if this is all going on you wouldn't want them to take your babies. And I would apply for the liscences and tell them you had undestood it to be that you had to have them with three cats and you had two and see if they will approve you and tell them your cats are inside only and keep them as so for their protection.

Originally Posted by Tavia'smom

I'm sorry to change the subject a bit but I just wondered what an AR group is?

Click to expand...

Animal rights (think PETA). They have a lot of money to push their ideals and will go around to towns and push for laws on number of pets, licenses, spay/neuter requirements (that makes it difficult for the breeders who they want to wipe out), type of pets (resulting in nearly all reptiles being illegal to keep in some towns), and the breed specific laws.

In Australia, it would be different groups but they do exist over there. RSCPA/SPCA are questionable, too, since changes back in the 80s. HSUS has international offices and local connections over there as well.
While on the surface they may use the "to protect local fauna" argument, you have to look at who they're actually connected with.

(And just to be clear, I don't care where you live - your dogs and cats should not be allowed to freely roam about. It solves a lot of problems to obey leash laws and not think your cat is exempt.)

Originally Posted by missymotus

If people would keep their cats inside or in enclosures there'd be no need for laws like this to protect our lovely wildlife.

I'm sure if you applied for the required permit and stated the cats are indoor/enclosed they would have little reason to deny the permit.

Click to expand...

I agree with this. My cats are always indoor only because there are just too many hazards outside (cars, poison, disease, nasty people). I feel that I took on the responsibility of my cats and part of the responsibility is to keep them safe from harm: The only way to do that is to limit their exposure to the things that can harm them.

I live in an apartment in a large city, so that means my kitties are kept exclusively inside and taken out occasionally when the weather is nice, on a harness. If I owned a house, I would have an enclosed gazebo attached to the house with access in the wall for them to go from inside the house to the gazebo and back.

Originally Posted by strange_wings

Animal rights (think PETA). They have a lot of money to push their ideals and will go around to towns and push for laws on number of pets, licenses, spay/neuter requirements (that makes it difficult for the breeders who they want to wipe out), type of pets (resulting in nearly all reptiles being illegal to keep in some towns), and the breed specific laws.

In Australia, it would be different groups but they do exist over there. RSCPA/SPCA are questionable, too, since changes back in the 80s. HSUS has international offices and local connections over there as well.
While on the surface they may use the "to protect local fauna" argument, you have to look at who they're actually connected with.

(And just to be clear, I don't care where you live - your dogs and cats should not be allowed to freely roam about. It solves a lot of problems to obey leash laws and not think your cat is exempt.)

Click to expand...

I was thinking that was what was meant after I asked but I wanted to be sure. And I know too well about PETA, I used to have a pit bull and they are heavily involved in breed specific laws, they also have lobbied to ban chiuhauhas and huskies, and other such breeds due to what they say is aggressive behavior. I think its rediculous laws like that only hurt law abiding citizens the people who do bad things are going to do them no matter what and it will push them futher in hiding and hurt the animals more. The FBI has PETA listed as a terriorist group and has for years due to breaking in to homes and businesses and horrible things they have done.

Originally Posted by Tavia'smom

I think its rediculous laws like that only hurt law abiding citizens the people who do bad things are going to do them no matter what and it will push them futher in hiding and hurt the animals more. The FBI has PETA listed as a terriorist group and has for years due to breaking in to homes and businesses and horrible things they have done.

Click to expand...

You're correct. These limit laws will do nothing for the people with large amounts of cats or dogs that aren't caring for them properly, these people already hide that they do that. Make it illegal and they'll just be more cautious. Meanwhile honest law abiding folks stress about losing their pets because they're one over.

PETA, btw, is watched for who they financially support - arsonists and ecoterrorists. They don't do the crimes themselves under the PETA name, but they'll pay for the legal defense of those who do...
HSUS is currently being investigated for fraud (misuse of funds), though I have no idea if they're also watched like PETA - they should be though because they do/support all the same things as PETA, they're just a tad more cautious.
RSPCA/SPCA is given a free run and some legal ability to terrorize people, while having much the same AR core and goals.

