Abstract
AbstractWildlife rehabilitation is a critical part of animal welfare that contributes to species conservation. Despite the resources that go into rehabilitation, how animals fare after release from care is unknown. This is particularly true for cryptic arboreal species where specialist diets in care and low detectability in the wild present challenges for both care and post-release monitoring. We evaluated post-release outcomes for koalas and assessed if koalas were fed appropriately while in care. We monitored 36 koalas that had experienced one of three categories of medical intervention (none, minor, major) during rehabilitation. We examined the drivers of (i) koala survival and (ii) movements post-release, and (iii) evaluated variation between the species of browse fed in care versus browse selected by koalas in-situ. Overall, the post release survival rate of koalas was 58.5%, with only koalas that received medical intervention experiencing mortality. A critical threshold for mortality occurred at two weeks post-release and mortality was related to the measurable indicators of low body condition and poor climbing ability at time of release. In the month following their release, animals translocated furthest from their capture point moved the furthest. There was poor overlap between the tree species that koalas were fed in care and those they utilized post-release. We provide recommendations to address critical gaps in rehabilitation practices, as well as priorities for monitoring animals post-release to improve outcomes for arboreal folivores.
Funder
New South Wales Department of Planning and Environment
International Fund for Animal Welfare
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference94 articles.
1. Miller, E. A. Minimum standards for wildlife rehabilitation. (International Wildlife Rehabilitation Council. National Wildlife Rehabilitators’ Association (U.S.), 2012).
2. Pacioni, C. et al. Augmenting the conservation value of rehabilitated wildlife by integrating genetics and population modeling in the post-rehabilitation decision process. Curr. Zool. 64, 593–601 (2018).
3. Paterson, J. E., Carstairs, S. & Davy, C. M. Population-level effects of wildlife rehabilitation and release vary with life-history strategy. J. Nat. Conserv. 61, 125983 (2021).
4. Pyke, G. H. & Szabo, J. K. Conservation and the 4 Rs, which are rescue, rehabilitation, release, and research. Conserv. Biol. 32, 50–59 (2018).
5. Kirkwood, J. K. & Sainsbury, A. W. Ethics of interventions for the welfare of free-living wild animals. Anim. Welf. 5, 235–243 (1996).
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献