Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T22:29:48.573Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors that can be used to predict release rates for wildlife casualties

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

SE Molony ,
PJ Baker ,
L Garland ,
IC Cuthill  and
S Harris
SE Molony
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 IUG, UK
PJ Baker
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 IUG, UK
L Garland
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 IUG, UK
IC Cuthill
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 IUG, UK
S Harris*
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 IUG, UK
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: s.harris@bristol.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Of the wildlife casualties admitted to rehabilitation centres in England, less than half are subsequently released back into the wild. If the factors associated with survival within rehabilitation centres can be determined, they may be used to focus efforts on individuals with high chances of successful recovery, and thus improve welfare by devoting resources to those animals that are more likely to benefit. We analysed the medical record cards of eight species admitted to four wildlife rehabilitation centres run by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals between 2000-2004 to determine those factors that affected the chance of survival in care until release, and whether trends in predictive factors occurred across taxonomic groups. We found that the most important predictive factor, across all species, was the severity of the symptoms of injury or illness. Factors commonly used as important indicators of rehabilitation success in published practice guidelines, such as mass and age, were not found to affect survival significantly. Our results highlight the importance of triage based on clinical diagnosis as soon as a wildlife casualty is admitted, and indicate that although the ethos of many rehabilitation centres is to attempt the treatment of all wildlife casualties, the attempted treatment of those with severe injuries may be adversely affecting welfare by prolonging suffering.

Keywords

animal welfarepredictive factorsrehabilitationsurvivaltriagewildlife casualties
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 16 , Issue 3 , August 2007 , pp. 361 - 367
Copyright
© 2007 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ben-David, M, Blundell, GM and Blake, JE 2002 Post-release survival of river otters: effects of exposure to crude oil and captivity. Journal of Wildlife Management 66: 1208–1223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Best, D and Mullineaux, E 2003 Basic principles of treating wildlife casualties. In: Mullineaux, E, Best, D & Cooper, JE (eds) BSAVA Manual of Wildlife Casualties pp 6–29. British Small Animal Veterinary Association: Gloucester, UKGoogle Scholar
Blackmer, R, Casey, S and Casey, A 1997 Beyond conventional allopathic medicine: Options considered by wildlife rehabilitators. Journal of Wildlife Rehabilitation 20: 7–13Google Scholar
Boissy, A 1995 Fear and fearfulness in animals. Quarterly Review of Biology 70: 165–191CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carlstead, K 1996 Effects of captivity on the behaviour of wild mammals. In Kleiman, DF, Allen, ME, Thompson, KV & Lumpkin, S (eds) Wild Mammals in Captivity: Principles and Techniques pp 317–333. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, USA and London, UKGoogle Scholar
Cousquer, G 2005 Dealing with the roadside casualty badger. In Practice 27: 264–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fajardo, I, Babiloni, G and Miranda, Y 2000 Rehabilitated and wild barn owls (Tyto alba): dispersal, life expectancy and mortality in Spain. Biological Conservation 94: 287–295Google Scholar
International Wildlife Rehabilitation Council Home page. http://www.iwrc-online.org/ (accessed August 2005)Google Scholar
Kirkwood, JK 2003 Introduction: wildlife casualties and the veterinary surgeon. In: Mullineaux, E, Best, D & Cooper, JE (eds) BSAVA Manual of Wildlife Casualties pp 1–6. British Small Animal Veterinary Association: Gloucester, UKGoogle Scholar
Kirkwood, JK and Best, D 1998 Treatment and rehabilitation of wildlife casualties: legal and ethical aspects. In practice 20: 214–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkwood, JK and Sainsbury, AW 1996 Ethics of interventions for the welfare of free-living wild animals. Animal Welfare 5: 235–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lander, ME, Harvey, JT and Gullard, FMD 2003 Hematology and serum chemistry comparisons between free-ranging and rehabilitated harbour seal (Phoca vitulina richardsi) pups. Journal of Wildife Diseases 39: 600–609CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McArthur, RA, Geist, V and Johnston, RH 1986 Cardiac responses of bighorn sheep to trapping and radio instrumentation. Canadian Journal of Zoology 64: 1197–1200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenzie, S and Deane, EM 2005 Faecal corticosteroid levels as an indicator of well-being in the tammar wallaby, Macropus eugenii. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology A 140: 81–87CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Molony, SE, Dowding, CV, Baker, PJ, Cuthill, IC and Harris, S 2006 The effect of translocation and temporary captivity on wildlife rehabilitation success: an experimental study using European hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus). Biological Conservation 130: 530–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullineaux, E, Best, D and Cooper, JE 2003 BSAVA Manual of Wildlife Casualties. British Small Animal Veterinary Association: Gloucester, UKGoogle Scholar
Quinn, GP and Keough, MJ 2002 Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overskuag, K, Bolstad, J, Sunde, P and Oien, I 1999 Fledgling behaviour and survival in northern Tawny Owls. Condor 101: 169–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ringsby, T, Saether, B and Solberg, E 1998 Factors affecting juvenile survival in House Sparrow Passer domesticus. Journal of Avian Biology 29: 241–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, CPJ and Harris, S 1995a The condition and survival after release of captive-reared fox cubs. Animal Welfare 4: 281–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, CPJ and Harris, S 1995b The behaviour after release of captive-reared fox cubs. Animal Welfare 4: 295–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, VR and King, MA 2003 Otters. In: Mullineaux, E, Best, D & Cooper, JE (eds) BSAVA Manual of Wildlife Casualties pp 137–147. British Small Animal Veterinary Association: Gloucester, UKGoogle Scholar
Stocker, L 2005 Practical Wildlife Care, second edition. Blackwell Publishing Ltd: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
Wingfield, JC, Hunt, K, Breuner, C, Dunlap, K, Fowler, GS, Freed, L and Lepson, J 1997 Environmental stress, field endocrinology, and conservation biology. In: Clemmons, JR and Buchholz, R (eds) Behavioral approaches to conservation in the wild pp 262–276. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar