Should we intervene to help wildlife

[Catherine]

It seems that there is now a movement to get involved with wildlife to reduce suffering and death. The issue is known as Wild Animal Welfare (WAW). It is a complex subject and if done badly more harm will be done. The well meaning people who "rescued" a baby Bison ultimately separated it from its herd and mother and caused its death. However providing vaccines to stop the spread of disease can have a real positive effect.

I think it is natural that we want to help, but we also feel that we should let nature take its course. The right way is probably a balance between the two positions. A lot of wildlife is in trouble because of things we have done. Helping in that case is just undoing the damage we have done. Whatever we do we need to think it through carefully. 

https://www.fastcompany.com/90339706/the...f-wildlife

On a local level with my own garden, I don't have a feeder for the birds, but I did plant trees and shrubs that naturally provide food and shelter. I see it as a more reliable long term solution. I set it up so that nature can help my local birds.

Building tunnels and bridges so wildlife can safely cross roads is another way of intervening to prevent animal deaths. We built the roads that are killing animals in the first place so it makes sense for us to do this.

Turtle watch volunteers who protect turtle nests until they hatch are really just giving the animals a boost since they have been so badly impacted by human activity. This is a well thought out idea that does help.  It is important that any action taken be carefully considered so it does actually help. There are many stories of human intervention that has been disastrous. Right now animals need us to make good choices when we help them.