Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T22:55:48.197Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Case for New Domestic Animals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2009

Michael A. Crawford
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

You do not grow bananas in the north of Scotland or raspberries in the Serengeti. Similarly temperate-zone cattle are not suited to Africa's semi-arid lands but giraffe and eland thrive. So these and other wild species, says the author, should be domesticated for such lands—40 per cent of Africa south of the Sahara is semi-arid—with cattle farming restricted to the highlands. In addition, research on new systems of management should aim to make use of the wild animals’ preferences for different grasses, bush and browse—from the tree-top using giraffe to the root-digging warthog.

Type
Research Article
Information
Oryx , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , February 1974 , pp. 351 - 360
Copyright
Copyright © Fauna and Flora International 1974

References

Crawford, M. A. 1968. Br. vet. Rec., 82, 305.Google Scholar
Crawford, S. M. & Crawford, M. A. 1973a. What We Eat Today. London.Google Scholar
Crawford, S. M. & Crawford, M. A. 1973b. In: Animal Agriculture, (Eds. Cole, H. H. and Ronning, M.), San Francisco. In Press.Google Scholar
Crawford, M. A., Gale, M. M., Woodford, M. H., and Casperd, N. M. 1970. Int. J. Biochem., 1, 295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dasmann, R. 1973. Ecological Principles for Economic Development. IUCN and Wiley.Google Scholar
Field, C. R. 1968. Symp. zool. Soc. Lond., No. 21, 135–151.Google Scholar
Fraser Darling, F. 1960. Wildlife in an African Territory. Oxford.Google Scholar
Laws, R. M. and Parker, I. G. C. 1968. In: Comparative Nutrition of Wild Animals, Symp. zool. Soc. Lond. No. 21, p. 289. (Ed. Crawford, M. A.), New York and London.Google Scholar
Nature 1971 Editorial, 231, 209.Google Scholar
Possyearelt, J. 1963. Rhod. J. agric. Res., 1, 81.Google Scholar
Retief, G. P. 1971. J.S. Afr. vet. med. Ass., 42, 119.Google Scholar
Rogerson, A. 1968. In: Comparative Nutrition of Wild Animals, Symp. zool. Soc. Lond. No. 21, p. 153 (Ed. Crawford, M. A.) New York and London.Google Scholar
Simon, N. 1962. Between the Sunlight and the Thunder. London.Google Scholar
Talbot, L. M., Ledger, H. P. and Payne, W. J. A. 1962. Proc. VIII Int. Congr. Anim. Prod., III, 205.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. R. 1969. Scientific Amer. 220, 89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, C. R. 1970. Am. J. Physol.,219, 1131.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. R. and Lyman, C. P. 1967. Physiol. Zool., 40, 280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treus, D. B. and Krevchenko, D. 1968. In: Comparative Nutrition of Wild Animals, Symp. zool. Soc. Lond. No. 21, p.395, (Ed. Crawford, M. A.). New York and London.Google Scholar
Trevelyan, G. M. 1944. English Social History, Longmans, Green, London.Google Scholar
Tribe, D. E. and Pratt, D. J.Proceedings of 3rd World Conference on Animal Production, Melbourne 1973.Google Scholar
Tulloch, D. G. 1970. Aust. J. Zool., 18, 399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
UNESCO 1968 Final Report of the Inter-Governmental Conference on the Scientific Basis for Rational Use and Conservation of Resources of the Biosphere.Google Scholar
Vesey-Fitzgerald, D. F. 1965 E. Afr. Wildl. J., 3, 38.Google Scholar