 Good morning and now moving into afternoon and welcome to session five of our workshop We'll be focused on the role of veterinarians and wildlife research as they work Collaboratively with wildlife biologists to assure compliance with the animal welfare act as well as requirements around the use of Pharmaceuticals in the design of studies and when working in the field I'm dr. Gayle Golab Vice president and chief veterinary officer for the American Veterinary Medical Association and I will be moderating our session today I'm thrilled that we will have four terrific speakers sharing their tremendous expertise and experience with us Dr. Margaret Wilde received her bachelor's in wildlife biology her DVM and her PhD in Zoology From Colorado State University and is a certified wildlife biologist She currently focuses on the study of emerging infectious diseases in wildlife as a professor in the College of Veterinary Medicine At Washington State University and will provide an overview of the wildlife veterinarians role in championing animal welfare programs and policies Dr. Wilde will be followed by dr. Kevin Monteith and dr. Michael Miller who will be sharing the wildlife biologists and wildlife veterinarians perspectives respectively and understanding accepting and enhancing the role of veterinary medicine in wildlife research Dr. Monteith received his bachelor's and master's degree in wildlife and fishery science from South Dakota State University And his PhD from Idaho State University He is currently an associate professor in the Hobbs School of Environment and Natural Resources at the University of Wyoming and Focuses on integrating nutrition population and quantitative ecology to study fitness and population dynamics of large mammals Dr. Miller received his bachelor's in Zoology his DVM and a PhD in wildlife biology from Colorado State University He serves as a wildlife veterinarian and staff scientist in the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife and Help to establish one of the first institutional care and use committees within a wildlife management agency We'll be finishing up our session with a presentation by dr. Dan McKay he who received his PhD in microbiology from Oregon State University and his DVM from the University of Wisconsin He is also board certified in zoological medicine by the American College of Zoological Medicine He'll be speaking to us about surgeries in the field Which is appropriate considering his former role as a federal wildlife veterinarian specializing in these procedures Dr. McKay he has also served as editor of the Journal of Wildlife Diseases Without further ado, let's get our session started Hi, I'm Margaret Wilde. I'm a professor in the Department of Veterinary Microbiology and Pathology at Washington State University But my perspectives for this presentation come from about three decades as a wildlife veterinarian with state and federal wildlife management agencies I'll kick off this presentation with a bit of an overview of a veterinarian's role in research Then we'll go to a bit more in-depth presentation with dr. McKay he and finish up with two presentations that if we were at an in-person meeting might have been a panel discussion to explore commonalities and differences in biologists and veterinarians perspectives on the role of a veterinarian in wildlife research Based on my knowledge and experiences I propose that a veterinarian's role in research is first not limited to clinical medicine and That a veterinarian has a legal or regulatory and ethical responsibility to champion welfare practices as well as policies And that we can't ignore our responsibility to apply animal welfare Standards to wildlife using the excuse that there isn't enough guidance or it's too complex to interpret the laws and regulations When people think of a veterinarian's role in research Probably the first thing that occurs to most is that a veterinarian provides medical care and treatments and there are indeed certain activities like Invasive surgery that fall under the definition of the practice of veterinary medicine and need to be conducted by a veterinarian There's also complex tasks like some types of sampling or Support provided to animals under anesthesia. They're usually conducted by veterinarians But more often than not it just comes down to if a veterinarian is available or is invited to come to the field with a researcher and For better or worse that invitation or availability is sometimes more likely and prioritized with high profile species or projects Because of the challenge of having a veterinarian on site for research connected in the field Veterinarians frequently play the role of a consulting veterinarian This can be done through training researchers on tasks like sample collection or administration of drugs and through prescribing drugs and Just like consulting with a statistician during the planning stages of a study is important It's also important to consult with a veterinarian to get ideas and input on the veterinary aspects of a study Also, particularly for new techniques having a veterinarian conduct a field visit to observe and discuss how things are going or Determine if for example pain mitigation is sufficient can be useful And always having a veterinarian available for follow-up to discuss procedures or unexpected issues that come up Can also be helpful Particularly in this consulting role It may be easy to forget that the veterinarian's role is more than an informal one Veterinarians whether treating your dog when it