Microsoft Powerpoint

Cattle – Britain’s ecological engineers

Stephen Hall • Where did our cattle come from? • What were their wild ancestors like? • What effect have cattle had on the environment? • What is the future for cattle in conservation? Evolution of bovines • Cattle and their relatives (124 species including antelopes, sheep, goats) are grouped in the family Bovidae • These are part of the suborder Ruminantia, animals which chew the cud A and B are possible precursor forms, long extinct

The ruminants radiated in step with the evolution fo grasses The radiation of the aurochs

• First aurochs remains are very recent – only 1.5 – 2 million years ago • This coincided with the Pleistocene period, in which the global climate alternated between warm and cool – and included the Ice Ages • Extensive dry grasslands appeared in many areas • Aurochs seems to have evolved in India and spread from there – Indian aurochs may be effectively a distinct species Probable peak distribution area of aurochs

From van Vuure: “Retracing the aurochs” Cattle and humans Aurochs – ancestor of domesticated cattle • Aurochs was domesticated 10,000 years ago in near East / west Asia, India, China and (probably) north Africa • First farmers came to Britain 5000 years ago and brought cattle with them • These cattle were very small – through selective breeding • No evidence the aurochs was ever domesticated in Britain though wild aurochsen might possibly have mated with domesticated cattle Reasons for studying aurochs behaviour • May lead to better understanding of cattle behaviour and of human-cattle relationships • May (possibly) give clues as to how aurochs was domesticated • May help with planning “authentic” ecosystem conservation – what was role of aurochs in British ecosystem before farming began? Demise of the aurochs

Aurochs European bison (wisent)

• Extinct in Britain 1500 BC (about 1500 years after first farmers arrived) • Described by Julius Caesar in Aurochs finally died out AD Germany but he and others often 1627 in a forest reserve in confused it with European bison Poland (which still exists) What was the natural (pre-human) forest cover of Britain like? • Pre-Neolithic era, 7,000 years ago • The last glaciers had receded 10,000 years ago and Britain became an island 8,500 years ago. • The first farmers (Neolithic people) arrived 5,000 years ago • What was the scenery like in that rather brief pre-farming era? Was tree cover continuous?

• Cotswolds rhyme: – A squirrel can hop from Swell to Stow – Without resting his foot or wetting his toe • And from Lancashire: – From Birchen Haye to Hilbre – A squirrel might hop from tree to tree

From Fauna Britannica (S. Buczacki) The traditional idea • The general idea has formed that the dominant vegetation in Britain will be closed-canopy forest • Well expressed by Oliver Rackham 1976: “It is supposed that if Britain had been left alone by man the “natural” vegetation would nearly everywhere be oak- dominated forest.” • However this is not asserted by most botanists nowadays Frans Vera’s hypothesis (2000)

Proposes that 7,000 years ago the landscape for central and western European lowlands was “half open”, and park-like (photo: Grimsthorpe) Large herbivores

• Vera argues that large herbivores were an essential driving force while others say fire and windthrow would have been important • Is the aurochs a candidate as an ecological engineer? Ecological engineers – species that determine the form an environment takes (beavers a possible example)

From A. Kitchener: “Beavers” Deducing the ecology of the aurochs • We have information on where in Britain aurochs lived – their archaeological remains have Ordnance Survey map references (called “find squares”) • The general form of the landscape nowadays is probably broadly similar to that of the landscape soon after the glaciers receded for the last time & the aurochs and other species recolonised • If we look at what the landscapes of these find squares are like today, that should tell us something about the habitat (and, from that, the ecology) of the aurochs An “experimental” approach

• Our prehistoric species included beaver, elk, wolf, bear, red deer, roe deer , aurochs • By focussing on the find sites of the 6 species of prehistoric Britain that aren’t globally extinct, we can deduce their habitats – if these deductions make sense, then our deductions about the aurochs would carry credibility • Analyse Ordnance Survey 1 km map squares to characterise “find squares” of the seven species

SJG Hall (2008) Ecography 31, 187 Aurochs

• Current question – was it a woodland animal? • Julius Caesar said it was – but cattle undoubtedly need lots of grass, more than will grow in tree shade • Much more likely it lived on floodplains and meadows, but lack of direct evidence either way • May have been chased into woods by farmers Available archaeological remains from Yalden (1999)* and pers. comms.

