Imagine you\u2019re driving down a windy road when you spot an injured possum.<\/p>\n
Your instincts might tell you to hit the brakes, check what\u2019s wrong and bundle it into your car.<\/p>\n
Research shows<\/a> many of us want to help wild animals in distress. This may be out of empathy, obligation or simply wanting to do the right thing.<\/p>\n But as Australia rapidly responds to its first cases of H5N1 bird flu<\/a>, authorities are urging the public to avoid contact<\/a> with sick or dying wildlife. This conflicts with our innate desire to help. <\/p>\n Our new research<\/a> shows why \u201crescuing\u201d a wild animal in distress, despite best intentions, can sometimes lead to unintended consequences.<\/p>\n An ethical challenge<\/p>\n H5N1 bird flu has finally reached all continents, arriving on Australian shores in June via a sick seabird<\/a>. As of Thursday, there are 17 confirmed cases<\/a> in Australia.<\/p>\n This deadly virus is highly infectious and can spread between<\/a> birds, many mammals and some kinds of livestock, zoo animals and pets. It rarely infects<\/a> humans. <\/p>\n Since the first H5N1 detection in Australia, authorities have consistently asked the public to \u201cavoid, record and report<\/a>\u201d any sick or dead animals. <\/p>\n This message seems simple. But it aims to balance a complex mix of factors including public health, animal biosecurity and wildlife conservation<\/a>.<\/p>\n And it begs the question, should we ever rescue ill or injured wildlife?<\/p>\n Read more: What we studied<\/p>\n In our new paper<\/a>, we used several case studies to illustrate how \u201csaving\u201d distressed wildlife may lead to some complicated problems.<\/p>\n Let\u2019s unpack some of them.<\/p>\n An orphaned magpie<\/p>\n In Australia, hand-rearing<\/a> orphaned birds and marsupials is one of the most common ways we rescue wildlife. This process typically involves providing an animal with a makeshift nest or pouch, and feeding it an artificial diet. It also requires close contact between the caregiver and the animal.<\/p>\n In many cases, hand-rearing saves animals that would otherwise struggle to survive. However, not all young animals found alone<\/a> need our help. For many species, the death of offspring is a natural part<\/a> of life in the wild.<\/p>\n Hand-rearing comes with certain risks. Hand-reared animals may become \u201cimprinted<\/a>\u201d on humans, whereby they form a strong, long-lasting social attachment to the species that reared them. This may mean they lose their \u201cwildness<\/a>\u201d and fail to develop the behaviours and skills<\/a> needed to survive in the wild.<\/p>\n Read more: We see this with rescued magpies. There are several well-known cases<\/a> of people raising rescued magpies alongside dogs and other predatory species, without the necessary permits. <\/p>\n Such activities are illegal in Australia, and highlight the risks of keeping wild animals in captivity for extended periods. Poor fitness, unsuitable nutrition and the harmful perception that wildlife make suitable pets are just three of these risks. These activities can also create conflicts with environmental authorities<\/a> and wildlife advocates<\/a>.<\/p>\n A sick wombat<\/p>\n Research suggests<\/a> demand for wildlfe rescue services are increasing. Generally, wildlife carers and authorities aim to treat sick or distressed animals by bringing them into temporary captivity. Sometimes there are calls to provide treatments to animals remaining in the wild. However, this is not always possible or straightforward.<\/p>\n Take the bare-nosed wombat<\/a>, for example, a species that\u2019s found across south-eastern Australia. These wombats are susceptible to sarcoptic mange<\/a>, a severe skin disease<\/a> that can be fatal if left untreated. <\/p>\n Read more: It\u2019s possible to treat affected wombats in the field, but we can also capture and bring them into care. In some cases, euthanasia may be necessary. Each approach comes with certain risks and benefits. And the jury is still out<\/a> as to what kind of treatment is best from an animal welfare perspective.<\/p>\n Treating unwell animals in the wild can endanger the health of other species if they share the same habitat. For instance, certain parasite treatments \u2013 such as moxidectin and fluralaner \u2013 may be effective to kill mites on wombats. However, they may contaminate<\/a> the broader ecosystem. <\/p>\n In the wild, it\u2019s difficult to monitor animals for side effects and locate any that need additional treatment. It\u2019s also harder to curb the spread<\/a> of disease within a population.<\/p>\n A vulnerable koala<\/p>\n Now let\u2019s consider a koala that\u2019s been injured by a bushfire. It may be possible to treat it for mild burns and smoke inhalation in care. It will also need a steady supply of food, namely the leaves of particular eucalyptus trees<\/a>. But collecting large amounts of these leaves for hospitalised animals may mean surviving koalas in the fireground go hungry.<\/p>\n Read more: So, what should I do instead?<\/p>\n Deciding whether to help a wild animal \u2013 and how best to treat it if you do \u2013 requires careful deliberation, training and ethical judgement.<\/p>\n Wild animals can\u2019t tell us<\/a> whether they want help or not. And animals may get more stressed<\/a> if they are handled or placed in captivity.<\/p>\n Licensed wildlife rehabilitators, wildlife veterinarians and government officers are among those who have the tough job of trying to compassionately balance many important factors. These include animal welfare, human safety, environmental health and the responsible use of limited resources. <\/p>\n Those involved in wildlife care must hone their ethical decision-making skills. \u201cRescuing\u201d an animal may seem simple, but often involves making complex choices. <\/p>\n So before attempting to help a wild animal, it\u2019s best to stop, think and seek advice from those with the necessary experience and expertise.<\/p>\n
\n Bird flu is here. Can we stop the spread?<\/a><\/p>\n
\n Saving burned or injured animals draws our sympathy. But some don\u2019t survive after release. Here\u2019s why<\/a><\/p>\n
\n Disease in the dirt: how mange-causing mites decimated a Tasmanian wombat population<\/a><\/p>\n
\n Hundreds of animals were rescued after the Black Summer bushfires \u2013 but how many actually survived?<\/a><\/p>\n