has an infection and needs antibiotics or Practicing medicine or serving as a consultant in wildlife research are bound. What's called the veterinarian patient client relationship When it's your dog the roles in this relationship are pretty clear the vet the dog the owner But with wildlife, there's generally accepted modifications to these roles With regard to the patient the veterinarian is more likely to have knowledge of the population than an individual And rather than an owner the biologist or researcher is acting in a public trust role representing the citizens of the state who are actually the owner in The veterinarian patient client relationship the vet has assumed responsibility for clinical judgments and the client Or in our case the researcher agrees to follow the veterinarian's instructions The veterinarian needs to have sufficient knowledge of the patient Which as I mentioned usually comes from knowledge of the population for wildlife and The veterinarian has an obligation to be available for follow-up to provide Oversight and to maintain records in wildlife. These records are often the capture record Now clearly meeting these requirements requires a team effort between the veterinarian and the researcher a Researcher may be unaware of the veterinarian's obligation But based on education training and licensing the veterinarian knows and Most will be quite sensitive to it ethically and Because a breakdown could lead to loss of their license to practice veterinary medicine or to obtain Prescription or controlled drugs in either case. This is a loss of their livelihood So the veterinarian has a keen knowledge of what it means to practice veterinary medicine But that's not the only animal law he or she is more likely to have a knowledge of than most others and Here when I saw it say laws, I'm using it as a catch-all for laws regulation guidelines and so on Based on their education and licensure Veterinarians are more likely to know about and to keep up with changes in State and federal laws on the use of drugs and animals and on animal welfare laws Given the focus of this workshop Let's focus now on just the animal welfare laws and the animal welfare act covers a lot Including requiring that humane standards are met and for example Making sure that research animals receive appropriate pain-killing drugs and as I've said veterinarians usually know about these animal welfare laws So the veterinarian has this awareness and knowledge of animal welfare laws and on top of that They've taken an oath upon entering the field of veterinary medicine to among other things protect animal health and welfare and to prevent and relieve animal suffering as A result it's clear that a veterinarian has a responsibility in the planning and conduct of animal research conducted by their agency they contribute to this responsibility through participation in research and in training research Researchers and serving as consulting veterinarians as we've talked about already Additionally the veterinarian in a management agency has an important role to play in policy Policy is not the most exciting subject I've shared some pictures of myself participating in exciting wildlife research But I don't have any pictures of myself sitting at my computer or at endless meetings with agency leadership But I would argue that this is one of if not the most influential roles a veterinarian can play If an agency already has policy and procedures For adhering to the animal welfare act then the veterinarian can contribute to implementing that policy If as is not uncommon though an agency does not have policy in place to comply with the animal welfare act Then a veterinarian has a responsibility to bring his or her awareness to an agency's leadership that may not have that same awareness or has cursory knowledge and unintentionally or intentionally decided they didn't need to comply in a 2017 article Mokei he argued that there's three reasons why wildlife agencies fail to comply with the requirements of the animal welfare act First the agency states that it does not conduct research, but conducts only management, which is not covered under the act to a lack of enforcement allows for self-exemption and three to avoid the perceived burden of compliance in An upcoming paper my co-authors and I propose one additional reason That is lack of clarity and regulations and policy regarding which wildlife Activities meet requirements of the animal welfare act that said there is information if you make an effort to look for it There is literature and scientific journals that provide perspectives and arguments for the applicability of the act to wildlife and There's examples from other agencies Agencies like Colorado Parks and Wildlife and the National Park Service have long histories of research oversight by animal care and use committees or IACUCs Now I'm not saying that additional formal guidance wouldn't be useful in clarifying further But some good models exist for those that want to move forward willingly rather than wait to be regulated further This is just one example from the National Park Service that you probably saw earlier in Dr. Baton's presentation It's a decision tree that can be used to determine the requirements for IACUC review and oversight for projects involving animals and The more we develop and share policies procedures and protocols and publish them when appropriate The more we can help others who are struggling to make a decision on the applicability of the animal welfare act to the work Conducted by their