ANIMAL WELFARE AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
The impact of bushfires on the welfare of wildlife occurs at various stages and may be naturogenic or anthropogenic. Exposure to fire may result in heat stress, burns, smoke inhalation and other injuries as animals flee from the fire.
After a fire, lack of water, food and shelter results in dehydration, starvation, exposure to temperature extremes and vulnerability to disease, predation or motor vehicle strike (Albery et al. 2021; Legge et al. 2023; Sher- wen et al. 2023; Webb et al. 2022). The need and desire for humans to intervene and rescue animals may result in additional physical and psychological harm from capture, handling, transport, housing, examination, treatment, rehabilitation and release (Sherwen et al. 2023). Although well meaning, these interventions often result in exacerbation and prolongation of pain and suffering, often compounded by poorly coordinated or executed wildlife emergency response; deficiencies in training and experience; inadequate equipment and facilities; lack of standardised, evidence-based protocols, standards and guidelines for assessment, triage, treatment, rehabilitation and feeding; emotions; influence of media; interpersonal or interorganisational conflicts and rivalry; self- or group promotion; and self-deployed volunteerism outside established incident management systems.Rescue, rehabilitation and release of wildlife is defined as ‘Taking wild animals that are injured, diseased or orphaned, and with veterinary support, provide humane care until they can be released to habitat from which they came, or are euthanased’ (see section 3.3.2). This definition is underpinned by two goals: to ensure that the welfare of individual animals is paramount at all stages and intervention does not perpetuate suffering; and to ensure that when released, there is no harm to the individual being released and to free-ranging conspecifics, sympatric species and ecosystems (see Chapter 4).
This definition and goals are particularly relevant to burn patients, where injuries may be extensive, painful and debilitating. Attempts at treatment in many cases perpetuates suffering and the long-term effects of the burns may result in permanent disability, rendering animals unreleasable. Only animals that are fully capable not only of surviving but thriving should be released.Early assessment and decision making must be made from an animal-centric perspective rather than based on human emotion and outside influences such expectations of carers, public funding bodies and the media. Compliance with the relevant jurisdiction’s wildlife codes of practice, guidelines and legislation is critically important when assessing and treating burn patients to ensure optimal welfare outcomes for these animals. Some of these codes of practice contain welfare-based standards that are enforceable by law.
Veterinary responsibility for welfare extends beyond the emergency treatment phase and must continue throughout the rehabilitation and prerelease phase. This can only be
achieved through fostering good relationships and trust in wildlife volunteers, who play a critical role in rescue, emergency care and rehabilitation of burn patients. Key areas for veterinary oversight during rehabilitation include compliance with established codes of practice; suitability of housing; biosecurity; access and dispensing of controlled drugs by non-veterinarians; lack of or inadequate analgesia; proximity to children and domestic animals; disturbance; and regular veterinary assessment.
An effective response to a bushfire or other natural disaster affecting wildlife relies on the cooperation and coordination of many people. Individuals and groups may have to make decisions based on incomplete information in an emotionally charged environment with a high level of public interest. Moral distress and interpersonal conflicts can arise from differing ethical viewpoints regarding the appropriateness of interventions, the relative value of species, the allocation of limited resources and philosophies regarding animal euthanasia.
Strategies for veterinary personnel to successfully navigate these complex situations include respectful and clear communication; honest consideration of motivations influencing actions; reliance on evidence, expertise and professional judgement; and clinical debriefing (Sherwen et al. 2023; M Campbell pers. comm.).• Alleviation and prevention of suffering must be the primary goal when assessing burn patients.
• Regular welfare re-assessment of burn patients by a veterinarian throughout the rehabilitation process is critically important.
• Treatment and management of wildlife burn patients by experienced wildlife veterinarians and nurses at dedicated wildlife hospitals significantly improves welfare outcomes and prognosis for return to the wild.
• Rehabilitation of wildlife burn patients by experienced wildlife volunteers who have a holistic and pragmatic approach to care and have a good working relationship with a wildlife- capable veterinarian, results in better welfare outcomes.
• Reluctance to euthanase wildlife burn victims that have a poor prognosis for return to the wild results in poor welfare outcomes.
• The treatment, rehabilitation and release of wildlife must comply with relevant federal, state and territory legislation and codes of practice (see Chapter 4).
2.