But the solution isn’t quite that straightforward, says Dr John Bradshaw, who has studied domestic cats since the mid-1980s. “In this country [the UK], the evidence that cats are causing any serious depletion in wildlife populations is pretty flimsy,” he explains. “That’s not to say they aren’t killing things. There are plenty of surveys that show they are. But the long-term effects of that have been difficult to find.”

Most species targeted by domestic cats will have lots of offspring, to counter the expectation that many will die before they reach adulthood.

“Cats aren’t very efficient hunters,” adds Bradshaw. Their prey is most likely already in a poor condition, dead or dying, when they catch it. “Really, focusing on the cat is counterproductive.”

To demonise cats, Bradshaw suggests, would distract from the real dangers to wildlife in the UK: loss of habitats, reduced availability of food and the increased use of pesticides and fertilisers. These threats were identified in the UK’s State of Nature report in 2016, which brought together data from more than 50 different organisations. Though Mittens may not be public enemy number one on our shores, elsewhere in the world cats aren’t off the hook.

The article then goes on to say that it might be more of an issue in the US, but my point is that you can't say "cat = danger to wildlife" as a universal truth that applies everywhere.