A survey of current rehabilitation practices for native mammals in eastern Australia
Amanda J. Guy A C and Peter Banks BA School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia.
B School of Biological Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
C Corresponding author. Email: amanda.guy@hotmail.com.
Australian Mammalogy 34(1) 108-118 https://doi.org/10.1071/AM10046
Submitted: 25 November 2010 Accepted: 22 September 2011 Published: 5 December 2011
Abstract
Wildlife rehabilitation is common in Australia, with more than 30 mainly volunteer wildlife networks caring for thousands of animals annually. Here we report on a survey of 140 Australian wildlife rehabilitators that asked questions about their motivations, their methods of rehabilitation and their methods for release and post-release assessments. Most rehabilitators were motivated by animal welfare concerns and most animals coming into care were injured or orphaned wildlife. Most rehabilitators recorded each animal’s history, conducted a medical examination and briefly quarantined new arrivals; few conducted pre-release medical testing. Animal behaviour before release was a significant concern and >50% of respondents stated that animals exhibiting stereotypic behaviours were still released. However, there were no consistent criteria for the suitability of an animal for release, its release site, or which soft-release method to use. Fewer than 60% of respondents carried out post-release monitoring, which was typically <1 month, and only 40% could identify factors that contribute to release success. Predation hampers most reintroductions and is likely to reduce survival of rehabilitated wildlife, highlighting the need for strategies to reduce predation risk; 20% of respondents carried out antipredator training, though most in an unstructured way. The ability to carry out animal training, and monitor success was perceived to be limited by poor funding, poor access to monitoring equipment, little government support and time constraints. Researchers are encouraged to collaborate with wildlife volunteer networks in order to improve this potentially valuable conservation approach.
Additional keywords: conservation, reintroduction, wildlife.
References
Arnold, G. W., Steven, D. E., and Weeldenburg, J. R. (1989). The use of surrounding farmland by western grey kangaroos living in a remnant of wandoo woodland and their impact on crop production. Australian Wildlife Research 16, 85–93.| The use of surrounding farmland by western grey kangaroos living in a remnant of wandoo woodland and their impact on crop production.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cockburn, A. (1990). Sex ratio variation in marsupials. Australian Journal of Zoology 37, 467–479.
| Sex ratio variation in marsupials.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Collinson, R. F., and Anderson, J. L. (1984). Problems, principles and policy in the reintroduction of large mammals in conservation areas. Acta Zoologica Fennica 172, 169–170.
Delroy, L. B., Earl, J., Radbone, I., Robinson, A. C., and Hewett, M. (1986). The breeding and re-establishment of the brush-tailed bettong, Bettongia penicillata in South Australia. Australian Wildlife Research 13, 387–396.
| The breeding and re-establishment of the brush-tailed bettong, Bettongia penicillata in South Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Department of Environment and Heritage (2001). Australia State of the Environment Report 2001. Australian Government, Canberra.
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (2010). Native fauna. Government of South Australia
Department of Environment and Resource Management (1992). Code of practice for the care of orphaned, sick or injured protected animals by wildlife care volunteers. Department of Environment and Resource Management Queensland, Brisbane
Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (2008). Why can’t you keep other native animals – like quolls or sugar gliders – as pets? NSW Government.
Hardman, B., and Moro, D. (2006). Importance of diurnal refugia to a hare-wallaby reintroduction in Western Australia. Wildlife Research 33, 355–359.
| Importance of diurnal refugia to a hare-wallaby reintroduction in Western Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hauser, M. D. (1988). How infant vervet monkeys learn to recognize starling alarm calls: the role of experience. Behaviour 105, 187–201.
| How infant vervet monkeys learn to recognize starling alarm calls: the role of experience.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Johnson, C. N., and Isaac, J. (2009). Body mass and extinction risk in Australian marsupials: the ‘Critical Weight Range’ revisited. Austral Ecology 34, 35–40.
| Body mass and extinction risk in Australian marsupials: the ‘Critical Weight Range’ revisited.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Mason, G., Clubb, R., Latham, N., and Vickery, S. (2007). Why and how should we use environmental enrichment to tackle stereotypic behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 102, 163–188.
| Why and how should we use environmental enrichment to tackle stereotypic behaviour.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Mathews, F., Moro, D., Strachan, R., Gelling, M., and Buller, N. (2006). Health surveillance in wildlife reintroductions. Biological Conservation 131, 338–347.
