Performance Standards in

Wildlife
John A. Bryan, II, DVM, MS
Wildlife Veterinarian
Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study (SCWDS) at the
University of Georgia College of Veterinary Medicine

Contents
Performance Standards (PS):
A Brief Word
PS Definitions as they relate
to Wildlife Research.
Ecology, Experience,
Flexibility, and Ingenuity:
Developing (and Recognizing)
PS in Wildlife Research
An Example

PS: A Brief Word

Performance Standard:
A standard or guideline that,
while describing a desired
outcome, provides flexibility in
achieving this outcome by
granting discretion to those
responsible for managing the
animal care and use program,
the researcher, and the IACUC.
The performance approach
requires professional input,
sound judgment, and a team
approach to achieve specific
goals, The Guide, p. 6.

PS: A Brief Word

Performance Standard
(Parameters/Definition):

Primarily as pertains to Project

Review/Oversight.

A Standard or Guideline
Describes a Desired Outcome
Provides Flexibility in Achieving that
Outcome
Discretionary Authority:

Left to or regulated by ones own

discretion or judgment, American
Heritage College Dictionary, 3rd
Edition.
The power of a local government
(entity) to conduct its own affairs,
Advisory Commission on
Intergovernmental Relations, 1981.

PS: A Brief Word

Discretionary Authority (cont.):
Granted to:

ACUP Managers
IACUCs
PIs (Researchers)

PS Developmental Requirements:
Professional Input
Sound Judgment
Team Approach

PS: A Brief Word

Performance Standards:
Design:

De novo?
Resources

Application (Implementation &

Monitoring):

Best Practice Tools employed in the

assessment of animal use activities.
Specifically to ensure compliance
with relevant law and/or policy

The point is to achieve the

desired outcome of the highest
possible standards of animal care
in the context of compliance,
regardless of circumstance.

PS Definitions in Wildlife Research

What traditional resources
exist, and what guidance do
they provide?
The AWA/R
The Guide

What other resources exist,

and what guidance do they
provide?

PS Definitions in Wildlife Research

The AWAR:
1.1 Definitions:
Field Study means a study
conducted on free-living wild
animals in their natural habitat.
However, this term excludes any
study that involves an invasive
procedure, harms, or materially
alters the behavior of an animal
under study.

PS Definitions in Wildlife Research

The AWAR:
2.31 (2): Inspect, at least once every
six months, all of the research
facilitys animal facilities, including
animal study areas, using title 9,
chapter 1, subchapter A Animal
Welfare, as a basis for evaluation;
Provided, however, That animal
areas containing free-living wild
animals in the natural habitat need
not be included in such inspection.
2.31 (8)(d): IACUC review of
activities involving animalsfield
studies as defined in part 1 of this
subchapter are exempt from this
requirement.
Photo Credit: Gavin Emmons, 2011

PS Definitions in Wildlife Research

The Guide:
The Guide does not purport to be a

compendium of all information

regarding field biology and methods
used in wildlife investigations, but
the basic principles of humane care
and use apply to animals living
under natural conditions. IACUCs
engaged in the review of field studies
are encouraged to consult with a
qualified wildlife biologist.
(ILAR Guide, pg. 32)

PS Definitions in Wildlife Research

Other Resources:
AFS
ASM
OC

PS Definitions in Wildlife Research

Points:
Flexible PSs are to be created
via discretionary authority
(using professional input,
sound judgment, and a team
approach) to achieve a desired
outcome (e.g. compliance).
How is this achieved in the
realm of wildlife?
Is it different than the lab?
If so, how? Why?

Ecology, Experience, Flexibility, and

Ingenuity
How are PSs created in
Wildlife Research Oversight?
Ecology
Know the environment, climate, season,
physiology (potentially dynamic) of
species. Nothing in isolation.

Experience
Whos done this?

Flexibility
Contingencies; Knowns, Known
Unknowns, and Unknown Unknowns,
D. Rumsfeld

Ingenuity
Quick responses; on the fly

Ecology, Experience, Flexibility, and

Ingenuity
Ecology:

The cornerstone of wildlife project

oversight. Cannot be
underestimated.
Environment: tropical, temperate,
arctic, marine, mountainous,
desert, etc.
Climate: precipitation, wind,
terrain, rapid fluctuations, etc.
Season: winter, spring, summer,
and/or fall
Species Physiology: migration,
reproduction, hibernation, age,
sex, etc.
Now mix all and stir.

Ecology, Experience, Flexibility, and

Ingenuity
Experience
One of the most important
resources/recourses.
Committee Experience
Individual Experience

Committee: Have we seen

something like this before?
How did we approach it?
Individual: Who has done this,
or something similar?
Professional Consultation

Ecology, Experience, Flexibility, and

Ingenuity
Flexibility
Must be equal to the dynamic
nature of wildlife research.
Inflexibility in oversight and/or
project design begs catastrophe.
Attempts at being somewhat
predictive.
Must be informed; e.g. Ecology
and Experience.

Ecology, Experience, Flexibility, and

Ingenuity
Ingenuity:
Flexibility applied.
Should be predictive; based on
ecology and experience.
Adaptive, and repeatedly so.
Responsive; e.g. amendments

Photo Credit: The Denver Post

An Example
A Desert Bighorn Sheep (Ovis canadensis
nelsoni) Project.
Extremely challenging conditions in every
way; e.g. environment, terrain, climate,
and species.
Experience, Flexibility, and Ingenuity in
high demand for both the project and its
oversight; i.e. all aspects of PS
development are in-play.
What happened?

Photo Credit: http://fineartamerica.com/featured/desert-bighorn-sheep-ram-iidonna-van-vlack.html

An Example
Performance Standards at
Work:
Project Review:
Project immediately appreciated
as potentially furiously dynamic.
Recognized need for built-in
flexibility; e.g. prioritized
contingencies and quick
communication.
Heavy on experience of IACUC
membership and professional
consultation (including PI).
Photo Credit: NPS

An Example
Performance Standards at
Work:
The Field:
PI calls from the field.
Need to move to contingency 1 for
capture & handling.
A significant change.

Committee members are prepared,

and on-call during field season.
Members reached, and real-time
discussion takes place with PI in
the field.
Amendment passed in real-time,
recorded, and filed in project folder
and Committee archive.

Photo Credit: http://wwwscf.usc.edu/~anhphi/Final%20Project%20Data/desertbighorn.jpg

An Example
Performance Standards at Work:

During the review for this project, the PI

stated that capture and handling methods
were challenging for the species and the
environment; to which the IACUC responded
that it would be prudent for the PI to
periodically report from the field as to how
things were going.
Thus, the reviewing IACUC members for this
project were aware of the high potential for
an amendment during field season, and were
not caught off guard. How?
Because the IACUC members knew the species,
the environment, the PI, the drugs, and the
seasonal conditions relevant to the project, and
were prepared.
Moreover, the IACUC SOP had been written in
such a way (in consultation with the USDA) as to
allow for spot-amendments from the field for
projects so identified.
Such experience, flexibility, and ingenuity are
the hallmarks of any wildlife IACUC
Performance Standards.

Photo Credit:
http://www.westernwatersheds.org/issues/species/bighorn-sheep/

Thought
Perspective:
Generally: The definition and
parameters of Performance Standards
as provided in the Guide would seem
(ideologically) to be exquisitely in line
with the inherently flexible, dynamic,
and collaborative principles of project
review in the realm of wildlife
research assessment and review.
Specifically: the details of wildlife
project oversight require knowledge
and application unique to the
discipline.

Thank You So Much