QUARANTINE AND HEALTH SCREENING

4.1 Quarantine

Quarantine is important in ex situ-breeding programs, both at establishment with the arrival of founder stock and for inter-institutional transfers. A period of 30 days has been recommended as a minimum standard duration (Woodford 2000); however, the DRA will generally guide the duration and level of isolation required for a given CT.

During the quarantine period animals typically undergo anaesthesia for comprehensive health evalua­tion, disease screening and application of a unique identi­fier such as a microchip transponder or ear tag. For CTs comprising direct wild to wild translocations, a period of in situ or ex situ quarantine maybe implemented. The duration of quarantine maybe determined by the length of time required for diagnostic testing to be completed or by the incubation period of specific diseases of concern. In addition to its obvious role as a disease mitigation strategy, quarantine also provides a period of acclimation before release, which may be particularly important in assisted colonisation programs. Given that quarantine has been associated with elevated FGMCs, for example in eastern bettongs (Batson et al. 2017), welfare considera­tions are also important in determining the length of the quarantine period.

4.2 Health and disease screening

Baseline health and disease data are unknown for many native mammal species. Performing comprehensive health evaluations serves several functions. It allows for baseline health and disease parameters to be established, which in turn can be used for the conservation manage­ment of the species. This data can then be used to inform disease risk analysis and mitigation strategies and forms the basis for longitudinal monitoring. Finally, health evaluations can be used as a basis for selecting candidates of an appropriate health status for CTs, thus maximising both conservation and welfare outcomes.

Health screening of conspecifics and sympatric spe­cies at the donor and recipient sites has been advocated to gain a broader understanding of potential disease effects. However, in reality logistical and resource constraints often dictate that health screening is limited to individu­als under direct consideration for CTs. Sympatric macro­pods were screened for a range of parasites and pathogens before reintroduction of brush-tailed rock-wallabies in the Grampians National Park, Vic. but there are few other examples of targeted surveillance of native mammal species at the recipient site before CT (Schultz et al. 2011).

Standardised assessment protocols and accurate record keeping are vital to ensure consistency throughout the process and for accurate comparisons during experimental evaluation of CT techniques. Anaesthesia is recommended for performing a complete physical examination and sample collection. Frequently, health and disease screening is carried out in remote locations, often at the point of cap­ture if the donor population is free-ranging, necessitating substantial forward planning to ensure successful field work (Fig. 2.2). Effective biosecurity protocols are also an important component of trapping, handling and sampling procedures to reduce the spread of pathogens and parasites and the possibility of cross-contamination of samples col­lected for disease screening (Hillman et al. 2016).

Deciding which diseases to screen for in CT programs will be influenced by the outcome of the DRA, the availa­bility of validated testing methodologies for a given patho­gen and species, the volume of blood and other biological samples that can be safely collected and logistical and cost limitations. Some disease processes with multifactorial aetiologies may be difficult to detect despite health screen­ing. For example, despite comprehensive pre-release oral cavity examinations in brush-tailed rock-wallabies several reintroduced animals succumbed to macropod progres­sive periodontal disease within 3 mo of release, suggesting early signs of the disease were not detected during health screening (Schultz et al.

Table 2.2. Selected diseases that may warrant consideration in disease risk analysis or disease investigation for macropod conservation translocations

Table 2.3.

Fig. 2.2. Field set up for health evaluation of bush rats (Rattus fuscipes) during a reintroduction program. Photo: Larry Vogelnest

Table 2.4. Selected diseases that may warrant consideration in disease risk analysis or disease investigation for wombat conservation translocations

Table 2.5. Selected diseases that may warrant consideration in disease risk analysis or disease investigation for dasyurid conservation translocations

Table 2.6. Selected diseases that may warrant consideration in disease risk analysis or disease investigation for possum and glider conservation translocations

Table 2.7. Selected diseases that may warrant consideration in disease risk analysis or disease investigation for bandicoot and greater bilby (Macrotis lagotis) conservation translocations

5.