In This Issue

Excerpt

Carter et al. begin this Supplemental Issue of EcoHealth on Health and Disease in Translocated Wild Animals with an overview of terrestrial animal translocations carried out for conservation purposes in Britain, summarizing what has been achieved in recent decades and discussing the issues raised by this approach to conservation. Moving species around is a complex undertaking, and understanding of the inherent risks involved, including the risks from disease, has improved significantly in recent years. The authors recommend that conservation translocations should be considered in the context of species recovery targets and that high standards should be maintained so that disease risks and other potentially negative impacts are minimized. Hartley and Sainsbury follow up by describing the use of disease risk analysis, and propose modification of methods for wildlife translocations undertaken for conservation purposes. The challenges of these specific scenarios, including hazard identification, multiple epidemiological pathways, and data gaps, are addressed. Tools, which could improve the usefulness of the technique, are also described. Examples are taken from the 25 years’ work of the UK Species Recovery Program. Wildlife translocations happen all over the world with varied success, while disease is a known potential complicating factor of translocations. Dalziel et al. provide a comparison of three different qualitative methods of disease risk analysis (DRA) using the translocation of Hihi, a New Zealand passerine bird, as a case study. DRAs are advised for all species translocations, but the method used to conduct the DRA can have an effect on the result the user receives. They recommend that users of DRAs understand the limitations and strengths of the method they use, and become familiar with their idiosyncrasies. …