Low Standards for High Flyers?

dayreleaseWho has their hands on raptors?

reformWIRES has received a copy of an email from Wildlifewhistleblowers which was sent to NSW National Parks.

This email talks about concerns that some raptors may not be handled in accordance with WIRES authorization. They suggest members feel this can't be raised with the management as the state raptor coordinator is a previous member of the Board, an employee of WIRES and has friendships with Board members. Members are afraid of recriminations.

Go to topGo straight to commentsAdd a commentConcerns for WIRES Raptor License: Is NPWS Policy being followed? Is the Process for authorization being followed? Do facilities for Raptor rehabilitation meet the standards and guidelines? Are unauthorized carers receiving raptors?

There is a shortage of Raptor carers within each region. Some branches have none and haven't for years, despite people willing to rehabilitate and house this species. Why doesn't the raptor coordinator… coordinate and encourage members from branches without raptor carers to train some?

Experienced carers in WIRES have been discriminated against having been rejected from attending Raptor Training Courses, not given raptor care authorization, or not given raptors to care for once qualified.

There are concerns for the welfare of raptors within the WIRES system. i.e. A raptor being fed a euthanized animal; nocturnal species being released during the day. 

Branches ask where are their injured and sick raptors? Who takes them away and to where? Are they returned? Why aren't branches told about what happens to these birds from their area?


# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?circus 2011-11-30 15:11
The main raptor article commented on the lack of raptor rehabilitators within WIRES. God knows we have always needed them.
As a former trainer I can say that over the years the Raptor Team trained hundreds of people. We did all we could to increase the number of courses per year and to take the courses to parts of the state other than Sydney.
After members have been trained the next step was to get facilities together and authorise rehabilitators. The reason it doesn’t happen is MONEY. It can cost thousands to get facilities that are anywhere near acceptable.
I’d love to know why WIRES bends over backwards to reimburse expenses for committee members to attend meetings when they rarely if ever spend money on achieving and maintaining acceptable facilities within the branches. As a former trainer I know how many promising carers turned up time and again to attend courses and refreshers only to have their and their branch’s ambitions stymied by LACK OF FUNDS.
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?guest 2011-12-02 01:03
Those lucky ones who actually do get to care for raptors are those who can afford those thousands of dollars to provide their own facilities. Spending funds on actual animal essentials such as purpose built facilities simply doesn’t happen very often. Its to do with agendas and priorities. Successful and active carers have to be wealthy enough to provide for themselves and it’s not just the facilities. Food is very expensive. Raptors and reptiles aren’t going to be reared, cared for and released on subsidised Wombaroo.
I heard there could only be 2 raptor carers per branch who must be approved?
I know a raptor carer and they are run off their feet and the cost of feeding is excessive so why would carer numbers be restricted? If true, this sort of directive doesn’t cater to the best interests of the animals or the membership.
a guest
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?a guest 2011-12-06 15:58
It’s clear from the article on where the money goes Circus and Guest that the board should be set up video links for meetings and the savings used to pay for raptor facilities. For the sake of the raptors.
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?circus 2011-12-20 16:46
It seems that if your passion within WIRES is committee work and attending meetings you get paid - sorry, reimbursed. If your passion is animals other than mammals, you don’t. We didn’t get any help with feeding the birds or maintaining our raptor food factory.
As for our facilities - we did it the easy way by converting an existing structure into aviaries using unwanted and second-hand materials. We were lucky to have had those resources. Many prospective raptor rehabbers have had to start from scratch and boy does that cost a lot.
It may not have occured to WIRES that most of the volunteers who have the TIME to devote to wildlife (rather than committee work) are going to be unemployed or on a pension. They need help and there is only so much their branches can do.
As for the “two rehabbers per branch” - last thing I heard that was a NPWS thing not a WIRES regulation and I don’t know whether or not anyone has tried to change it.
# Guest 2012-02-01 23:23
It is a NPWS thing from a long time ago and should be changed but WIRES can’t change NPWS stuff except ask
# Apache 2012-02-02 13:57
Has anyone asked? answer is probably not. I think theres more to the relationship between the board and npws because they get on fine most the time!!!!
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?Guest 2011-11-16 12:34
If you want to be truly truthful and honest ad say its about ideas not persnalities why are only ideas that agree accepable? Some WIRES members know there are prblems but know people are doing their best and are suporting and trying to make a diffrence with training and change like that not revolution that hurts people.
Also if a post is defamatory why is it left for lots of people to read then taken down? Why not checked from the beginning?
I seen posts here from people who did the bad things being complained of and resigned from WIRES just before they were kicked uut for those things. Like a person who took animals to schools and left one untreated by a vet even though the coordinator told her to tae it and didnt feed propely then was just about to be kicked out then she resigned and complained about the coordinator. So WIRES is trying to do things but all tied up with rules so people get away with it. That’s not WIRES thats the people doing the wrong things. Like those feeding tea and arrowroots to joeys then saying the coordinator is perscetung them when she tries to get them to do it right.
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?Spartacus 2011-11-17 13:49
All posts are moderated from the start - no post goes up without our approval. Our legal team checks them for defamation / libel. We post all opinions (even yours) - we reject ONLY posts that are legally questionable and in that event we encourage and suggest alterations to make the comment legally acceptable. Your assertion is incorrect.
The rest of your post is, as always, approved without amendment even though it makes criticism of us and others. You are free to say what you want and be judged for it by those who read it.
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?geoaussie 2011-11-15 07:24
I am very concerned about the training practices of WIRES. I am a specialist carer unrecognised by WIRES. This is because I have not been able to attend a specialist training course. It is not because I dont want to but because there has not been one run that I could attend. There has only been one run in our district in the last ten years and I was in hospital at the time. All others have been at least 150km away and I cannot afford the travel and accommodation to attend. I have commpleted other training courses not recognised by WIRES. I have also organised a specialist national conference on the care and management of my species. It is interesting that I do get a lot of calls especially for adult animals that nobody else knows how to deal with but I get an absolute refusal to have my specialist knowledge acknowledged. I am also a board member for an organistion promoting the care and protection of my species and am very concerned that the WIRES manual is somewhat out of date. But because I am not a “specialist” my advice and the advice of other carers in the support network I have become apart of is ignored.
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?Guest 2011-11-15 00:07
Shooting is allowed because its quick. Lots of people pick animals up that vets think will be OK but they know it would be OK as a pet but not in the wild and they take it to another vet or euthnize themselves. If NPWS asaid it was OK why is ig still a WIRES matter? I’ve even picked birds up that the vet say give TLC and its been dead before I get home. Why did the rescuer go to NPWS instaed of the WIRES complaints anyway?
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?Wattlebird 2011-11-11 10:02
