Up For Discussion - Nonnative Species - International Wildlife Rehabilitation Council

Opossum L reed — Virginia Opossum (Didelphis virginiana) is non-native in British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, and California. Photo Credit L Reed

Up For Discussion

The upcoming issue of JWR will feature a Letter to the Editor questioning the ethics of treating and releasing non-native, invasive species. In this particular case, the species in question is Virginia opossums in California (introduced in 1910, according to Jameson & Peeters (California Mammals, University of California Press, 1988)). But rehabilitators across the U.S. are familiar with the dilemma of caring for European starlings and English (house) sparrows. And this concern is not limited to North America. In Australia the problem may be European rabbits, red foxes, and cane toads. Africa’s invasive species include the crab-eating macaque, grey squirrels, and Canada geese; the grey squirrel has also been introduced to central Europe, along with California quail and the bullfrog. Add to the list beaver in South America, raccoons and nutria in Asia.

_MG_5619 — Rock Pigeon (Columba livia) Photo Credit Bob Elko

Some rehabilitators believe that when an invasive species arrives for treatment the most humane and ethical protocol for all parties is to euthanize the animal. They may point out that rehabilitators have enough trouble garnering respect from the more established wildlife professions without engaging in activities that undermine efforts to support native wildlife populations. Others argue even an exotic species offers an opportunity to educate the public—about empathy AND environmental issues. Then there is the very practical concern over possible bad PR for a rehabilitation organization that depends on donations to operate getting “caught” euthanizing some of its patients simply because they are not deemed “worthy” of care.

Obviously, this is an enormous issue that needs to be faced and discussed by the wildlife rehabilitation community.

What are your thoughts on this matter?

What is the most important issue for rehabilitators to address—the health of the individual, the health of the population, or the health of the ecosystem?

Do you (if home-based) or your organization (if affiliated with a rehab center) have an established protocol for dealing with non-native wildlife species?

If so, what is it, and how did you come to this decision?

If not, why not?

Submit your responses to Kieran Lindsay, JWR Editor at jwr.editor@theiwrc.org

Comments (2)

David

May 22, 2012

In the summer, 1980 issue of our Journal, Gary Bogue wrote this:

Sooner or later, this is a question that all wildlife rehab centers must deal with to their own satisfaction.

In the one I work with, we have a policy that says if someone brings in a wild creature to us for care, we’ll treat it to the best of our ability. Be it eagle, deer… or starling. Who are we to tell a person who has driven 50 miles, clutching a bleeding starling, that it’s not on our list? A life is a life.

Besides, there are literally millions of house sparrows and starlings in this country. Compared to the few you might treat, there’s no comparison. So, since whether you treat them or not has nothing to do with whether the species survives or not, why not treat them?

I guess the bigger question is are you in the game management business or the business of treating hurt animals?

Lloyd

May 14, 2012

I believe that Wildlife rehabilitators have an obligation (not only) to care for the animals in their care but also the environment in which those animals live. Release of exotic animals into an ecosystem is almost always detrimental to that system and the animals which inhabit it. I am fortunate to live and rehab in Florida. Here, our State agency has clearly made it illegal to release any animal that is not native to the area.
In 1592 (when Florida was still a colony of Spain) the Spanish goverment conducted a biological survey of the animals that lived here at that time. Since this was done before Europeans began to occupy the area, it is accepted that anything that was on that list is a native species and anything that is not has been introduced here by the actions of humans.
We get in a lot of animals that are very popular in the pet trade (Such as psitacines). When possible, we will try to place those species that come in for care. But we also live in an environment that has become one of the leading examples of the damage of exotics. Almost everything thrives in South Florida and the release of exotics into our environment has resulted in the decimation of many of the species of our native wildlife. In the everglades, exotic snakes have reduced the populations of our native small mammals by up to 90%. In our oceans lionfish are accelerating the destruction of coral reef by killing off the native fish vital to the reefs survival. In our lakes and canals, muscovy ducks push out the native water birds by reproducing at a rate of ten times greater than that of the native species. At Wildlife Rescue of Dade County there is no debate. We will never release any species, known to be exotic into the wild.
We do have a question about what to do for animals which have migrated into our area on their own. We have Cattle egrets that have come here from Africa and Coyotes that expanded their territories into our state. What to do about those animals who are here not because of the actions of people, but who have migrated here on their own?

Up For Discussion – Nonnative Species

David

Lloyd

Leave a Reply