Listen to this story.

Dr. Michelle Willette, a senior veterinarian at The Raptor Center in Minnesota, examines a bald eagle. Photo courtesy of Dr. Michelle Willette.

Photo courtesy of Dr. Michelle Willette

A senior veterinarian at The Raptor Center at the University of Minnesota, Dr. Michelle Willette examines a bald eagle.

For possibly as long as there have been people and wild creatures, individuals with a soft spot for nature have taken in injured or orphaned animals and tried to nurse them back to health.

And when, 40 years or so ago, wildlife rehabilitation became an established endeavor with national and international advocacy organizations, it was driven by people without formal training in medicine, and largely still is.

Now, in a world where humans are encroaching more deeply into other species' domains, wildlife's needs are more complicated. To meet those needs, the rehabilitation sphere requires more involvement from people trained in veterinary medicine, and more veterinarians need training specifically in wildlife rehabilitation.

That's the case laid out by Dr. Michelle Willette, a leading proponent for creating a veterinary specialty in clinical wildlife practice.

"These animals are coming to the point where it isn't just a displaced orphan that needs a little hand-rearing and then is released," she said, ticking off present-day threats such as extreme weather disasters driven by a changing climate and new infectious diseases, whether novel forms of avian influenza or white-nose syndrome or Covid-19.

"We have all these new diseases that affect wildlife and, therefore, more animals are going to rehab and more animals are requiring a higher and higher level of veterinary input," Willette said.

Her observations and advocacy stem from her experience as a senior veterinarian at The Raptor Center at the University of Minnesota College of Veterinary Medicine, where she is also an assistant professor in veterinary population medicine and ecosystem health.

Willette and fellow advocates of a formal specialty focused on the clinical care of wildlife submitted their proposal last week to the American Board of Veterinary Specialties (ABVS). Part of the American Veterinary Medical Association, the ABVS confers recognition to veterinary specialties. A decision on the wildlife proposal is anticipated next spring.

As in human medical fields, veterinary medicine has a number of specialty areas. To date, ABVS recognizes 48 specialties that are overseen by 22 specialty organizations, according to the AVMA.

The proposed wildlife specialty would operate under the American Board of Veterinary Practitioners (ABVP), which has 12 specialties, including shelter medicine practice, exotic companion mammal practice, swine health management and fish practice.

In deciding recognition of any proposed new specialty, a key question before the ABVS is whether it is distinct from existing specialties.

The organization that oversees the zoological medicine specialty maintains that a clinical wildlife practice specialty would be duplicative.

"[D]iplomates of our college fill many niches in veterinary medicine, including as wildlife health professionals performing clinical wildlife medicine," Dr. Krista Keller, secretary of the American College of Zoological Medicine, said by email. "The current certification structure through the ACZM does require knowledge and competence in clinical wildlife medicine."

Veterinarians seeking specialist status in zoological medicine may pursue certification in any of four disciplines: aquatic animal health, general zoo health, wildlife population health and zoological companion animal health.

Willette argues that none quite speaks to the work of veterinarians in wildlife rehabilitation, who tend to individual animals with the goal of safely returning them to their natural habitats.

"I'm acutely very aware of how much overlap there is and yet how there's these different skill sets, because the goals are different ..." said Willette, referring to treating an animal that will remain captive versus one intended for return to the wild.

Willette is a former zoo veterinarian and a specialist in veterinary preventive medicine. She also is pursuing board certification in animal welfare.

While the zoological medicine specialty offers a wildlife population certification, that doesn't quite fit, either, Willette maintains, "because you're not dealing with individuals; you're dealing with the population."

In caring for individual wild animals, for example, "You have to make sure that you do not habituate it to people and that you keep it in a low-stress environment because it's already in a room with predators," she said, meaning people, "and it's already impaired with whatever is wrong with it — either injured or sick or orphaned."

Dr. Stephen Divers, a zoological medicine specialist at the University of Georgia College of Veterinary Medicine, opposes the proposed specialty, agreeing with the ACZM that clinical wildlife medicine is already covered.

"Clinical wildlife medicine is absolutely central to the wildlife [certification] that the ACZM offers, and that specialty is well established," Divers said. "It has excellent standards and it is a comprehensive exam, and the people that take it typically dedicate the majority of their time to the specialty, whether it be working with free-ranging wildlife or wildlife rehabilitation triage and clinical medicine."

Sitting for the zoological specialty exam is a two-day, two-part endeavor. Part one of the test is the same for all examinees. Part two differs by discipline. For those pursuing a wildlife population health certification, Divers said, the exam covers biology and ecology, environmental factors, population medicine, restraint of the patient, medicine and surgery, mortality and crisis management, conservation and One Health, scientific research, regulatory affairs and communications with the public.

"I would say 75% is directly related to the care of individual wildlife patients," he said.

Divers was one of about 145 individuals or entities that submitted comments to the ABVS during a public comment period this summer. Under the process of requesting recognition, comments are shared with the proponents, who are asked to address questions and concerns in their formal application.

According to Willette, "more than 70% of the comments were overwhelmingly positive. There were also some neutral comments and requests for more detailed information. The bulk of the unfavorable comments were concerned with a possible overlap with existing specialties." Proposals submitted to the ABVS must address commenters' questions and doubts.

At the University of Minnesota College of Veterinary Medicine Raptor Center, a great horned owl has its eyes examined

Photo by Lori Arent

At the University of Minnesota College of Veterinary Medicine Raptor Center, a great horned owl has its eyes examined.

Cultural shifts drive need for more wildlife focus

Willette said the growing need for wildlife veterinary care is driven partly by demand from the public, which increasingly is sensitive to animal welfare.

"We have a lot of people living in urban areas where there are squirrels and rabbits and deer and raccoons and ducks and songbirds, and they're always getting injured," she said, and people who find them expect there to be someplace they can take the animals. That might be to a rehabilitator, if they know of one, or it might be to a veterinarian.

Whether a given veterinarian will know quite what to do with the wild species is another matter. Willette said that while more veterinary schools in the United States offer exposure to clinical wildlife medicine than when she was a student in the 1980s, the training typically is elective.

Inexperience with non-domestic species results in calls like one she once received from a companion animal practitioner, who was examining an owlet someone had brought in. Concerned about the cloudy look of its lenses and its lack of a menace or fear reflex, the doctor told Willette, "I'm pretty sure it's blind."

Willette explained that its eyes and behavior were normal for its age. "This is how baby owls act," she assured her colleague. "So, no, do not euthanize it."

Lack of wildlife-specific training also can lead well-intentioned veterinarians to treat in a way that may be appropriate for a pet but not for an animal that must fend for itself in the wild. Moreover, because many wild species are protected by state or federal laws, determining appropriate treatment is complicated.

"Veterinarians in general, we're used to fixing things," Willette said, offering as an example a bird with a broken leg. A practitioner assessing the fracture might conclude, "I cannot fix that broken leg, but I can amputate it."

Such a move would have complicated implications. With many species, a plan to amputate requires first consulting with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. A bird with an amputation that cannot be safely returned to the wild would need to be kept in captivity "or, if behaviorally, [that] is not appropriate," Willette said, "now you need to euthanize it after you put it through all of that stress."

State laws also govern the practice of wildlife rehabilitation, much of which is done in laypeople's homes or small outbuildings, Willette said. Typically, rehabilitators and rehabilitation organizations are compelled to have a veterinarian of record, but such veterinarians aren't required to have clinical training in wildlife, she said.

Divers, the zoological medicine specialist, agrees that general practitioners could benefit from training in wildlife medicine but believes becoming a specialist isn't warranted for a doctor whose contact with free-ranging animals is limited.

"If you're doing wildlife 10 to 20% of the time ... that doesn't mean you need to be a specialist. You could be well served by doing CE courses in wildlife," he said, speaking of continuing education.

Earlier this year, before the clinical wildlife practice specialty proposal was formulated, the specialist organization ABVP suggested to the zoological medicine organization ACZM that they jointly establish a wildlife practice fellowship. It was envisioned as available to diplomates in both colleges "to advance wildlife acumen," according to Dr. Michael Dutton, who is certified in four ABVP specialties and is the founder of the New Hampshire Veterinary Center for Wildlife, a nonprofit practice anticipated to open next year.

"ACZM declined to participate," Dutton said.

Divers said the specialist community has a broad concern that a proliferation of credential levels would confuse the public and ultimately degrade the specialist designation. "We've got to hold the line," he said.

For training more veterinarians in clinical wildlife practice, proponents of the specialty see it as "a way of establishing veterinary expertise and credentials that will benefit all stakeholders working with wildlife in clinical practice," Willette said. CE, fellowships, internships and residencies, she added, would "benefit from having specialists with recognized subject matter expertise."

Recognition of new specialties does not happen readily. According to the AVMA, the ABVS has received one to two inquiries a year during the past 10 years or so about possible new specialties. Some inquiries have ended with proponents not pursuing recognition.

In the past decade, the ABVS has recognized four new specialties or specialty organizations: equine dental in 2014, equine diagnostic imaging in 2019, the American College of Veterinary Nephrology and Urology in 2022, and fish practice in 2023.