"Corsica is a paradise for stray cattle" (RENUCCI, 1970). In this territory, animals enjoy a freedom that is well-known in popular culture but not always well understood. Indeed, Corsican husbandry is characterised by ancestral pastoral practices that are far removed from the idea of a form of indolence on the part of the shepherds (RAVIS-GIORDANI, 1975) that can convey the Epinal image relating to the place of livestock on the island. Formerly confined to rural and mountain areas, and always under surveillance and control, animals now move freely on roads, beaches, in the heart of villages and now in the island's main towns, Bastia and Ajaccio. The phenomenon is sufficiently important to be the subject of regular media coverage, denouncing the material and human damage they cause on the roads and even in the urban centres. The physical accidents they cause, as well as the health status of these animals that could be vectors of bovine tuberculosis, are deemed to constitute a public health and safety problem. These animals - whose numbers are difficult to quantify but are thought to number several thousand or even ten thousand - are then referred to as "strays". However, if such a category of administrative and police origin (divagant in French) seems appropriate for qualifying and managing accidental situations of livestock escaping from a corral, it is much less so when it comes to dealing with stray cattle in Corsica, particularly in urban areas. The presence of cattle in towns produces a particularly original magnifying effect for examining town/countryside relations through the prism of animal mobility. Indeed, it is not exactly the category of "wild" that is used to apprehend these "farm" animals apparently free to roam wherever they please. Nor is it exactly the category of "domestic" as it is usually understood in urban spaces populated by pets (mainly dogs and cats) that is mobilised. Thus, the straying of livestock generates an uncomfortable blurring of the usual categories of understanding and treatment of issues relating to the 'rightful place' (MAUZ, 2002) of animals in anthropised spaces such as cities, where certain objects, certain humans and certain animals (GULLO et al., 1998; DAVIS, 2000; JEROLMACK, 2008; PEARSON, 2021) are synonymous with disorder (DOUGLAS, 1966) and are the object of long-standing and constant efforts to exclude them (PHILO, 1995). Indeed, there seems to be a consensus that livestock in cities are "out of place". However, despite this unanimous observation, the embarrassment of humans and public authorities in proposing solutions and coordinating to act reflects the difficulties in agreeing on the legitimacy and place of these animals. This article analyses the way in which the qualification of so-called "stray animals" and the problematisation of their presence and mobility recharacterise urban and rural spaces and the activities of those who are supposed to look after them. By questioning the spaces travelled and the boundaries crossed by animals, we understand the way in which nature/culture and urban/rural boundaries are designed and transgressed, and how certain actors act to maintain or limit these transgressions. To do this, we rely on a survey conducted between December 2021 and December 2022, during which twenty-six interviews were conducted with farmers, residents and elected officials of urban and rural municipalities, representatives of nature management organisations, the hunting federation, animal protection NGO, victims' associations, and representatives of public order (municipal police). We also relied on a review of the press, mainly regional but also including some national media, on the issue of animal "straying" in Corsica. The thematic analysis of the interviews and the media treatment of the problem made it possible to analyse the way in which are co-constructed and collectively negotiated, on the one hand, the qualification of stray animals at the interface between wild and domestic, and on the other, the qualification of spaces at the interface between town and countryside. We then show that these animals gravitate in the grey zones of modernity and circulate in territories where they have no place anywhere.