Does Feeding Community Cats Count as “Take” Under Federal Wildlife Law? 

The Answer Is No!



Author: Greg Pu'uwai Aloha Baker, MBA, CCM
Date:  December 29, 2025
Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved
Hawaii Animal Advocacy Org

Note: This is solely the opinion of the author and does not
constitute legal advice, an attorney should always be consulted
to obtain legal advice.

 

Across Hawaiʻi, the question of how to humanely manage free-roaming “community cats” has become a flashpoint in public debate. Some groups have claimed that simply feeding a cat near sensitive bird habitat could constitute an illegal “take” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) or Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), potentially exposing caretakers to federal prosecution.

That claim is not supported by law, case precedent, or federal wildlife enforcement practice.
This article explains why.
.
.

PLEASE CLICK HERE TO DONATE NOW - LET'S MAKE SURE CAT SUPPORTERS GET ELECTED TO HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL

..

What the Law Actually Says About “Take”

Under the ESA, “take” means to kill, injure, harm, harass, trap, or capture a protected species. Courts have consistently held that to violate the ESA, a person’s actions must be the direct, proximate, and foreseeable cause of a protected animal’s injury or death.

The MBTA is even narrower: it prohibits direct killing or possession of migratory birds without a permit. Federal courts have rejected attempts to expand the MBTA to cover indirect or incidental actions that might contribute to bird mortality.

In short:  Federal wildlife laws regulate direct harm, not remote or speculative contributions to risk.


Why Feeding a Community Cat Is Not “Take”

Feeding a cat does not fall under any of the ESA’s prohibited actions. It is not killing, trapping, harassing, harming, or even interacting with a protected species. 

For feeding to legally qualify as “take,” a prosecutor would need to show:

  1. A specific listed bird was killed,
  2. By a specific cat,
  3. And your act of feeding that cat directly caused that bird’s death,
  4. In a way that was foreseeable and would not have occurred otherwise.

That is an impossible standard under current ESA jurisprudence.


Predation Is Considered an Independent Cause

Courts treat an animal’s natural predatory behavior—whether a cat, a dog, or a wild predator—as an intervening cause that breaks the chain of legal responsibility. Unless a person weaponizes the animal—such as training it to kill protected wildlife—the human cannot be held liable for the animal’s independent actions.

Feeding a cat is nothing close to training it to kill.


Federal Courts Have Repeatedly Rejected Indirect Liability

Several landmark cases make the needed causal chain absolutely clear:

  • Babbitt v. Sweet Home (1995): ESA harm requires proximate causation. Speculative or indirect effects do not qualify.
  • Strahan v. Coxe (1997): Liability only when the state’s permitted fishing gear directly entangled endangered whales.
  • Loggerhead Turtle v. Volusia County (1998): ESA requires demonstrable injury directly caused by the challenged action.
  • Defenders of Wildlife v. EPA: Courts reject claims where the causal chain is too attenuated.
  • MBTA cases (CITGO, Newton County): MBTA prohibits direct killing, not incidental or indirect actions.

If constructing a building, approving pesticides, authorizing development, or managing public lighting is too indirect to qualify as “take” without clear, proven harm, then feeding a cat certainly is.


No Federal Agency Has Ever Prosecuted a Cat Feeder

In more than 50 years of ESA enforcement:

  • The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS)
  • The U.S. Department of Justice
  • State wildlife agencies

have never charged anyone under ESA or MBTA for feeding a community cat, even in areas where sensitive seabird species nest.

If feeding cats constituted take, USFWS would already issue warnings, guidance, or enforcement actions. It has issued none.


The Science Underscores It: Feeding Does Not Increase Predation

Multiple peer-reviewed studies show that:

  • Fed cats hunt less, not more.
  • Starving cats expand their hunting range and kill wildlife at higher rates.
  • Managed feeding combined with TNR reduces predation pressure, disease prevalence, and roaming.

This further undermines any claim that feeding a cat near bird habitat is a foreseeable cause of bird mortality.

 

Local Feeding Bans Are Local Policy—Not Federal Wildlife Law

Counties may choose to regulate feeding for their own reasons, but local feeding bans have no connection to the ESA or MBTA. Violating a county ordinance is not a federal wildlife crime. Federal wildlife law plays no role in restricting feeding activities.

 

Bottom Line: Feeding Cats Is Not “Take.” It Is Not an ESA Violation. It Is Not an MBTA Violation.

No case law supports treating cat feeding as a Take.

No federal agency interprets it as Take.

No prosecution has ever occurred.

Claims that cat caretakers are violating federal wildlife law by feeding animals are incorrect, legally unsupportable, and contrary to decades of precedent.

 

A More Productive Path Forward

Responsible cat management—TNR, vaccination, stable feeding stations, spay/neuter campaigns, and relocating cats away from sensitive nesting sites—is the scientifically validated and ethically grounded approach. It protects both wildlife and community animals.

Legal misinformation only inflames conflict.
Clear understanding supports solutions.

 

PLEASE CLICK HERE TO DONATE NOW - LET'S MAKE SURE CAT SUPPORTERS GET ELECTED TO HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL

..

About The Author

Greg Puʻuwai Aloha Baker holds an MBA and a College Certificate in Community Cat Management from the University of the Pacific, a program focused on effective, humane methods to stabilize and reduce free-roaming cat populations. The program was taught by Stacey LeBaron, a nationally recognized expert with over 30 years of experience in community cat management, shelter operations, and TNR (Trap-Neuter-Return). LeBaron is best known for her leadership in the groundbreaking Newburyport, Massachusetts TNR project that successfully reduced a waterfront colony of 300 cats to zero by 2009, and for founding CommunityCatsPodcast.com.

Greg has been deeply involved in cat rescue and advocacy for more than five years, co-managing multiple community cat colonies in Pāhoa on the Big Island of Hawaiʻi as well as creating a mini-cat sanctuary for hard to adopt Community Cats. Through consistent TNR work, he has personally trapped, neutered, and returned over 70 cats. He also volunteers regularly at PetFix Spay/Neuter MASH events, providing critical support for both cats and dogs.

Greg’s commitment to humane cat management extends to policy advocacy. He founded Hawaiʻi Animal Advocacy Organization and led community efforts opposing the Hawaiʻi County Cat Feeding Ban (Bill 51), gathering over 7,500 petition signatures to defend community-based, science-driven animal welfare practices.