Enhancing Success At Wild Animal Rescue Centers

Wild animal rescue centers around the world are a key part of ensuring that we consider the welfare of wild and not just domestic animals. However, these centers can enhance their work by keeping more comprehensive data on the animals in their care and by exploring trends in that data to determine areas for improvement and raise public awareness of conservation concerns.

In this study, researchers explored intake and outcome trends for wild animals at a rescue center in Costa Rica. They mined the center’s digital database to understand the main causes of admission and to determine what factors influence whether animals are successfully rehabilitated and released.

Using statistical and descriptive analyses, the researchers examined the records of close to 6,000 animals admitted to Rescate Wildlife Rescue Center in 2020 and 2021. Where complete, data on each animal included the following:

• Species, order, and class;
• Age group;
• Reason for admission (like captivity, disease, or physical injuries);
• Clinical classification (from needing only basic care to different types of diseases);
• Number of days the animal spent at the center; and
• Whether the animal died, was released, was in ongoing care, or had some other outcome.

The researchers also calculated the likelihood of animals’ release or death in care.

Most animals admitted to the center were birds (59%), followed by mammals (21%) and reptiles (17%). Overall, the main reasons for admission were captivity (35%), found (23%), and physical injuries (19%). Under half (42%) of the animals were released, which is in line with release rates reported by other centers across the globe. Almost a quarter (24%) died in care, particularly those who were orphaned. Nearly another quarter (24%) were euthanized, the majority being mammals and those suffering from physical injuries. Under a tenth (7.5%) went into permanent care, of which most had come from captivity. The remaining animals escaped or had unknown outcomes.

Animals who were released spent more time in care than animals who were euthanized — an average of about 47 days for the former compared to about 3 days for the latter.

Different trends emerged for different types of animals. For instance, mammals were mainly admitted because of being orphaned or found by a member of the public, whereas for birds and reptiles, the main cause of admission was captivity, meaning they had likely been kept as a pet. Birds had a higher release rate (59%) than either reptiles (30%) or mammals (7.5%). However, they also had the highest mortality rate (59%), followed by mammals (34%) and reptiles (4%). Thus, birds had a distinctly binary outcome.

Overall, the factors predicting survival of the animals in care were a longer stay at the center and being reptiles, juveniles, and in need of no or only basic care. Conversely, being admitted for physical injuries or being orphaned, or being birds, infants, or nestlings led to the highest mortalities.

The authors highlight multiple limitations to the study. Firstly, the center’s data could be kept more consistently and comprehensively, including reducing entry errors and ensuring all categories of information are recorded for all animals. For example, clinical classifications were missing for 48% of the animals. Moreover, access to wild animal rescue center data more generally is limited, making comparison between centers difficult for determining patterns and suggestions for improvement.

Therefore, the authors recommend that wild animal rescue centers keep full and accurate records of the animals they rescue and study the data’s trends. They also advocate for international record-keeping guidelines. High quality data can make centers more efficient in allocating their resources and in easing animals’ suffering through more effective triage and treatment approaches. It also provides evidence of the negative impact that humans can have on other species, which can be communicated out to the public.

According to the authors, filling gaps in public awareness is key to the survival of wild animals. For example, in Costa Rica, 23.5% of homes uphold the tradition of keeping captive wild animals, mainly parrots, even though this is usually illegal. Animal advocates can help by discouraging this practice due to conservation concerns and issues like stress and malnutrition. Such improvements in record-keeping and public outreach projects would enhance the vital work of wild animal rescue centers around the world.