Following continued problems with vets refusing to treat or even see dying, sick or injured foxes (and other wildlife) I have for the past four years tried politely to explain to vets that first aid response is important and part of their code as members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons.
Recent events have highlighted a continued refusal to treat sick wildlife and so I sent the following email to The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons: 17th April, 2023
"Hello.
You may recall that I contacted you previously regarding RCVS members and their duty to treat wildlife.
Secret World is a wildlife rescue centre established in the 1970s and is well known locally and nationally. One of its rescuers was called out to an abandoned fox cub and was asked to take it to a vet to insure it was uninjured before being transported down to Somerset. Three vets refused to see or check the cub -these were flat refusals for no reason other than they were not interested in wildlife.
Each rescuer carries a copy of the RCVS guideline to show vets but to date this has been met with lack of interest.
Recently one of the rescuers was called out to a malnourished fox (vixen) and it was obvious that it was suffering -the rescuer noted maggots around its reproductive area.
Avon Lodge Veterinary Practice 283 Wells Road, Bristol BS4 2PP -refused to see the fox. This left the rescuer having to then drive to Rowe veterinary practice, Bradley Stoke who also flatly refused to see or (obviously) euthanise the fox. The rescuer then drove to Highcroft Veterinary practice which, likewise, refused to see the obviously suffering animal.
Considering the state of the fox the fact that the rescuer was told she would need to “get a voucher from the RSPCA” before the vet would consider treating shows not just a disregard for wildlife needing help but what amounted to a totally callous disregard for the suffering of a dying animal.
Bounced from one Bristol vet to another the rescuer had to deal with the extra stress of the suffering fox eventually dying in her car.
I have tried for over 4 years to try to politely get vets on board with helping sick or injured foxes (and other wildlife) but the fact is that they flatly refuse with the rare exception. There can be no excuse to disregard the suffering of an animal in the way these vets are doing and will no doubt continue to do.
The British Fox Study has a web site/blog with a world wide audience and it publicly names bodies or businesses that illegally destroy dens as well as take part in other anti wildlife activities. In the next couple of weeks the veterinary practices named in this email will appear on this list. Basically we have been left with no alternative as the disregard for animal suffering by animal care professionals has to be highlighted and this is a step I would sooner not take but after 4 years a line has to be drawn.
Might I suggest that the RCVS advises its members who are anti wildlife to make it clear that they will not treat any sick or injured wildlife to save people the stress of driving around the City and County trying to find a vet who will help end an animals suffering?
Sincerely
T. Hooper-Scharf"
The following response was received from the RCVS today (Friday 21st April 2023)
Dear Mr Hooper-Scharf
Thank you for your email below.
With regards to treating wildlife, veterinary surgeons must adhere to Paragraph 1.4 of the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons. This says “Veterinary surgeons in practice must take steps to provide 24-hour emergency first aid and pain relief to animals according to their skills and the specific situation”.
You may already be aware of Chapter 3 of the RCVS’s Supporting Guidance to the Code of Professional Conduct. This guidance has been produced to assist veterinary professionals with their duties. I would highlight the following paragraphs which deal with emergency first aid and pain relief:
3.7 The purpose of first aid and pain relief is to attend to the initial and essential welfare needs of the animal. The primary consideration of the veterinary surgeon should be to relieve the animal’s pain and suffering. In some cases, euthanasia may be appropriate.
3.8 A veterinary surgeon on duty should not unreasonably refuse to provide first aid and pain relief for any animal of a species treated by the practice during normal working hours.
3.9 A veterinary surgeon on duty should not unreasonably refuse to facilitate the provision of first aid and pain relief for all other species until such time as a more appropriate emergency veterinary service accepts responsibility for the animal.
3.57 Following initial assessment and the provision of emergency first aid and pain relief, the on-duty veterinary surgeon should make a full and realistic assessment of the prognosis and the options for treatment or euthanasia, taking into account the particular circumstances of the animal and owner.
In the first instance, you may wish to contact the veterinary practices mentioned to raise your concerns directly with them.
I hope the above information is able to help and thank you for contacting the RCVS.
Kind regards"
Prabhjit Soomal
Standards and Advice Officer
Standards and Advice Team ‑ Professional Conduct
Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons
This makes it quite clear that the vets involved have decided to breach the terms of their own professional standards. Not all vets, but a large enough number to show that they have no interest in wildlife or providing the aid they are supposed to.
As I have made this clear to the veterinary practices named repeatedly it seems pointless to once more point out that they are breachi8ng their own code of practice.
In future any vet providing aid as required will be noted as will those who continue to breach their own guidelines.
