Simple SummaryFree-roaming cats (domestic and feral) are known to negatively impact wildlife numbers in Australia and can also affect human health via zoonotic diseases. To help learn more about their outdoor movement, free-roaming cats in two local government areas (LGA) in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, Campbelltown (CT) and the Blue Mountains (BM), were monitored in this study using two different data gathering methods. The BM LGA contains high levels of National Park land compared to CT LGA, however, Campbelltown’s human population is more than double and its population density is approximately ten times higher than the BM region. Motion-capture cameras were installed on 100 properties (50 per LGA) to capture all animal movements over a two-month period and transect drives along pre-determined routes through both areas (four per LGA) were completed to directly observe free-roaming cats in residential areas. The results showed higher numbers of free-roaming cats in CT LGA, and higher levels of wildlife in the BM LGA. Free-roaming cats were seen roaming throughout the day. This data provide a baseline for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) NSW Keeping Cats Safe at Home program which is designed to reduce free-roaming cat numbers.AbstractFree-roaming cats pose a risk to their own health and welfare, as well as to the health and welfare of wildlife and humans. This study aimed to monitor and quantify area-specific free-roaming cat movement. Two local government areas (LGAs) in Greater Sydney were included, Campbelltown (CT) and the Blue Mountains (BM). Motion-capture cameras were installed on 100 volunteer properties (50 per LGA) to indirectly capture animal movements over two months. Transect drives were completed eight times (four per LGA) to directly observe roaming cats in residential areas. The cameras and transects both identified higher free-roaming cat numbers in CT (density of 0.31 cats per ha, resulting in an estimated abundance of 361 cats in the 1604 ha of residential area) than the BM (density of 0.21 cats per ha, resulting in an estimated abundance of 3365 cats in the 10,000 ha of residential area). More wildlife events were captured in the BM (total = 5580) than CT (total = 2697). However, there was no significant difference between CT and the BM for cat events (p= 0.11) or wildlife events (p= 0.32) observed via the cameras. Temporally, cats were observed via the cameras throughout the entire day with peaks at 9:30 am and 8:00 pm in the BM, and 7:00 am and 12:00 pm in CT. Overlaps in activity times were recorded for free-roaming cats with bandicoots (BM), possums (BM), and small mammals (BM and CT). This study demonstrates that camera monitoring on private property and transect drives are useful methods to quantify free-roaming cat abundance to inform cat management interventions.