Risk of capture-related mortality in large free-ranging mammals: experiences from Scandinavia

Abstract Chemical capture and anaesthesia of free-ranging mammals will always involve some risk of mortality even in healthy animals. Deaths may be directly or indirectly attributable to the anaesthetic event itself (e.g. drug overdose, drowning during induction and dart trauma) or may be caused by secondary effects from the capture (e.g. stress, myopathy, trauma or instrumentation with radio-transmitters). In long-term research projects on five major wildlife species in Scandinavia, the capture-related mortality rates (number of captures) were: moose Alces alces 0.7% (N = 2,816), brown bears Ursus arctos 0.9% (N = 1,079), wolverines Gulo gulo 2.8% (N = 461), Eurasian lynx Lynx lynx 3.9% (N = 380), and gray wolves Canis lupus 3.4% (N = 89). We suggest that wildlife professionals should strive for a zero mortality rate but adopt the standard that a mortality rate of > 2% probably should not be accepted in any large mammalian species. This can be achieved by: 1) using an experienced professional capture team, 2) developing and following a capture protocol specific to each species, and 3) requiring that a mortality assessment be undertaken after any capture-related death. This assessment should re-evaluate the capture protocol, including how changes in anaesthetics and methodological approaches could have prevented the mortality.