Before last ice Last ice age and No age Totals age (Devensian) more recent assigned

Aurochs 17 75 96 188 Beaver 7 61 0 68 Brown bear 18 68 10 96 Elk 2 7 18 27 Roe deer 0 28 18 46 Red deer 0 47 26 73 Wolf 25 68 8 101

*Yalden, D.W. (1999) The history of British mammals. Poyser, London Examples of find squares - 1

• Find square is to NE of symbol • SK 0954 (near Dove Dale, Derbyshire) • Species found - Brown bear & wolf Examples of find squares - 2

• Find square is to NE of symbol • TL 5467 (Cambs. fens) • Species found - Aurochs Examples of find squares - 3

• Find square is to NE of symbol • TA 1656 (S. of Bridlington) • Species found - Beaver & wolf Map features considered

1. Numerical features – height above sea level, number of contour lines and distance between highest & lowest contour lines (indicates flatness) 2. Landscape features – presence/absence of cliff, lake, woodland Results –how the species differed in the altitudes of the sites where their remains were found

Height above Distance between highest sea level (m) & lowest contours (m) Beaver 29 10

Aurochs 30 10

Elk 50 20

Roe deer 50 20

Red deer 55 20

Wolf 61 40

Brown bear 76 46

Statistical test shows there are very probably (at least 95% chance) real effects of species on these variables Landscape features

• For each species, how do find squares compare with other map squares in the vicinity? • For each species, compare each find square with a randomly chosen, nearby “control square”. Comparison is particularly clear for this find square: • Find square is to NE of symbol • Species found - Brown bear & wolf • Compared with any nearby control square, find square has steep slopes and caves Beaver 68 find Only 5/68 control A tendency for beaver squares – 13 squares have a finds to be in areas have a lake lake which today have a lake Brown 26/96 find Only 9/96 control A tendency for bear bear squares have squares have a finds to be in areas a cliff cliff which today have a cliff Wolf 18/101 find Only 4/101 A tendency for wolf finds squares have control squares to be in areas which a cliff have a cliff today have a cliff Roe & No differences between find and control squares red deer, elk Aurochs 84/188 find 107/188 control A tendency for aurochs squares have squares have finds to be in areas woodland woodland which today do not have woodland

For all these comparisons there is at least a 95% chance these are real effects Conclusions – 1 – lakes, cliffs and woodland • Map squares with beaver finds are significantly more likely to have a lake today, than the control squares • Similar for brown bear and wolf, in relation to cliff These results are as would be predicted • Aurochs is significantly more likely to have been found in areas which lack woodland today • In Britain today, woodland tends to be on the more infertile ground Suggests aurochs was a creature of the more fertile areas Direct comparisons between find squares and control squares for aurochs

Find square - Control Statistical median square - test median

Height above sea level (m) 30 50 99% chance this is a real effect Distance between highest & 10 20 94% chance lowest contours (m) this is a real effect

Implies aurochsen tended to live in the lower-lying, flatter parts of the landscape Conclusions – 2 – height above sea level of find squares Beaver 29 m • The rank order for the non-extinct species is Aurochs 30 m as would be predicted Elk 50 m from knowledge of present -day Roe deer 50 m populations

Red deer 55 m • Suggests the aurochs was a creature of low- Wolf 61 m lying areas while the red deer was more Brown bear 76 m upland Conclusions – 3 – flatness of find squares Beaver 10 m • The rank order for the non- extinct species is as would Aurochs 10 m be predicted from Elk 20 m knowledge of present-day populations Roe deer 20 m • Suggests the aurochs was

Red deer 20 m a creature of flat areas • Supported by the Wolf 40 m comparison of aurochs find and control squares Brown bear 46 m Ecological findings

• Ecologies (at the landscape scale) of prehistoric animals, predicted from present-day landscape features, are consistent with what is observed today • Suggests overall approach is valid • Suggests aurochsen lived in flat, low-lying, highly fertile areas like floodplains – and that it was not a creature of the more upland woodland • The main herbivores of the more upland woodlands were probably red deer Implications

• Regarding the Vera hypothesis – this suggests the aurochs may have shaped the low-lying floodplain environment, but probably not the more upland areas • However, a finding that the aurochs was a creature of highly fertile, open areas does have some implications for its behavioural ecology Behavioural implications (1)

Aurochs would have had strong herd structure (open ground, high plant productivity) Would have come into conflict early with humans because • (a) river valleys are easy routes for hunting parties • (b) river valleys are desirable for farming • (c) adaptation to rich localised food resources would have predisposed aurochs to crop raiding Behavioural implications (speculative) • Inhabiting highly productive ground, aurochsen probably had high breeding rate • Cows may well have calved every year • Stimulus for weaning may have been birth of next calf • May imply strong selection for cow-neonate imprinting in order to suppress cow’s bond to last year’s calf • A strong imprinting tendency might have made it easier for humans to tame neonatal calves as a first step in domestication Back to the wild Can modern cattle simulate the aurochs? Heck cattle

