Wild injured anole....any advice?

[joeysgreen]

Admittedly I agree that proper care can be expensive. It's also expensive for rehabber's, rescues, and wildlife veterinarians, so consider offering a donation to whomever you send him too; any little bit helps.

If you have a veterinary college nearby they'll likely do wildlife rehab as part of their exotic's department; I'm at OSU so not your state, but UFLA, LSU, U of Georgia all have excellent programs.

Ian

[Sonya610]

Sadly the little guy passed on today. I always suspected that there could be severe internal injuries involved (since one of my dogs obviously caught him and carried him into the house, and they are none to gentle when hunting small critters in the yard).

Thanks for all the great advice.

Joeys I know you probably believe that if only the little guy had received trauma care from a veterinarian he could have been saved. I personally believe he likely had serious internal injuries and could not be saved. I live in the country and there is a lot of wildlife, my chickens have eaten baby snakes, a snake ate a bunch of chicks, my dogs have caught/killed lizards, armadillo's, etc.... and in return they have had a couple of close calls where they were nearly bitten by a rattler and a copperhead. In short, stuff happens and with lots of little critters about the incidents are more common than I would like.

[d_virginiana]

Sorry to hear that. Whenever I am dealing with wild animals my rule for vet care is that if it's going to cost more than about $50 I let nature take its course. I also don't bother with a vet visit unless the problem is very obvious and easy to treat (like a localized infection or something). Spending time to rehabilitate one is one thing, but spending hundreds of dollars is another.
Frankly, spending the money it would take for a case like this would just be ridiculous. You gave him somewhere warm and calm to die, and that's more than most people would do.

[joeysgreen]

I'm sorry for the loss. I'm not about to say that vet's save everything either. I was just offering options for the greatest chance of a good outcome.

Perhaps this would be a good thread to discuss wildlife rehab and everyone's opinions on the topic. Lora, consider what you said with a limit of ~50 dollars or letting nature take it's course. $50 for a person treating wildlife like it's their pet won't take you very far... the examination alone is often $30-50. If that amount were donated to a wildlife center it would go much further.

"letting nature take it's course" I think this is at the very root of wildlife rehabilitation. These animals are mostly injured due to mankind (our top reasons for admission is caught be cat/dog and hit by car). Saving one anole, or one bird, or one squirrel, doesn't make a difference to the population of that species. They die in the wild all the time. I think rehabilitating them is just one means of giving back and reducing our impact as a society.

So then perhaps the biggest part of wildlife rehabilitation might be to spread the message on how to reduce our impact before these animals are injured. From my point of view the biggest change a single person can do is to keep their cats indoors or only let them out on a leash or under supervision. Dogs might be confined to a fenced yard perhaps.

Ian

[d_virginiana]

Actually I got opthalmic antibiotics for about $30 for my Turtle who ended up so attached to us over the six or seven months she was recovering she is now a permanent pet. Plus we moved so we were out of her home range. I don't think that money would have been better spent for a donation. With rescues I only spend money if there looks to be a specific problem with a straightforward solution. I'm not stupid enough to take an animal with vague problems to the vet and expect a battery of tests to cost $50. I frankly don't have the money to treat random wild animals like they are my pets.

A lot of the time, just TLC is enough to help out even some really bad cases. Another pretty horrifying rescue that I helped supervise this past year was a blacksnake that got caught in some netting and looked like someone had just taken about a third of its skin and rolled it down like a sock. No vet visit was made and he ended up being released near the end of summer completely healed after two successful sheds (my parents don't live near a reptile vet, so it wasn't even an option).

My point is that whether because of finances or location, a vet visit typically isn't in the cards for a wild rescue for most people, leaving either TLC or some sort of animal-oriented charity/student vet school/ect if you're lucky enough to find one that will take something like an extremely common species of snake or a baby anole.

[Albert Clark]

Well, I think it was a valiant attempt to save a life even though the anole didn't survive. At least he was given a chance. Sonya610, kudos to you! These guys (anoles) have very complicated and intricate systems that require special microinstruments , it would have been difficult for the vet to save him also. Good call and great job!

[joeysgreen]

With rescues I only spend money if there looks to be a specific problem with a straightforward solution. I'm not stupid enough to take an animal with vague problems to the vet and expect a battery of tests to cost $50.

