A section with key insights from PetRescue's 2025 guardian-assisted rehoming program report: Finding another way home

Challenges driving rehoming by species

We examined the challenges faced by guardians in keeping their pets, based on the type of pet they owned. While we expected to see differences based on behavioural factors and compliance challenges due to the specific behaviours and needs of different species, somewhat surprisingly challenges related to human-centric reasons also varied significantly across species.

Note: Values in the below tables are % of the species cohort.

Further detail is provided in Appendix Table A7: Behavioural challenges according to species of pets.

As expected, multiple behavioural challenges were either specific to or more prevalent in one species of pet.

Behavioural challenges

Dog guardians were more likely to report the following behaviour challenges as drivers for rehoming, compared to cat guardians: fearful and anxious behaviour (2.6x more likely to report), aggression (1.7x more likely to report), excitability, boisterousness, and excessively rough play (5.9x more likely to report), destructive behaviour (3x more likely to report) and escapism (6.2x more likely to report). Problematic barking is a species-specific behaviour (reported by 10.5% of dog guardians).

Conversely, cat guardians were more likely than dog guardians to report only two behaviours as drivers for rehoming: incompatibility with another pet (1.3x more likely to report) and litterbox issues (reported by 9.5% of cat guardians).

For other species of pet, the only behavioural challenges reported at notable frequency were incompatibility with other pets within the same household (reported by 15.1% of guardians) and aggression (reported by 5.3% of guardians).

Compliance with laws and regulations

Further detail is provided in Appendix Table A8: Compliance with local or state laws and regulations.

When examining barriers to continued pet ownership related to local and state laws, some notable patterns emerged based on the type of pet involved.

The only compliance challenge that occurred across all types of pets was the banning of the breed or species within the guardian’s area. Pets affected by bans included 11 roosters, 7 cats (cat bans in suburb/area), 6 rabbits (banned in Queensland), 3 birds other than chickens or roosters, 2 dogs (guardians moving overseas and unable to take their dogs due to breed restrictions), and 1 goldfish (banned in Tasmania).

Cat guardians were more likely than dog guardians to report containment challenges as drivers for rehoming, due to the introduction of containment requirements causing issues for cats that are used to outdoor access (2.5x more likely to report). Guardians typically reported that mandatory containment in their area negatively impacted the wellbeing of their cat that previously had access outdoors, or that moving to an area with 24/7 containment made it impossible to keep their cat, as the cat was not adapting to a full-time indoor lifestyle, resulting in other behavioural challenges such as litterbox issues.

Cat guardians were also more than 3x more likely than dog guardians to report having too many pets. For dog guardians, the only compliance challenge reported at higher frequency was problematic barking.

Challenges meeting pet’s needs

Cat guardians reported time constraint challenges less than half as often as dog guardians, and almost half as often compared to all other species. Similarly, they reported work-related challenges as barriers to continued ownership significantly less often than guardians of other pets. Cat guardians were more likely than guardians of other species to report moving and relocating (although at a similar rate to rabbits), entering a care facility (almost twice the frequency of dog guardians), age-related health challenges (1.3x more likely than dog guardians), death of the guardian (1.9x more likely than dog guardians), and human allergy (7.6x more likely as a driver for rehoming).

Dog guardians were less likely than cat guardians to report ‘never intended to keep’ (2.5x less likely) and ‘leaving the country’ (less than half the frequency) as reasons for rehoming. They were more likely than cat guardians to report unsuitable property for the pet’s needs (1.5x more likely) and, in general, all reasons related to changes in life circumstances were reported more frequently by dog guardians compared to other species, especially cats.

To download the full PDF boop here.

Jump to specific insights from the report: