We need to revise our complaints to include the new Domestic Animal Management Plan 2021-2025 and send in between 28th Oct to 28th November. If you live, work or play in Knox.
To original complaints against the 24-hr cat curfew, add something relating to the DAMP 2021-2025 and send revised complaints to: locallaw.administration@knox.vic.gov.au Complete online : https://haveyoursay.knox.vic.gov.au/dogs-and-cats
By post to Community Laws department, DAM Plan, Knox City Council, Reply Paid 70243, WANTIRNA SOUTH VIC 3152
The Mayor said that if the response is overwhelming, the law can be re-considered, it can be revoked.
Two councillors have indicated they will not change. In the Local Government Act, councillors should not disadvantage a group, and advantage another group. This is the finalisation of the law - the last chance for us to ask Council to listen, to not decimate its citizens. We need many objections, not just from cat-owners and cat-lovers, but all those who believe in community, co-existence and diversity in Knox - who stand against victimisation against a minority, and misinformation. Council quotes ‘experts’ without qualification, the CEO of Animal Aid - with a contract with Council, the RSPCA - the leading private contract killer of cats, and Zoos Victoria.
Please keep all your emails and letters to Council, also any Council responses.
DAMP 2021-2025 is here: https://hdp-au-prod-app-knox-haveyoursay-files.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/9016/3529/7492/Draft_Domestic_Animal_Management_Plan_2021-2025-compressed.pdf
1. How much is the DAMP and enforcement of cat containment costing council and ultimately ratepayers?
2. What qualifications does the RSPCA have to speak as 'cat welfare experts'? The organisation killed 9,714 cats last financial year.
3. What qualifications does Zoos Victoria have to determine threats to Wildlife? They keep animals in cages for the entertainment of humans.
4. Why claim cat containment is to address cat nuisance and promote cat safety when 80% of impounded cats do not have owners?
5. Why promote dog ownership when Council receives triple the number of nuisance complaints for dogs every year?
Thank you to an AdvoCat (adapted from his submission) 24 hour Cat Curfew does not seem to be supported by any data.
-No financial transparency. Detailed cost / benefit of the plan not provided.
-Engagement survey response data ignored. Free or subsidised cat enclosures / fencing is the top suggestion, yet this is absent from the plan.
-Views opposed to 24 Hr Cat Curfew are absent from the report.
-Rationale for cat curfew not supported by evidence. Council is ignoring the feedback and pushing ahead with their agenda regardless.
-Cat nuisance issues and impoundments have been trending down since 2012, despite cat registrations trending upward. -Engagement survey responses indicate cat nuisance issues are rarely or never a concern for the majority of respondents.
No detailed costings. -There is insufficient detail to provide financial transparency on the cost/benefit for implementing this plan.
-Need a breakdown which covers income from pet registrations, animal-related fines etc. plus rate revenue, vs cost of each element of the plan, so that residents are clear on the value and benefits.
-Each element of the plan should be costed in sufficient detail to provide clarity and transparency so ratepayers can assess the value or otherwise.
Subsidies are missing.- Despite the survey results, there is nothing in the plan around subsidies for the cost of cat enclosures or fencing for cat owners,
- Focus is on providing services for trapping cats which only serves one section of the community, rather than the cat owners who are most impacted.
Rationale for the Cat Curfew is not based on the data from the Engagement Survey Responses.
- Council have stated the key purpose of the curfew is to reduce cat issues caused by wandering cats. Council says the success of the curfew will be measured by the number of cat nuisance calls.
- However, the data indicates cat nuisance calls are already trending down by 36% since 2012, despite the registered cat ownership increasing by 24% over the same period. Why is this even an issue? Even if nothing further is done, this measure will still be met.
Engagement Survey Results indicate the majority of respondents experience Cat Nuisance issues Rarely or Never.
- However, the report is skewed the other way on this. The facts are being ignored to suit the Cat Curfew Agenda. Why is this even an issue of focus? The data is being ignored.
Missing verbatim feedback from the Engagement Survey Report.
- There is no mention of comments about either abandoning the 24-hours or replacing it with a dusk-to dawn-curfew instead. Why are these many responses not mentioned? The report appears biased in favour of the Council cat curfew agenda, while censoring any dissenting views.
Thank you to scientist Tom Caradoc-Davies (from his submission): I am concerned that the proposed 24 hour curfew does not seem to be supported by any data. However, as a scientist I know that the plural of anecdote is not data. Statements such as “experts agree…” are often misused to push select agendas. Experts in the field will publish their results in peer-reviewed publications and then cite these to support their position.
Regarding the welfare of local wildlife; the council has not presented any data on the predation impacts of registered domestic cats. What is the total feline predation in Knox on wildlife? What fraction of this is feral cats, unregistered cats and registered cats? If the majority of cat owners comply with the curfew what is the expected reduction in predation on wildlife and how will this be measured? No data or studies are provided. This raises the risk that no significant environmental benefit will occur. 80percent of impounded cats are unregistered - unowned. If feline predation is an issue then trapping cats that enter sensitive environmental areas may be more effective. Actual studies and data are required, rather than generalized statements.
On the issue of nuisance to neighbours, the council’s Engagement summary report (3) states on p25:
“The majority of responses (shaded in blue) indicated that the respondents either only ‘rarely’ or ‘never’ experienced the cat nuisance issues that include preying on wildlife (71.89%), appear being unowned (75.6%), causing nuisance to your property (74.33%), disturbed garden beds due to cat activity (74.92%), or cats in sensitive environmental areas or reserves (82%).“
Nuisance to neighbours from cats is rated at ‘rarely’ or ‘never’. With such a minor nuisance and the significant impact on cat owners of fencing/caging their properties is disproportionate. The council’s report shows that “prevent cats from being a nuisance to neighbours” is not required as the vast majority of those surveyed state that this is not an issue.
October Meeting link, press 6.4 below to go to exact place: http://webcast.knox.vic.gov.au/archive/video21-1025.php
Keep in touch on Knox AdvoCats: https://www.facebook.com/Fighting4FelineFreedoms/
Because We actually Care, and really are Independent.
Community Matters Most to Knox Residents!
Fair Actions, not empty Words - we are paying for Council, not paid by Council.
Knoxers - We need you! Cat Lives Matter! Thank you!