agency And this I would say is the final role of the veterinarian in research to share their experiences tools that their agency have developed as appropriate and Support relationship building among agencies and among people with different backgrounds Veterinarians, biologists, ethicists, policy makers, and so on This can help ensure that we're doing the best we can for welfare of wildlife And helping ensure that we can all continue to conduct the research that's necessary to successfully inform wildlife management Our colleague and friend Dr. Tracy Thompson exemplified this last objective through generously sharing her insight and work with others to apply animal welfare standards to wildlife She spent her career working to improve animal welfare. I Appreciate all that I learned from her and dedicate this presentation to her memory You should have just heard from my colleague Dr. Wilde about some of the critical roles that veterinarians serve in wildlife research My task here in is to discuss the role of veterinarians in wildlife research from the perspective of a wildlife biologist To which my colleague Dr. Miller will follow with some perspectives from a veterinarian as we discussed in coordinating this session We believe this subject to be a worthy pursuit and discussion To have nothing else point out what can sometimes be the elephant in the room I am Kevin Monteith an associate professor at the University of Wyoming But we'll confess this was my initial reaction when I was asked to talk in this session About the role of veterinarians in wildlife research as is already obvious I'm not a veterinarian and and the only non-veterinarian speaking on the role of veterinarians in wildlife research should be fine, right? right or This is about as misguided as me trying to measure rump fat on an elephant But with further and careful consideration about my vulnerability in this situation and with some great conversations with my veterinarian colleagues in this session I figured it's worth trying and I hope my genuine efforts here prove fruitful and not destructive While not a veterinarian, I have been conducting research on large junglets for over 20 years Much of our work is couched within the lens of nutritional ecology And we use the animals themselves as our indicators to what they are experiencing within their environment Consequently much of our work involves capture and handling and often repeated capture and handling to better connect an animal to their environment Accordingly, I've led the capture and handling of over 10,000 ungulates across a broad range of species landscapes and conditions One of the greatest challenges as a biologist and I believe one of the greatest contributors To what can become a difficult dynamic between biologists and veterinarians is that it is necessary for biologists to work under the umbrella of a DVM Whether that's access to controlled substances to state or federal permitting to institutional animal care and use committees a Biologist is constantly having to seek approval of and require the facilitation and support of a DVM Sometimes comparable evaluations from multiple entities yielding opposing recommendations On perhaps the same project can lead to difficult situations Biologists are then forced to ask you what is a balance among personal desires experience or knowledge and perhaps conflicting DVM authorities Consequently the dynamics can become crippling at times and it can sometimes just be easier to give up and do nothing If you're passionate about what you do and maybe are admittedly a bit bullheaded like myself You will do your best to find a way forward Nevertheless in those conversations as a biologist you may have a wealth of experience and competency And are very confident in what should be the way forward But that DVM will always trump experience and perhaps making about the only leg There is to stand on for the biologist being data or other published works It is with these interactions that relationships between veterinarians and biologists can quickly become strained antagonistic and very much counterproductive As a veterinarian you may now be ready to punch your screen or perhaps you already have And for some biologists you may be celebrating that some poor sucker finally said it And though there may certainly be some truth in what I just conveyed from the perspective of what a biologist may experience or feel in some situations Through better understanding of the perspectives of both parties. I believe these sorts of situations can be avoided or remedied The perspectives I aim to communicate today, please keep in mind that they originate from an n of one that being me And if you are in a situation where your veterinarian biologist relationship is harmonious and productive then crap celebrate that Truth is relationships between biologists and DVMs can often become strained And I'm going to do my best to relay today some of the reasons I think that may happen I will of course be speaking from the perspective of a biologist And my colleague dr. Miller will follow me on behalf of the veterinarian First I will try to break down where each professional is coming from and then land on some broad conclusions Some of this will look familiar to you because my colleague dr. Wilde just talked through some of it but with emphasizing the perspective of Biologists and where they're coming from the standard biologists will have in-depth training in ecology biology and wildlife management with hopefully some soft skilled training and communication And