A Retrospective Study on Wild Animals Admitted to Animal Rescue and Rehabilitation Centres in Türkiye*

Year 2023, , 112 - 116, 30.09.2023

Emrah Bozkaya , Tamay Başağaç Gül

https://doi.org/10.30516/bilgesci.1266037

Abstract

The aim of this study was to retrospectively reveal the rehabilitation numbers of wild animals admitted to rescue and rehabilitation centres in Türkiye between 2017 and 2021, to investigate the wild animals hospitalized in the centres under mammal, bird and reptile classes at the level of order and species, and to identify the deficiencies in wildlife rehabilitation and to make recommendations. The main material of the research was the data for the years 2017-2021 obtained from the Wildlife Information System-YABIS, a database of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. As the method, numerical data on the species downloaded from YABIS were analysed. Accordingly, it was understood that a total of 35764 cases were admitted to all rescue centres across Türkiye. About 61% of these cases were treated and released into nature, about 34% died and about 5% were placed in zoos. While the Cetartiodactyla was the most affected order in mammals, the most accepted species in the centres was the Roe deer (Capreolus capreolus). In birds, the Columbiformes was the most affected order, the most accepted species in the centers was the Rock dove (Columba livia). In reptiles, the Testudinata was the most affected order, the most accepted species in the centres was the Mediterranean spur-thighed tortoise (Testudo graeca). The increase in the number of cases brought to rehabilitation centers between 2017-2021, excluding 2019, clearly showed the role of rescue and rehabilitation centers in protecting wild animals and providing sustainable wildlife.

Keywords

Rehabilitation, rescue centres, treatment, Türkiye, wild animal

Thanks

We would like to extend our sincere thanks to the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry for providing the data for this research.

References

• Bevanger, K. (1998). Biological and conservation aspects of bird mortality caused by electricity power lines: a review. Biological Conservation, 86, 67-76.
• BirdLife International. (2019). Columba livia (amended version of 2016 assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2019: e.T22690066A155493121. https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22690066/155493121
• Coşkun, G. (2020). Yardıma Muhtaç Yaban Hayvanalarının Rehabilitasyonu ve Doğaya Salınması: Antalya Örneği [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Akdeniz Üniversitesi]. 2020.
• Davis, P. H., Cullen, J., & Coode, M. J. E. (Eds.). (1965). Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands (Vol. 1).
• Donazar, J. A., Gangoso, L., Forero, M. G., & J., J. (2005). Presence, richness and extinction of birds of prey in the Mediterranean and Macaronesian islands. Journal of Biogeography 32, 1701- 1713.
• Eker, İ., Vural, M., & Aslan, S. (2015). Ankara İli’nin Damarlı bitki çeşitliliği ve korumada öncelikli taksonları [Research Article]. Bağbahçe Bilim Dergisi, 2(3), 57-114. https://doi.org/https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/bagbahce/issue/53948/727582
• Elliott, G., & Avery, M. (1991). A review of reports of buzzard persecution 1975–1989. Bird Study, 38(1), 52-56.
• Fahrig, L. (2003). Effects of Habitat Fragmentation on Biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 34, 487-515.
• Grogan, A., & Kelly, A. (2013). A review of RSPCA research into wildlife rehabilitation. Veterinary Record, 172(8), 211-211.
• Hall, E., & Zoo, T. (2005). Release Considerations for Rehabilitated Wildlife National Wildlife Rehabilitation Conference,
• IUCN. (2022). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Retrieved 18 Nisan from https://www.iucnredlist.org/search
• IUCN/SSC. (2013). Guidelines for Reintroductions and Other Conservation Translocations. Retrieved 14.12.2022 from https://portals.iucn.org/library/efiles/documents/2013-009.pdf
• Kahraman, A., Onder, M., & Ceyhan, E. (2012). The importance of bioconservation and biodiversity in Turkey. International Journal of Bioscience, Biochemistry and Bioinformatics, 2(2), 95-99.
• Kandır, E., & Aslan, A. (2017). An investigation on releasing treated wild animals into the nature in Turkey. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 15(4), 1757-1763.
• Kandır, E. H., & Tuğrul, G. (2020). A retrospective study on wild orphan animals in Afyon Kocatepe University wildlife rescue rehabilitation, training, practice and research center (AKUREM). Kocatepe Veterinary Journal, 13(3), 272-280.
• Kaya, Z., & Raynal, D. J. (2001). Biodiversity and conservation of Turkish forests. Biological Conservation, 97(2), 131-141. Klem, D. (2008). Avian Mortlty at Windows: The Second Largest Human Source of Bird Mortality on Earth. Proceedings of the Fourth International Partners in Flight Conference: Tundra to Tropics,
• Lovari, S., Herrero, J., Masseti, M., Ambarli, H., Lorenzini, R. & Giannatos, G. (2016). Capreolus capreolus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T42395A22161386. https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/42395/22161386
• Miller, E. A. (Ed.). (2012). Minimum standards for wildlife rehabilitation (4th edition ed.). National Wildlife Rehabilitators Association.
• Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. (2022). 7 Bin 784 Yaban Hayvanı Tedavi Edilerek Doğaya Bırakıldı. https://www.tarimorman.gov.tr/Haber/5454/7-Bin-784-Yaban-Hayvani-Tedavi-Edilerek-Dogaya-Birakildi
• Official Gazette of the Republic of Türkiye. (2004). Regulation on the Establishment, Management and Inspection of Game and Wild Animal Breeding Sites and Stations and Rescue Centers. https://mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuat?MevzuatNo=7209&MevzuatTur=7&MevzuatTertip=5
• Pyke, G. H., & Szabo, J. K. (2018). Conservation and the 4 Rs, which are rescue, rehabilitation, release, and research. Conservation Biology, 32(1), 50-59.
• Romero, F., Espinoza, A., Sallaberry-Pincheira, N., & Napolitano, C. (2019). A five-year retrospective study on patterns of casuistry and insights on the current status of wildlife rescue and rehabilitation centers in Chile. Revista chilena de historia natural, 92(1), 1-10.
• Sanderfoot, O., Bassing, S., Brusa, J., Emmet, R., Gillman, S., Swift, K., & Gardner, B. (2022). A review of the effects of wildfire smoke on the health and behavior of wildlife. Environmental Research Letters, 16(12), 123003.
• Şekercioğlu, Ç. H., Anderson, S., Akçay, E., Bilgin, R., Can, Ö. E., Semiz, G., Tavşanoğlu, Ç., Yokeş, M. B., Soyumert, A., & Ipekdal, K. (2011). Turkey’s globally important biodiversity in crisis. Biological Conservation, 144(12), 2752-2769.
• Tortoise & Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group. (1996). Testudo graeca. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 1996: e.T21646A9305693. https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/21646/9305693
• Van't Woudt, B. D. (1990). Roaming, stray, and feral domestic cats and dogs as wildlife problems. Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference,
• Vogelnest, L. (2008). Veterinary considerations for the rescue, treatment, rehabilitation and release of wildlife. Medicine of Australian mammals, 1-12.