....and also about mynas and other invaders 

Invasive species constitute one of the most severe threats to biodiversity.
Anyone who is concerned about species richness and environmental quality in general (- all of us) should be aware of the high risk posed by the invasion of new species into their environment. Despite the above, I am surprised by the amount and nature of the responses published whenever the subject of domestic cats comes up for discussion in any public forum, and from members of the academic community in particular, for two reasons:
The first is the lack of a sufficient scientific basis for the claims, in the form of studies showing direct competition between invasive species and local species in Israel. The invasion of a bird species in Gush Dan is not equivalent to the invasion of a species into an isolated area on an island in the Pacific Ocean; therefore, studies conducted in Israel are needed (see the response on the matter by biologist Dr. Nir Sapir). The second reason is the sweeping mobilization to fight domestic cats, alongside the disregard by some of those fighting them for other environmental problems.
Cats hunt wild animals in fairly high numbers, a subject that has also been studied in Israel (A cat at home, a leopard outside). Beyond the harm caused by the direct hunting of wild animals, cats are also dangerous to the natural population of the wildcat species, since they create hybrids, with far-reaching effects: the lifestyles of the hybrid cats, including activity hours, differ from those of wildcats, so natural species suddenly face a super-predator that they are not adapted to deal with.

Still, it is interesting that when a cat catches an animal in a city park, it is considered a threat to wildlife, whereas if it were a bat, we would grant it the argument that it was engaged in legal and legitimate biological pest control. Cats do indeed eliminate an enormous number of wild animals (such as mice and rats) in populated areas, but if they did not— we would probably be forced to look for alternative solutions for this purpose, as we do in the case of insects. On biological control of mosquitoes using insectivorous bats, in joint projects by researchers from Tel Aviv University and the Ministry of Environmental Protection, one can read at the following link:
Biological control of mosquitoes using insectivorous bats in the city of Ramat Gan
This is a welcome project that one can only hope will become more common, which does not contradict the fact that we are encouraging the proliferation of a bat species whose effects on local species we are probably unaware of. After a little data had been collected in the field system, we found that in central Israel there are bat species whose presence in the area we were not even aware of, and it seems that the word "perhaps" is unnecessary. This example in no way diminishes the importance of the project or the harm caused by cats; it is brought here to highlight the fact that when it comes to cats, our sensitivity to the disruption of the natural balance rises dramatically. I allow myself to formulate and write a few words about cats, but nature conservation is a matter for professionals. Therefore, we turn to authoritative sources to examine the status of domestic cats in relation to burning nature-conservation issues.

In the Red Book of Vertebrates in Israel, domestic cats are mentioned only 4 times. One of them, incidentally, is in the context of the golden spiny mouse. There may be additional studies, perhaps even many observations of cats preying on squirrels in Mount Hermon (there are none), but if one wishes to mobilize public support for the fight against domestic cats, the findings should be published and brought to all our attention. Until then, we can conclude that, according to what we know, in the race for species extinction the domestic cat does not rank among the top places at all. An examination of nature-conservation struggles in Israel reveals that the cats’ relative share in them is questionable (...). As for habitat destruction, one cannot blame cats, for example, for the quarrying of sand at Samar. In terms of management and species protection, cats are not responsible for the criminal treatment of fruit bats or cormorants in fishponds. It is interesting that, compared with the four species mentioned in the Red Book, in a quick search I conducted in the archive of the mailing list of the Zoological Society I found about a million messages devoted to domestic cats, a number roughly a million times greater than the number of people present at the demonstration in support of the Samar sands that took place in Jerusalem.

With regard to invasive species, one must distinguish between the private and the public spheres.
Whoever finds an abandoned kitten and cares for it (or worse— a myna chick), is likely to contribute more to nature conservation than someone who abandoned it because it is an invasive species. I admit I am somewhat tired of reading and searching for articles in education, so I leave it to anyone interested to do a quick search on the web; they will soon find many sources of information about the importance of fostering the connection between youth and animals, as well as the potential harm inherent in the way invasive species and their handling are presented. In a broader view, it seems that what threatens nature in the country more than domestic cats are the brutality and irresponsibility of officeholders, and to cultivate those there is no better means than domestic animals.

The practical meaning of "separating the private sphere from the public sphere" is professionalism.
I expect a teacher whose students found a rose-ringed parakeet chick or an injured puppy to guide them on how to care for it, not to lecture them about invasive species. I expect a government authority to set professional policy and act according to the law. Regrettably, this sometimes also includes killing animals. If it acts professionally, it will reduce this to the minimum possible.
The Society for the Protection of Nature did not establish an information system that receives reports and sightings from the public, but it hurried to do so in the name of the nation's defense against invasive species. A student who saw a swift lizard on a hike is invited to keep the information to himself/herself (no longer..), whereas with a myna he/she is asked to report it to the authorities.

In Israel, nature conservation and preventing animal suffering are fields standing at opposite poles, but this is not an absolute fact beyond dispute; they can be brought closer together and the gap narrowed. Perhaps this is the case in other countries and will come to prevail here as well, but as of today, the use of scientific (supposedly) arguments in implementing policy for the management of invasive animal species is nothing more than an excuse for criminal amateurism and the authorities’ failure to perform. Whoever defines themselves as an animal lover is also concerned for the fate of wild animals. They do not enjoy the sight of hungry cats scattered through the streets and act to prevent their multiplication. They are probably not a preferred candidate for a position requiring shooting stray dogs or for the committee selecting the Director General of the Authority, but as of today they are also very far from being the most severe threat to nature conservation.

Further reading:
The impact of domestic cats on wildlife and nature conservation /  Inbal Brickner-Brown