should have a bent towards data and associated statistics Consequently, unlike veterinarians, there's no formal standard and training associated with veterinary practices As we move on to talking about authority Authoritative roles diverge markedly between the biologists and veterinarians With veterinarians having ultimate practice authority and biologists having what could be some authority as the principal investigator But otherwise depending upon the conversation or the decision Is based on evidence and experience which can often carry very little weight When considering their responsibilities They are clearly defined legally and ethically For the veterinarian which puts them in a very different position than the biologist The biologist has a responsibility of collecting data to find answers Faces an expectation associated with animal ethics and welfare And while less defined legally have a lot at stake if they fail in their responsibilities Mainly because of how it could affect their credibility their rapport with agency personnel or other collaborators and of course funding sources Now perspectives though, they may be completely aligned in some instances As a generality may be a bit divergent A veterinarian may focus more on the individual animal and emphasize welfare and preventative medicine Whereas the biologist may often have a bit of a broader view that is focused more on the population Which can be a necessary perspective and considerations of conservation decisions or for example in species recovery Of course as is already obvious Biologists are completely reliant on veterinarians for access to controlled substances via the veterinarian-client-patient relationship This puts the onus on the veterinarian to prescribe and supply and thus it's tied to their license and ultimately their signature Experience in veterinary-like practices can start with education Which is defined for veterinarians and not so much for biologists Thereafter experience and competence can vary considerably for both Indeed veterinarians have a wide array of expertise Similarly biologists may vary from little experience or expertise in animal capture handling and welfare To being some of the most experienced and competent in the field Now with that backdrop, I will strive to relay what I see In thinking about these dynamics and the relationships between veterinarians and biologists To which dr. Miller will have similar things to offer So three things that I think biologists need to understand Is we need to see that veterinarians have a lot at stake legally Therefore what they approve or support can certainly come back to affect them And we're relying on them to approve and support what we do At the same time veterinarians have a common core training and thus do have a lot to offer us And can certainly be worthy collaborators as I have enjoyed some Incredible collaborations and mentorship from veterinarians over the years I truly believe it does not have to be us against them Even though I'll admit it has can and certainly has felt that way in the past But there is a pathway to collegiality and collaboration And it is with some hesitancy in realizing this may be the only time in my life I am expected to give advice to a veterinarian But there are three things that I propose that could be helpful for veterinarians to understand Biologists have a lot at stake too and sometimes when they are suggesting something Or proposing something that may be counter to what you think It may not be their ego, but may be coming from a from a sincere place And with substantial insight and experience And indeed many biologists are incredibly competent and may be worth listening to Or at least having a conversation before some top-down decisions or recommendations are made Please know also for better or worse your word as a DVM carries a lot of weight I have literally had a project go belly up because of what I suspect was a well intended But erroneous statement made by a DVM at a stakeholder meeting where I was not present Point is you are inherently respected as an expert because of your DVM Next I'll do my best to convey what I see as the five biggest challenges to functional veterinarian Biologists wildlife relationships Number one the DVM aura and gosh, I hate to say it, but it sure can be a real thing Certainly not all operate in this manner, but a DVM shouldn't inherently make you the expert Nor should a PhD for that matter Number two This one is not anyone's fault is more of just the nature of the situation But I truly think the ownership over projects and research by the biologists When met with the authority of the DVM can make things tricky right out of the gate And because of the permitting processes the necessary approvals It it makes this an absolutely forced relationship Which I think can quickly make a biologist feel very boxed in And then at the same time can make the veterinarian feel like they're unnecessarily sticking their neck out So I think that just the nature of the situation creates a tricky dynamic to navigate right out of the gate from both sides of the table Finally we may come from differing perspectives, which may seem conflicting though They don't have to be It simply means that conversations of the merits of research must be considered within the associated risk relative to the gain Finally some things that I believe could improve the veterinary biologist wildlife relationships Number one is mutual respect, which I see is absolutely essential and needed in so many instances Number two More