Hi Pam,
My Mongolian study covers all of the livestock present in the area - sheep,
goats, cows, yaks and horses. The issues around 'harvesting' and/or
'leaving' dead animals are complex and pertain not only to pest control but
also to human health, animal health and even the less measurable but no less
important human desire to live in a clean environment. You’re correct to
pick up on proximity to habitation sites - if an animal should die far
enough away then they will be left; the effort of bringing it back outweighs
the other factors I just mentioned, which are lessened by the distance. For
the same reasons, the pyre/dump is built as far from the main living area as
possible. Similarly, in my Ethiopian study, all deadstock, whether disposed
of by burial or exposure, was left a minimum of 200m from the village and
often further.
If an animal has died of starvation there's likely to be little worth
'harvesting' from it in any case. Where you can be certain that it died of
disease disposal can be an important measure to stop that disease spreading
- both to other animals and to humans. It is not always clear if an animal
was carrying a disease when it died though, so why take the risk?
As Sue said, there are currently very tight restrictions in the UK about
disposal of livestock - since F&M it is no longer permissible to bury
deadstock on your own holdings or burn it; they have to be collected by an
officially appointed government contractor. Often in remote areas though
this is simply not practical and, in any case, where livestock are free
roaming a dead animal may not be found that quickly/easily - both points
evident from my case-studies and (you'd have thought) common sense would
predict that but apparently bureaucrats don't always put much stock in
common sense.
Best regards,
Lee G. Broderick. BA (Hons), MSc, FZS
Zooarchaeologist
www.zooarchaeology.co.uk
This e-mail is intended only for the person or entity to which it is
addressed and may contain information that is private and confidential. If
an addressing or transmission has misdirected this e-mail, please notify the
author by replying to this e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient you
must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail.
We sweep all outgoing messages for the presence of computer viruses.
However, we cannot accept any responsibility for any loss or damage to your
systems due to viruses or malicious code not detected.
-----Original Message-----
From: Analysis of animal remains from archaeological sites
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sue Millard
Sent: 31 October 2013 16:17
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ZOOARCH] Mass burning of animal carcasses
There's also the problem of a carcase attracting rats if it's left near
houses.
Modern farming practice is to have dead stock picked up by the National
Fallen Stock scheme, but in remote areas far from roads it often doesn't
make economic sense to haul a dead sheep down off the high fell and pay for
it to be taken away. I think there's also a feeling that if the fox is going
to eat any of your stock he might as well eat the old dead ones as kill one
of the live (better) ones for himself.
I am reminded of the old farming song I've heard at Hunt suppers, "Old
Mutton Pies" in which the young farm hand complains of being fed exclusively
on the elderly ewes that have died around the farm. "And the farmer said,
Sit down, young pup, for thou'll get nowt else till it's all etten up!"
Sue Millard
On 31 Oct 2013 at 11:33, Pam Cross wrote:
>
>
>Certainly singular deaths
> from climate seem to be generally left for predators/rot here in the
>Dales and also in some areas of the US SW. I'm still surprised
>winterkills wouldn't be harvested (are dogs not allowed to scavenge
>sheep for fear of them attacking live animals?) or just left rather
>than burnt. Is there some sort of predator/dog attraction issue?
> Especially if they're near habitation sites, I suppose? Pamela J
Cross
Sue Millard MSc, BEd
Web minion for Fell Pony and Countryside Museums
http://www.fellpony.f9.co.uk/
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4158 / Virus Database: 3615/6792 - Release Date: 10/29/13
|
