Mr Forster also raised photos of the property produced as evidence in the District Court trial before Judge Grant Fraser.
The photos, taken by SPCA senior operations inspector Jim Boyd over three days, did not have dates or times attached to them.
That information had since been made available and should be compared with the film footage, Mr Forster argued.
The times the photos were taken was important because images from the third day of the operation could show evidence that had been moved ``innocently'' over the previous days.
Mr Forster also argued that some of the diseases some of the cats suffered, such as ringworm, were not significant and there was ``no suffering in the dog population''.
The couple kept the animals as part of a breeding operation.
Half of the animals were put down and about 50 cats were treated by a veterinary surgeon. Some of the cats took three years to recover fully.
The couple were sentenced to a fine of almost $28,000 to be paid to the SPCA and disqualified from owning or caring for animals for 20 years.
Crown lawyer Stephanie Edwards said today the timing of many of the photos taken after the first day was not significant because they were of outbuildings after the animals had been seized.
She defended the length of the animal ban.
"The message must be made clear to breeders that the failure to meet acceptable standards will have significant consequences for their livelihood.''
The Crown had sought a lifetime ban, but the legislation was not clear as to whether that was lawful, she said.
The fines imposed on the Balfours were at the "conservative'' end of the available range, she said.
The justices reserved their decision.