data on capturing handling methods animal welfare and perhaps associated standards Many practices are accepted as standard but often not greatly represented in the literature to support those conversations I think a perceptive view is absolutely critical And basically allows the opportunity to acknowledge where the other is coming from And this is one of those places where it takes to not just the biologist Having the perception perceptive ability to see the veterinarian the veterinarian see the biologist as well I also believe there may be a place of more training both in veterinary practices animal welfare pain management for biologists And in research and applications or specific wildlife training for some veterinarians And of course we need to be better about talking and listening to each other To which I am pleased to say is exactly what we have done and are doing in this session Include I am very encouraged by these conversations And I hope whether you are a biologist or a veterinarian That you can take the conversations within this session with an empathetic view I do believe we can do better and see hope for genuinely beneficial and productive biologists veterinarian relationships For the betterment of our wildlife resources And our sanity Assuming this session's presentations are running in proper order You've already heard from dr. Wilde that veterinarians do have roles in wildlife research That extend well beyond prescribing capture drugs and providing input in high-profile situations In practice and certainly in my and others experiences Wildlife studies done in the laboratory and in the field can benefit from veterinary medicine and veterinary involvement But as you as you've also hopefully heard from dr. Monteith and perhaps from other presenters We do seem to have a ways to go to assure this is consistently the case In the brief course of planning what to present in this session on the role of veterinary medicine and wildlife research Became clear that we needed to address some underlying issues in order to move forward So we wanted to take a peek behind the curtain of veterinary involvement in wildlife research And it's oversight to address what some view as a biologist versus veterinarian mindset That can be an obstacle to functional working relationships in a wildlife research setting To the organizers and with apologies to the rolling stones I'll just say this may not be exactly what you want, but hopefully you'll find It's something you need It seems at times that perhaps biologist investigators really don't want or think they need veterinary input into their work and plans Except perhaps when they want prescription drugs for capture or other applications Now on the other side of this equation I'm given to understand that at times veterinarians may come off a bit overbearing and unapproachable especially when operating in an oversight role Understanding commonalities and differences in biologists and veterinarians perspectives and roles in wildlife research seems a necessary first step toward progress Consequently to the four talks in this session are devoted to sharing such perspectives A few quick caveats and provisos Sample sizes for these talks are vanishingly small n equals one apiece Individual results and perspectives may vary And if most or all of these things make sense or already have been addressed within your research program then congratulations Those are the kinds of examples the organizers should be seeking as they consider next steps in this arena Doctors wild and mon teeth already did a nice job of reviewing some of the key aspects Of biologists and veterinarians backgrounds roles responsibilities and perspectives in the context of wildlife research From a veterinarian standpoint, I'll only re-emphasize that a number of these are dictated by laws that those of us practicing veterinary medicine are obliged to follow Which brings me to a little about me I'm dr. Michael miller and i'll be providing a wildlife veterinarians perspective to compliment the biologist perspective offered by dr. Montee I've been practicing wildlife veterinary medicine and serving the state of colorado's division of wildlife for over 30 years I also have been doing research on wildlife and captive and field settings for my entire career And maybe most important in this workshop's context My research has been reviewed approved and overseen by an institutional animal care news committee That has functioned within our wildlife management agency for over 30 years So i'm speaking from first hand experience when I say that it's quite feasible to do wildlife research while following established animal welfare laws Oh and uh for the talent portion of this session I'll be collecting blood from an unsedated bighorn sheep while standing on my head See the photo at upper left, uh, but enough about me As with so many constructs in wildlife medicine the idealized veterinarian client patient relationship Enjoyed in clinical practice doesn't always translate well into wildlife research, especially in the field But that doesn't mean the notion should be dismissed out of hand Unfortunately participation in veterinarian biologist wildlife relationships and research settings can feel perhaps a bit forced With one or more reluctant parties in the wildlife subjects sometimes out of the picture altogether But for a variety of reasons not the least of which are complying with existing laws And meeting the public's expectation on how their wildlife resources are treated I submit that we need to figure