True that in the “Winter of White Death” in Mongolia, record summer heat in Russia’s Far East, and biblical (once-in-a-century) flooding in Pakistan, tens of millions of domesticated animal have perished, taking with them the livelihoods of their owners.
But regarding “Who’d be a livestock keeper these days?” What else would you be on the Mongolian Steppe, on the coldest permanently inhabited spot on earth, or in the conflict-ridden and poverty-stricken Indus Valley? Those of us working for the International Livestock Research Institute believe livestock can be a pathway out of poverty. One reason is because livestock keeping is so often the “only” way to make a living.
But that doesn’t mean keeping livestock always leads to progress. Here, for example, is an alarming archaeological note on the web about the Indus Valley, whose floodplain was an early cradle of civilization 9,000 years ago:
> 1400 cities have been found.
> As the Indus flooded, cities were rebuilt on top of each other.
> Each city was built a little less skillfully than the city below it.
> The most developed was on the bottom: Ancient Indus, Harappan Civilization.
You’re quite right, of course. Livestock keeping and herding are indeed the most rational — indeed the only possible — livelihoods in some areas. I was just being facetious. I guess the question is whether something is being done at least to minimize genetic erosion in these livestock populations, so that when the recovery in numbers happen it can be as sustainable as possible.
True that in the “Winter of White Death” in Mongolia, record summer heat in Russia’s Far East, and biblical (once-in-a-century) flooding in Pakistan, tens of millions of domesticated animal have perished, taking with them the livelihoods of their owners.
But regarding “Who’d be a livestock keeper these days?” What else would you be on the Mongolian Steppe, on the coldest permanently inhabited spot on earth, or in the conflict-ridden and poverty-stricken Indus Valley? Those of us working for the International Livestock Research Institute believe livestock can be a pathway out of poverty. One reason is because livestock keeping is so often the “only” way to make a living.
But that doesn’t mean keeping livestock always leads to progress. Here, for example, is an alarming archaeological note on the web about the Indus Valley, whose floodplain was an early cradle of civilization 9,000 years ago:
> 1400 cities have been found.
> As the Indus flooded, cities were rebuilt on top of each other.
> Each city was built a little less skillfully than the city below it.
> The most developed was on the bottom: Ancient Indus, Harappan Civilization.
You’re quite right, of course. Livestock keeping and herding are indeed the most rational — indeed the only possible — livelihoods in some areas. I was just being facetious. I guess the question is whether something is being done at least to minimize genetic erosion in these livestock populations, so that when the recovery in numbers happen it can be as sustainable as possible.