| Health surveillance in wildlife reintroductions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
McLean, I. G., Lundie-Jenkins, G., and Jarman, P. J. (1996). Teaching an endangered mammal to recognize predators. Biological Conservation 75, 51–62.
| Teaching an endangered mammal to recognize predators.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
McLean, I. G., Schmitt, N. T., Jarman, P. J., Duncan, C., and Wynne, C. D. I. (2000). Learning for life: training marsupials to recognise introduced predators. Behaviour 137, 1361–1376.
| Learning for life: training marsupials to recognise introduced predators.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Minister for Agriculture (2001). Code of practice for the welfare of wildlife during rehabilitation. Victorian Government.
Minister for Environment and Conservation (2010). South Australia Animal Welfare Act 1985, Version 1.2.2010. Government of South Australia.
Molony, S. E., Dowding, C. V., Baker, P. J., Cuthill, I. C., 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, 530–537.
| The effect of translocation and temporary captivity on wildlife rehabilitation success: an experimental study using European hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Piggott, M. P., Banks, S. C., and Taylor, A. C. (2006). Population structure of brush-tailed rock-wallaby (Petrogale penicillata) colonies inferred from analysis of faecal DNA. Molecular Ecology 15, 93–105.
| Population structure of brush-tailed rock-wallaby (Petrogale penicillata) colonies inferred from analysis of faecal DNA.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD28XitVGkt78%3D&md5=79c172ec0976d6dcee70cdc751dae045CAS |
Protected Areas Policy and Programs Branch Parks and Wildlife Division (2010). Rehabilitation of Protected Fauna Policy. Department of Environment, Sydney.
Richards, J. (2007). Twelve years of mammal re-introductions and introductions by the Australian Wildlife Conservancy. Re-introduction news 26, 43–45.
Robertson, H. M. (2007). Wildlife Conservation and Perth Zoo. In ‘National Wildlife Rehabilitation Conference’.
Serena, M. (1995). Reintroduction Biology of Australian and New Zealand Fauna. Sydney: Surrey Beatty and Sons.
Shier, D. M., and Owings, D. H. (2007). Effects of social learning on predator training and postrelease survival in juvenile black-tailed prairie dogs Cynomys ludovicianus. Animal Behaviour 73, 567–577.
| Effects of social learning on predator training and postrelease survival in juvenile black-tailed prairie dogs Cynomys ludovicianus.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Short, J., and Turner, B. (2000). Reintroduction of the burrowing bettong Bettongia lesueur (Marsupialia: Potoroidae) to mainland Australia. Biological Conservation 96, 185–196.
| Reintroduction of the burrowing bettong Bettongia lesueur (Marsupialia: Potoroidae) to mainland Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Short, J., Bradshaw, S. D., Giles, J., Prince, R. I. T., and Wilson, G. R. (1992). Reintroduction of macropods (Marsupialia: Macropoidea) in Australia – a review. Biological Conservation 62, 189–204.
| Reintroduction of macropods (Marsupialia: Macropoidea) in Australia – a review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
South Australian Murray–Darling Basin Natural Resources Management Board (2010). Living with wombats. South Australian Murray–Darling Basin Natural Resources Management Board.
Stow, A. J., Minarovic, N., Eymann, J., Cooper, D. W., and Webley, L. S. (2006). Genetic structure infers generally high philopatry and male-biased dispersal of brushtail possums (Trichosurus vulpecula) in urban Australia. Wildlife Research 33, 409–415.
| Genetic structure infers generally high philopatry and male-biased dispersal of brushtail possums (Trichosurus vulpecula) in urban Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
The State of Queensland Department of Environment and Resource Management (2010). Native animal pets. Queensland Government.
Wildcare (2010). Wildcare Australia. Available at http://www.wildcare.org.au/ [Accessed July 2010].
WIRES (2010). WIRES. Available at http://www.wires.org.au/ [Accessed July 2010]
Zenger, K. R., Eldridge, M. D. B., and Cooper, D. W. (2003). Intraspecific variation, sex-biased dispersal and phylogeography of the eastern grey kangaroo (Macropus giganteus). Heredity 91, 153–162.
| Intraspecific variation, sex-biased dispersal and phylogeography of the eastern grey kangaroo (Macropus giganteus).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3sXlslKju74%3D&md5=878678ee3a5e4a297875aed4f0437fb4CAS |