out how to make these relationships more functional across the board in a wildlife research setting To this end I offer a long time wildlife veterinarian's perspective on understanding accepting and enhancing the role of veterinary medicine and wildlife research These are my short lists on the same four areas covered by dr. Montieth and our lists were developed independently So three things that I think biologists need to understand Catching and handling wild animals is more than momentarily distressing and sometimes painful To both the animal and sometimes if you're not careful to the investigator The animal welfare rules do apply In all likelihood the veterinarian did not make the rules but is obliged to follow them And it's okay to seek help and consider alternatives. You've got plans They're probably good plans that be open to other ways of doing things To my veterinary colleagues with roles in wildlife research Three things I think you need to understand First is that authority does not necessarily equate to expertise. We all have veterinary degrees, but we may not have equal Experiences with respect to wildlife Consequently it is okay to seek help and consider alternatives sometimes even from the investigators themselves It's also okay to say no or stop or time out And it's really not okay to be compelled to indulge in practices that you're not comfortable with Simply because that's the way it's always been done Or that's the way an agency or an investigator says they need to do it I see at least five big challenges to functional veterinarian biologist wildlife relationships Maybe the most important is an inconsistent understanding of and respect for the rules responsibilities Differences in professional perspectives and standards between veterinarians and investigators in the field This is kind of combined with an uneven and sometimes inconsistent application of animal welfare laws to field studies Also an inconsistent and limited availability of true wildlife medicine expertise in field and oversight settings Navigating myriad and often cross-purpose rules related to veterinary practice Extra-labeled prescription drug use and other things involved In an inability of the veterinarian in many cases to participate directly In situations and cases under their practice authority and responsibility Given these challenges, I think there are at least five things that could help improve and smooth our working relationships The first of these is compulsory training for biologists and stress and pain physiology and management Across taxa. So maybe we have a little more common understanding of some of the issues that are underlying our viewpoints on on welfare compulsory training for biologists and veterinarians when needed in research ethics animal welfare laws and standards and specific applications to wildlife studies into field work broader conversations to establish standards standards for acceptable and unacceptable field practices A better use of informal veterinary consultations early in the field study planning process And finally a better use of wildlife experts and wildlife medicine experts in institutional review processes for wildlife studies Now I realize that at least for some of you most or all of these things on my list make Sense or are already in place within your wildlife research programs and institutions If so, that's fantastic But if not, then these are important things to consider in particular I suspect comparing the biologist and veterinarian perspective shared today Will reveal some common themes. It's a place to start I think it's time to move beyond biologist versus veterinarian I'm confident that greater investment in cultivating functional relationships would benefit research oversight As well as operational aspects of field studies involving wildlife species Doing so will assure compliance with established laws And likely will improve wildlife subject welfare and field research products as well Examples of functional relationships in field research settings are not hard to find And can serve as a catalyst for progress elsewhere Thank you for the opportunity to speak Today I will be talking about surgeries done on free-ranging animals in the field setting I will focus on regulations in animal welfare relative to surgeries rather than specific techniques Surgery is likely second only to capture in its intrusiveness on wildlife Compliance with the animal welfare act interagency research animal committee principles And public health service policies have introduced new and unaccustomed requirements For information and accountability from wildlife researchers External forces largely obtaining collecting permits and getting work published in research journals Has pushed the agencies towards compliance The increase in employment of veterinarians by agencies and institutions has brought knowledge and expectations to allow such compliance Employments of veterinarians however has not been driven by animal welfare compliance issues But by rather the need to deal with disease issues like chronic wasting disease And obtaining captured drugs There are a wide variety of surgical techniques done on wild animals to obtain samples for various analyses To equip animals with tracking devices to mark them for individual identification And to otherwise surgically manipulate them Surgeries have become an important part of the wildlife science The short answer to this question is surgeries can be done wherever the animals are It is both efficient and from an animal welfare point