Lora, I think that's the root of the problem that I'm getting at. You are deciding the fate of this animal based on your interpretation of what might be a straightforward solution. And you are taking my suggestion of offering a donation as a measure of what can be done. Don't give anything if you wish. The care will still be there because they (wildlife rehabber's) have access to it and funds dedicated for the care of wildlife. Even without "a battery of tests", simple fluid therapy and pain management will see a lot more cases survive, or at least die a comfortable death (euthanasia is sometimes an unfortunate part of wildlife care). Your state fish and wildlife website should have an extensive list of licenced wildlife rehabilitators, and yes, many do take in reptiles. The small state of Oklahoma for instance has several hundred options to choose from.

I see a lot of excuses why things are done the way they are. I'm offering advice as to how things can be done better, to raise the bar.

Ian

[d_virginiana]

You are deciding the fate of this animal based on your interpretation of what might be a straightforward solution.

Yes, I am deciding the fate of that animal when I find it struggling around half-blind in the wild and decide not to let it get eaten by the neighborhood cats.
No I am not deciding the fate of that animal based on my interpretation. There's usually a vet phone-call or two involved at the very least, and a turn-over to a rehab organization with the volunteer of fostering if it's something that can't be handled at home.

I see a lot of excuses why things are done the way they are. I'm offering advice as to how things can be done better, to raise the bar.

No, you're making someone who came here with the best intentions and an animal that was so small it probably couldn't be effectively treated feel bad for not donating to a wildlife charity or spending money on a vet visit when she did more than what most would do.

I'm a graduate student, currently unemployed, and barely making ends meet. I find it a little insulting when people tell me I should donate or take a sick animal (that I did not sign up to have any responsibility for) to the vet. Yes, I take advantage of low-to-no-cost options when possible, and I suggest those to others. I didn't presume that the OP had money to give a donation to cover medical care (she may, she may not, I don't know), so I suggested that maybe she could offer to foster instead. You say "Don't give anything if you wish" like it's my choice rather than my financial reality that dictates these things. If I donated or took injured wild animals to the vet on my own dime it would be very irresponsible, as it would deplete the money I have saved up in case one of my pets needs emergency vet attention. Frankly, a lot of the suggestions you offer on this site, while they may be medically correct, are completelyoutside the realm of what a casual hobbyist can/will spend on a garter snake. I'm not criticizing your intentions, just the plausibility of a lot of the suggestions.

You say you "see a lot of excuses as to why things are done the way they are". If you can find anything to criticize how Sonya handled the anole situation then I think you're holding people to an unrealistic standard. She did just fine, and more than what should be expected for an animal she has no responsibility for.

I'm confused as to why you're acting like someone who calls a rehabber or rescue organization without an offer of money is somehow not doing their best, when in reality they are doing more for the animals than most would.

[joeysgreen]

Lora, and Sonya, first and foremost, I don't want to make you feel bad for doing what you did. You did the best with the information and resources that you had available to you and as discussed, the first, best treatment for most wildlife cases is to reduce stress.

Lora, I understand that most good samaritans have nothing to donate. If my suggestion to offer something was offensive, it wasn't meant to be.

It is free to bring the animal to someone with the resources (money and expertise) to take the animal off your hands and give the best treatment available. I don't understand how this suggestion is insulting or not in the best interest of both the animal and the good samaritan.

As for the level of information I offer here and elsewhere on this website, I think that an informed hobbyist is a better hobbyist. And while I want to make this world a better place, I do realize it isn't my world and others will do as they wish. No one is forcing anyone to do what's best, but if there is a trend for better care, or for less wild-caught, or to take that extra step, then I can't say I'd frown against progress.

[d_virginiana]

There is nothing offensive about suggesting that someone take an animal to a rescue/university/whatever. If I sounded like I thought that I didn't mean to.

Oh, I'd love to be able to realistically recommend a vet visit on a lot of the sites I visit, and often do even though I know it won't happen. The sad fact is that 90% of people who keep exotics do so on a whim (this site is one of the few that seems to be largely made up of more dedicated keepers which is why I've been on it so long) and won't bother to spend the time and money. Then you run into the issue of exotic vet care not being at the level vet care for more common pets is. For example I find it hard to recommend a vet visit to someone for something like a vaguely ill frog or a sick baby garter because the odds are they will end up with a huge vet bill, extra stress on the animal, and still end up with a dead animal. I've run into that several times with my garters since they are smaller than a lot of common pet species and I'm lucky enough to be able to go to the nation's first exotic vet practice for civilian purposes (all previous ones had been for zoos and what have you).

I didn't mean to sound so harsh, I think we just have different views on when vet care is a realistic option for reptiles.