What's wrong with the registration of all animal shelters?

Is there anything wrong with the idea that all animal shelters of any kind should be registered with the authorities? I note that the state of Colorado has obligatory licensing for animal shelters but how widespread is this across the US? The intention would be to ensure that standards were kept high enough in the interests of the welfare of the animals at the shelter. 

Michelline Toulouse. Video screenshot. She ran her own 'rescue' while volunteering at another but was herself a cat hoarder who was later charged. Licensing would have prevented her behavior.

Registration would entail inspection which in turn would be taking preventative steps against those cases in which the animal sanctuary owner loses control resulting in neglected animals some of whom end up starving to death or becoming very ill.

Surely, it is wiser to take preventative steps rather than reactive ones? On an almost daily basis we read about well-intentioned cat owners looking after more than one cat which then becomes an informal cat shelter of sorts. This then develops into an out-of-control situation in which the shelter founder and owner fails to have sufficient funds to run the establishment. 

I am concerned about individuals who have good intentions but end up hurting the cats while running informal "sanctuaries" or "shelters". I put these words in quotes because they're neither shelters nor sanctuaries. They become hellholes for cats. Sometimes you can't really blame the person but it would be far better to take proactive steps and it might be cheaper for the authorities.

And there aren't enough volunteers to help or foster carers. The complexities and difficulties of running an animal shelter can bring them down unless the person is well-prepared.

Of course, you would have to keep a register and have somebody to inspect the property. I don't foresee that as being very expensive for the authorities because there aren't that many animal shelters. I read many cat-news stories and I'm forever being reminded of the failure of informal, private cat shelters.

A recent story (Sept 2021) concerns a cat hoarder who was 'rescuing cats' from other cat hoarders. A bizarre state of affairs as she was also working as a volunteer at another rescue facility.

Michigan State University say that as at 2014, in America, traditionally, there's been a lack of regulation and supervision in monitoring rescue and foster care organisations. Licensing, they argue, would subject rescues to inspections and hold them accountable for the animals that they take in.

Of course, rescues are governed by the general laws of animal welfare in any particular state and therefore they are indirectly monitored through the potential of being punished should they break those laws. But as mentioned this is reactive and in the meantime, cats are hurt or killed. It is not as good as registration provided registration is carried out properly and combined with inspections.

1. Pet Animal Care and Facilities Act or also referred to as PACFA - info on Colorado obligatory licensing.

Big Valley council has passed a by-law on cat registration

NEWS AND COMMENT-BIG VALLEY, CANADA: Councillors, the ladies and gentlemen who run the village (which I'm told that it is), have decided to pass a by-law which makes it mandatory to register your cat with the council or some other agency appointed by the council. This is not a world first as far as I am aware but it is very rare indeed to introduce cat registration in line with dog registration.

Big Valley Council passed a by-law on cat registration. Image: MikeB

And it is reported that the reason why the council has introduced cat registration is so they can identify the owners of cats which citizens regard as troublesome because, for example, they damage people's property. This can lead to retaliation in which cats are harmed or even killed resulting in police involvement.

They say that concerned residents who don't like to see stray cats wandering around can use traps to contain them and take them, I presume, to a pound or shelter but they still don't know who owns the cat at least initially until they are scanned for a microchip. But sometimes cats aren't microchipped.

The strong argument is that if cats are registered, they will know who owns each cat. The mayor of the village, Clark German, was in favour of the new bylaw because the cats should be under the control of their owner. One councillor said that free range cats help to control the mouse population and that it is the owners who are to blame for any nuisance not the cats.

Despite this counterargument the councillors passed the law. So, there you have it: there will be cat registration in line with dog registration in the village of Big Valley!

Comment: registration of cats without micro-chipping might not work! You can't necessarily identify a cat by their appearance. I would have thought obligatory micro-chipping should go hand in hand with registration. And micro-chipping should be kept up to date because often the details become out of date as the owner moves home. Or the cat belongs to somebody else in due course.

This little story is very typical of much wider issues concerning cat ownership and whether cats should be allowed free access to the outside at their will. It is an ongoing debate in many jurisdictions in Canada, America, Europe, the UK and other countries. Australia probably leads the way in this debate. 

As I recall, one Aussie jurisdiction has introduced registration with limited success. Another problem is that you don't know who the cat owners are at the moment. If they don't come forward to register the cats you don't know that they haven't come forward.

This would particularly apply if in response to knowing about this new bylaw some people kept their cats inside for a while. Therefore, the law might be difficult to enforce accurately. It is the same with obligatory micro-chipping. How many people will volunteer their cats to be microchip? And if they don't what does the council do about it?

Bengal Registrations at GCCF down by 47%

The GCCF is the number one cat association in the UK. They report on their website that registrations of the Bengal cat are down by 47% for the period 2009 to 2010. The figures are as follows:

• 2009 - 1996 registrations
• 2010 - 1355 registrations

Breeders register their cats at the GCCF to ensure that they are formally accepted as purebred cats. You can see the GCCF registration policy on this page (new window). The figures are of a sufficient size to make the shift reliable but it is only one year. A trend over several years would be more conclusive - but see figures below. This may be a trend.

No one single cat breed went up to replace this downward trend for the Bengal.

Here are the overall figures:



The Bengal cat is second most popular on my long standing public (worldwide) poll.

Siamese Cat Registrations in the UK

The GCCF published figures on cat breed registrations for the period 2006 to 2010 shows that the Siamese cat is ranked third at 2010. On my worldwide poll of over 4000 votes it comes in as third most popular. A nice correlation but votes from the public worldwide is more reliable than registrations by breeders of individual cats at the premier UK cat association.

Here are the figures:

British Shorhair Most Registered Cat Breed by GCCF

The British Shorthair has increased in popularity while the Persian has decreased over the past several years.

I present below a spreadsheet from the GCCF figures showing registrations. Numbers of registrations indicates popularity, indirectly. This is for the UK only, of course.

On my website I have a world popularity poll and the Brit SH is 9th. It is a very popular cat breed. The lower placing is due to the fact that most votes are from America, where the Maine Coon is the most popular. But America has the biggest cat market in the world by far some ten times bigger than in the UK.