Welsh woman banned from owning cats after seven found living in faeces-strewn shed

A woman from south Wales has been banned from owning cats for five years after seven felines were found living in a faeces-strewn shed at her property.

Danielle Jenkins (D.O.B 9/11/1991), of Lynton Court, Abersychan, Pontypool, pleaded guilty to one offence under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 and appeared for sentencing at Newport Magistrates’ Court on March 6.

As well as the ban, the defendant was placed under a 12-month community order which requires her to complete 50 hours of unpaid work and undertake five Rehabilitation Activity Requirement (RAR) days.

The court heard that the RSPCA investigated after police passed on photographs and a video showing the conditions the cats were living in. When RSPCA animal rescue officers Danielle Randall and Kirsty Morgan went to the defendant’s home with a police officer on February 26 last year they found five ragdoll type cats and two black and white cats inside a stinking shed surrounded by their own faeces.

In a statement to the court, Animal Rescue Officer (ARO) Wilson said that the outer section of the shed was coated in faeces and urine stains and there was a small amount of water in a bowl for the animals.

RSPCA clinic

All seven cats were seized and taken to an RSPCA clinic.

The defendant was in prison at the time of the RSPCA’s visit, but later told the charity she had given relatives access to her property and they were going around to care for the animals there.

A vet who examined the cats said one female required dental surgery because she was suffering from gingivitis (gum inflammation) and a sore tooth. The other cats had no significant health issues, although one male ragdoll cat’s hair was matted.

The defendant was given credit for her guilty plea and her solicitor asked the court not to impose a disqualification as it was said “she did care for animals” – including two dogs she has owned for a number of years.

But the magistrates told the defendant: “These were terrible conditions which posed a risk to the health of the cats.”

The defendant was also told to pay a victim surcharge of £114 and a contribution to court costs of £400.

Two of the cats were previously signed over into the care of the RSPCA by the defendant and the court made an order for the other five cats to be signed over to the charity. They have spent time at an RSPCA approved-boarding facility and they will now be rehomed.