Absolutely agree - covering up “sins” by those in power is rife in WIRES and I have also seen it in a few other groups - bring back all those volunteers who are trying to make changes and introduce better practices. It is the animals that we care for and it should be DECCW’s first priority to ensure that all groups are being correctly run so that the wildlife can have the very best care that is available to them.
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?Guest 2011-10-31 08:27
An easy way to resolve these problems is to have regular and random audits for all rescuers and carers. The call information can be gotten from the database and it does not have to be old.
So why isn’t this done already?
I thought our licenses (from NPWS) are based on appropriate training, handling and releases. So who monitors this compliance?
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?sad 2011-11-03 01:10
No one
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?Wattlebird 2011-11-05 09:01
Yes Sad - nobody monitors anything. There are supposed to be checks made on carers but it never happens. I couldn’t tell you the number of times that I have said “I wish NPWS would go to that place and check it out” - no they just don’t care about our wildlife.
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?guest 2011-11-06 02:00
Quote - "Species Coordinators"...."their responsibilities include providing guidance and support to fauna rehabilitators and ensuring compliance"
The Code of Practice for Injured Sick and Orphaned Protected Fauna 3.3.4 states that Species Coordinators are responsible for compliance which is totally ridiculous and DECC know it, if only because I and others have pointed it out to them.
Your average Species Coordinator or Animal Officer has no knowledge of this and they will do what their group allows them to do and nothing more. Groups themselves would have to deliberately enact this to bring it into existence. Some groups may do this already. I have never heard it mentioned in my branch but this is what the Code says. Many Animal Officers would not want to be involved in compliance - they want to work with animals, not be the police. I’ve never heard it discussed within the branch. But oh! doesnt it look good on paper. You have to ask if there was ever any intention for compliance to actually take place. Its too messy, contentious and troublesome altogether.
It’s time
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?It’s time 2011-11-08 17:54
And what happens when the “Species Coordinator’ is in breach of acceptable animal care practices? I have seen for myself what happens - it is simply covered up, and anyone who suggests otherwise is hounded to the extent they stop trying to introduce better practices.
One that got away
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?One that got away 2012-01-27 17:38
Our branch discussed the COP at a branch meeting not long after it was approved. It was pointed out tht animal officers/species coordinators had responsibility to inspect and keep compliance. One of the senior coordinators went ballistic saying she would never let anyone inspect her and challenged the powers that be to bring the police with them. She was literally foot stamping and glowing red with anger. It was hilarious. As if any of the animal officers are actually going to do compliance or care what DECC says.
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?guest 2012-01-28 02:11
When the draft COP was released for comment DECC were told that species coordinators would not carry out compliance and that animal officers had no authority within the organisation to carry out that role and would not be given it. They were also told that people did not join WIRES to become compliance officers and the majority would reject the role completely. However it doesn’t really matter to DECC, they don’t care whether there’s compliance or not, it’s only important that it is all documented as there being a process. It absolves them of responsibility. What a joke, the whole system is sick as.
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?watsgoinon 2011-10-30 18:03
database disaster -entries not accurate often because when user attempts to update information, it simply refuses to accept changes & register alterations!
Who’s got time to go back and back (again or later) to do it - just pass info to coordinators and know it, likely, WON”T ever be done correctly!!
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?Bernie 2011-11-14 06:41
You may have heard the saying “If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys”. What do you get if you if you pay nothing?
Time for a change
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?Time for a change 2011-10-28 09:32
OMG is this in care or a pet?
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?Guest 2011-10-28 23:11
Looks like a late afternoon release photo. Aren’t they great birds
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?Guest 2011-10-29 12:27
Do people look on the database to see what happens to the birds?
Magnum P.I.
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?Magnum P.I. 2011-10-29 18:26
Oh dear - have you seen that database? Records years old with animals registered as species “unspecified” or as “unknown reptile” (or bird or possum or...), or injury “unspecified” or cause “unspecified” or still “in care” years later - still in the care of the rescuer years after it was rescued, OR all of the above. That’s if it is filled in at all - some branches some years have almost no records. That database is a shocker - when you have a database so wildly inaccurate and poorly maintained you can’t trust anything coming from it and what a great place to hind information - right where no one checks it and no one has to, and no one can be sure anything in it is accurate.
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?Snoopycruiser 2011-10-30 15:19
You are quite right, the data base is a “dog’s breakfast”, you almost have to search for an entry that’s correct. The whole data base is worse than useless. Instead of HO playing bureaucratic policeman and nit-picking on members, members they are supposed represent and help, why don’t they use their erstwhile resources to fix their daft data base.
It’s time
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?It’s time 2011-11-05 18:06
It has been my experience that the data entered is frequently inaccurate for many species. This has been brought to the attention of data recorder and management.
It is particularly concerning when this data is used to support publicity items; fundraising from the public;research etc.
# RE: Low Standards for High Flyers?guest 2011-11-19 00:18
This data is also used to provide official reporting to DECC - what a joke, its so inaccurate it may as well be just made up. This data would be valuable if it were accurate - such a wasted opportunity due to nothing more than gross incompetence caused by those in charge having an agenda that has little to do with the welfare of wildlife.

Add comment


SUBSCRIBE TO UPDATES - This option has been deleted due to abuse. You now have no reason to leave an email address so that option is gone too.

Security code

Write the minister

NSW Environment Minister - Paul SpeakmansGive The Minister the message


Put them behind bars!

What is reformwires?


Additional information