of view desirable to do surgeries as close as possible to the location where the animals are captured Frankly working in the field is the reason that most of us got into the field pardon the pun Second to that is the challenge of adapting our education experience in animal surgery To challenging locations interestingly There are no federal laws providing guidance that I know of I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on tv That regulate who can do surgeries on wild animals However, there may be state laws or even local regulations defining the issue and such laws certainly exist in other countries Over the years I've observed that most surgeries done on wild birds and mammals are done by veterinarians Whereas most surgeries done on fish are done by biologists And I think the reason for that is fish aren't covered by the animal welfare act It is both possible and desirable to do wildlife surgery at a high level of quality The intention of good technique is reduce potential adverse effects that might affect the quality of the data being collected The basic assumption of manipulations such as marking and tagging Is those procedures do not change the status quo of the animals or at least do so as little as possible The goal for all surgeons who whoever they are Should be to produce the highest quality repeatable results to support the project of the goal When you think about it shouldn't that be the goal? From the standpoint of their capture wild animals come in two varieties Those small enough are safe enough to be handled by hand and those too large are too dangerous to be handled by hand The latter and indeed some of the former are given drugs to Assure that they are tractable and safe to handle All FDA approved drugs Are approved for specific species or group as specific doses Used by a specific route of administration for a specific purpose Any other use of that drug is called extra label use and was actually illegal prior to 1994 When the animal drug use clarification act and duke was passed That permitted extra label drug use In that act congress has placed the proper use of prescription dugs and animals in the hands of veterinarians and made them accountable If you disagree with that view Your issue is with congress not with veterinarians The use of antibiotics in surgeries on wild animals domestic animals and humans Is currently controversial due to the emergence of drug resistance That is rapidly rendering certain antibiotics less and less useful A topic that there should be of great interest to all of us Is the proper use of antibiotics and surgery and indeed another wildlife procedures Because of this growing problem Drugs used for the capture anesthesia and sedation of wild animals all prescription drugs But in addition the potential for human abuse has brought Most wildlife captured drugs under the purview of the drug enforcement agency The possession of such captured drugs is a legal issue more than a biological issue The dea is quite serious about their enforcement of these regulations And you must get a permit for their use Accounting must be done very carefully. There are specific legal requirements for storage and accounting Losses must be immediately reported to the dea and you can expect Unannounced on-site audits by dea agents Surgeries done on wild animals are usually done as part of a larger study Unless the focus of the research is the surgery itself IOCUCs should expect thorough details about all aspects of the surgery Where surgeries are expected to be part of a multi-mure project Or done by a more than one biologist It may be worthwhile to write a specific protocol for the technique and get it approved by the IOCUC Then the researcher can refer it to it in a submitted project protocol Something like transmitters will be attached using Approved protocol 2022-XXX with the following exceptions Any additions or alterations should be done after that statement Aseptic techniques in the surgical sense means that all methods are used to prevent the introduction of potential pathogens into the animal during surgery The specific topic of the use of aseptic techniques in wildlife surgeries Is frequently misunderstood, especially in fish surgeries where veterinary involvement is very limited The animal welfare act regulations and others are clear that all survival surgeries Must be done using aseptic techniques, but do not have to be done in our dedicated facilities That means that we can do surgeries at the field site so long as our techniques are good It is both possible and desirable as previously mentioned To do wildlife surgeries in as high quality level as possible The advantages are to reduce the adverse effects in the animal and to assure that the data gathered And the conclusions drawn from those data are as representative as possible of the wild animals Good technique results in good data Producing guideline standards of care and best practices has become popular in recent years Published guidelines and similar documents setting standards for the techniques used in wildlife research Have some value, however, they have limitations both in their focus and in their use Differences exist in guidelines between taxa which could result in a variation of techniques Used in different tax across the wildlife biology field Importantly Such guidelines should not be blindly accepted. They are not laws or regulations And iacucks are not bound to accept them They should never be used as a substitute for federal laws and regulations such as the animal welfare act