There is currently no clear agreement on how to relate geographically linked variation in morphology and genetics to the taxonomy and systematics of the widely distributed Wildcat (Felis silvestris) (Kitchener and Rees 2009). The latest phylogeographical analyses (Driscoll et al. 2007, 2009; Macdonald et al. 2010) suggest that the Wildcat consists of five subspecific groups and three traditional subspecies (Nowell and Jackson 1996, Stuart et al. 2013): including the recent recognition of the Southern African Wildcat (F. s. cafra Desmarest, 1822). Based on genetic, morphological and archaeological evidence, the familiar housecat was believed to have been domesticated from the Near Eastern Wildcat (F. s. lybica), probably 9,000-“10,000 years ago in the Fertile Crescent region (Vigne et al. 2004, Driscoll et al. 2007), coinciding with the first agricultural settlements (Driscoll et al. 2007, Macdonald et al. 2010). Although the domestic cat derived relatively recently from the Wildcat, in terms of biological processes and phylogeny, it can be taxonomically classified either as a subspecies (F. s. catus) of F. silvestris or as a separate species (F. catus) (Macdonald et al. 2010). Recent evidence supports the classification of domestic cats as genetically distinct from Wildcats (Driscoll et al. 2007). For the purposes of this assessment, although we recognise the potential validity of the Southern African Wildcat (F. s. cafra), we defer to the species level until further research can accurately delineate subspecific geographical boundaries.