And limits on how many pets you can have is rediculous because what you can personally handle and care for is individualized. Currently I have one cat and due to a steady string of bad luck, and health issues, and innocidences of when I think things are better something else happens I can only handle one cat. Where as many people with 20 or more are perfectly capable of handleing them. If something where to happen to my Aunt I would tighten my belt a bit to take her cat in if my cousin could not but it would be a bit sticky not with food but with vet bills and such as for now I am budgeted for one. And their are some people who honestly cannot handle one cat. Its knowing what you can personally handle that should matter and the CONDITIONS in which the cats live and how they are cared for and if they get enough love that matters. My cat gets all of my love and I know my limits I don't need uncle sam to tell me what they are.

I think those laws limiting the number of pets a person can have is stupid. As long as the person is taking care of their pets, providing them a good home, good health, a lot of love, and vet care, it's nobody's business.

My Aunt lived in a place where she couldn't have any pets. She had a cat, and no one knew because she kept that cat inside.

Originally Posted by strange_wings

HSUS is currently being investigated for fraud (misuse of funds), though I have no idea if they're also watched like PETA - they should be though because they do/support all the same things as PETA, they're just a tad more cautious.
RSPCA/SPCA is given a free run and some legal ability to terrorize people, while having much the same AR core and goals.

Click to expand...

HSUS are being watched. I don't know if there are government entities watching, but there's a nonprofit watching them: HumaneWatch.

I follow them on facebook. I despise PETA, and have only slightly milder hatred for the HSUS. They've become corrupt agencies with warped agendas. If folks wish to donate to truly help the animals, find local rescues and such. The people I got Jack from in CNY are awesome, as is Cat Adoption Team here in Oregon. I know there are others. All awesome. Support them, not the money-grabbers.

Originally Posted by jcat

Limiting each household to just one cat seems extreme. Do they make exceptions for indoor-only cats? You have to wonder if the license isn't (also) a way to fill the town's coffers. Our town does that with dog license fees, which are double for the second dog (hundreds of dollars).

Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply, thanks all of you for your replies. As many of you have been talking about indoor-only cats, they do not offer any exceptions for they believe cats can "sneak out" of a house with locked doors and such. My gosh, these laws are silly! I have filled out the form but haven't sent it yet.

Originally Posted by Tavia'smom

I'm sorry to change the subject a bit but I just wondered what an AR group is? And as for the only one cat per home I think that is crazy and I would keep my cats strictly inside for their safety if this is all going on you wouldn't want them to take your babies. And I would apply for the liscences and tell them you had undestood it to be that you had to have them with three cats and you had two and see if they will approve you and tell them your cats are inside only and keep them as so for their protection.

Click to expand...

That is a good idea, thank you for your insight. I think I'll write that, thanks

Thanks all of you, I will be re-reading this thread some more when I have some time.

Jackz, Jazzy & Ginga.

I read the site. I do know that particularly in Australia, there is great concern (and a number of studies) about the impact of cats hunting on native wildlife, some of which is endangered. Of course, the encroachment of man on the habitat is the biggest problem, but in some instances, cat predation is of concern.

...not that this isn't a huge debate here by a really outspoken bird and wildlife conservation contingent.... but Australia does have many native species that exist nowhere else.

The way I read it, if you live in a fauna-protected buffer zone, you can have one cat without a permit. If you live in Sterling, but not a protected area, you need a permit if you have three or more cats. And it also seems that if you let your cats wander, if they're caught in a protected area, you then receive a fine.

If your kitties are indoor-only, it seems to me the only issue is paying the permit. It doesn't sound like anything happens to them if they escape - other than they need identification to be returned to you and if in a protected area, you get fined (I'm guessing a lot!).

I don't know about others, but I grew up in an area where even one dog required a permit. I'm not sure why cats should be different.

Thanks for the reply, Laurie. My girls are not indoor only but are confined to the backyard all the time. If they ever venture out, we rush out the front door Well, I think that everything will be fine and I will just go ahead and give them the permit application. Thanks all of you for your insights.

Jackz, Jazzy & Ginga.