• Heinz and Lutz Heck, in Germany in 1920s and 1930s, crossed various European breeds and selected primarily for colour and horn shape • The aim was to “re-create” the aurochs • Heck cattle are kept in small numbers today notably in Germany, France & the Netherlands • In 2001 there were 597 registered Heck cattle in Belgium, Germany & France plus (in 2004) about 660 unregistered animals in Dutch nature reserves Oostvaardersplassen (Lelystad, Netherlands)

Heck cattle and Konik horses Large herbivores have certainly helped to make Oostvaardersplassen a more biodiverse place Chillingham Wild White Cattle

• Live in 134 hectares of parkland near Scottish border. • Ancient history – maybe dates back to when Chillingham Park was enclosed (probably around 1225). Certainly were there in late 1600s. • Long history of ownership by Earls of Tankerville. • Park and cattle now belong to Chillingham Wild Cattle Association, sheep grazing tenancy acquired in 2005 & sheep removed • Many theories and speculations about origins of the herd – probably they are relict medieval cattle. • History of inbreeding (supported by genetic studies) Where are the Chillingham Wild White Cattle? Inhabit approx. 330 acres in north Northumberland (94 at present). Also a reserve herd in NE Scotland, plus semen in store (embryo collection is planned)

www.chillinghamwildcattle.com Associated with Chillingham Castle – also famous woodcut by Thomas Bewick, paintings by Landseer 1979

Line depicts boundary of current cattle park

• Mature bull – 300-320 kg in winter; cow 280 kg (i.e. small) • “Old-fashioned” conformation – relatively long legs & short body • All carry horns; all are white with red ears & some spotting on face, neck & shoulders • Herd receives hay in winter but otherwise is unmanaged • Total number 94 – highest ever • Sex ratio – usually more females, but nowadays approx. 1:1 (don’t know why) • Cows usually don’t conceive till 3 or 4 years old but there have been some conceptions at 2 years of age • Early conceptions may be getting more frequent Another park herd - Vaynol cattle

• Trace back to herd at Blair Atholl which was founded in early 1800s and sold in 1834 • Some went to Kilmory House in Argyll & were mated with white Highland cattle • 1870s & 1880s – herd went to Vaynol (Faenol) near Caernarvon

In Vaynol Park, before 1914 Potted recent history of Vaynol cattle • At Vaynol, herd ran with bulls from the Cadzow herd of White Park cattle • At KIlmory, there had been crossing with Ayrshire and Indian (zebu) cattle • 1980 – Vaynol estate sold, herd transferred to Shugborough Park farm in Staffordshire (comprised 3 young bulls and 12 females) • 1989 – Vaynol cattle recognised by Rare Breeds Survival Trust as a separate breed • 1989 – herd to Temple Newsam, Leeds • 1992 – some animals back to Vaynol • 2009 – some animals to Lincolnshire! British herds of white, horned park cattle (dates of dissolution in brackets)

According to Probably also in Established 19 th Bewick (1789) existence in 1800 century Chillingham Cadzow Park Dynevor Chartley Leigh Court (1806) Vaynol Wollaton (1820) Lyrick Hall (1810) Dalkeith (1838) Gisburne (1859) Ardrossan (1820) Kilmory (1838) Lyme Park (1885) Blair Atholl (1834) Taymouth (1842) Cally Park (1846) Lamphey (1918) Swona, Orkney Swona cattle – Britain’s unknown wild herd • People left the island in 1974, tended the cattle there till 1978 • Aberdeen Angus x Shorthorn • Cattle have been left to run wild since then • Numbers have been as high as 33, currently about 14

• Swona is a Special Protection Area (terns) • Cattle grazing is important to maintain bird value Rewilding or extensification?

• Animal welfare concerns probably mean full “rewilding” of cattle won’t be accepted in UK • Heck cattle – totally unlike Dutch conception of cattle, but public opinion there does not favour them having a wild status • Chillingham – regarded in some respects as wild (e.g. no eartags) and in others as husbanded stock Choice of breed for ecosystem management • No current breed is closer than any other to the extinct aurochs • Organisations are free to keep any breed they like but Heck cattle do not have any special practical or educational value • Heck cattle may in fact be harmful educationally as they might be taken to imply that extinction is not a terminal condition! • Using a minority breed (Galloway, Highland) or crossbred that is derived from minority breeds (most deserving case the Blue-Grey) would serve a genetic conservation purpose as well as achieving conservation objectives Conclusions

• The aurochs was probably an animal of fertile lands like flood plains and was not primarily a woodland animal • Our present -day cattle retain the capacity to live as wild animals • Choice of breed for ecosystem management – almost certainly “rewilding” is not an option in Britain, for legal reasons and because none of our breeds are an authentic choice