| Summary: | Wildlife rehabilitators have various levels of training, most relying on their
personal experience, while many also work to some degree with veterinarians.
Rehabilitators also operate within a regulatory framework created by government
agencies. Based on their own experience and training, these groups may have different
perceptions of the value of wildlife, of rehabilitation goals, and of its impediments.
Additionally, there is great scope for disagreement on numerous practice issues such as
methods of care and euthanasia. Disclosure of these value positions and issues is
important in resolving how stakeholders can work together more effectively to promote
the welfare of individual wildlife. Also, to assess the accomplishments and areas of
improvement for rehabilitation, it is important to identify what constitutes rehabilitation
success and determine how to effectively evaluate success. Therefore, this study aims to
describe rehabilitation goals, impediments, and issues, and discuss rehabilitation success
and its measures, among stakeholders. This is achieved through a comprehensive
survey, using interviews, questionnaires, and analysis of summary records. Participants
in all three groups saw the primary goals of rehabilitation as humane treatment and
public education; however, rehabilitators recognized a wider range of goals than others.
This may help to explain why, despite members of all groups identifying multiple
components of rehabilitation success, more rehabilitators had a broader view of success
than others. Rehabilitators further differed from other stakeholders when discussing
rehabilitation impediments; most participants cited money, however, over half the
rehabilitators also felt that a lack of non-monetary assistance or acknowledgement by
government were important impediments. Major disagreements exist on the care of nonnative
species and the use of non-releasable animals for education. Although consensus
was not achieved in all areas, consistent data recording and analysis, promotion of
existing care and euthanasia guidelines, and increased enforcement and care
assessments by a team of stakeholders, may serve to better inform practices and
decision-making within the rehabilitation community. Finally, rehabilitation success of
treating animals can be assessed by comparing facility operation and care methods to
accepted professional standards, while other aspects of the program, such as public
education, could be evaluated by surveying feedback. === Land and Food Systems, Faculty of === Graduate
|
|---|
