I already did a post on myths about Heck cattle in 2013 (go here). But that post fails to address the most prevailing myths or misconceptions about Heck cattle that I want to outline with this post.
Myth #1: Heck cattle are aggressive. This is a very annoying myth, because it simply is not true. I made a post on that a few weeks ago. It is based on one incident that is repeated over and over, yet that incident is the only documented case of some Heck cattle individuals behaving aggressively. Heck cattle are used in numerous grazing projects, are bred on private farms and zoos, and there have been no further incidents of Heck cattle attacking people without a reason. Heck cattle is generally described as a rather unproblematic breed by breeders [1,2]. I can confirm from my personal experience that Heck cattle are not an aggressive breed.
Myth #2: Heck cattle were bred using the Spanish fighting bull. I made a post on that common misbelief years ago. Many people that are only half-educated on this breed believe it was bred using the Spanish fighting bull. That false claim is even made in otherwise very well-researched sources [2]. While it is true that Lutz Heck has used Toro de Lidia in his crossbreeding experiments, it is also true that none of his stock survived past 1945, so that modern Heck cattle exclusively go back to the stock of Heinz Heck, who did not use that breed.
Myth #3: Heck cattle were created by the Nazis. This is another very annoying myth. The claim that it was Nazi officials that ordered the creation of Heck cattle is just plain wrong. The Heck brothers started breeding in the 1920s and their motivation was purely zoological. It is true that Hermann Göring sponsored Lutz Heck’s experiments and allowed him to spread his cattle among German game parks, but it is also true that Heinz Heck, whose stock is the basis of modern Heck cattle, was opposed to the Nazi regime. That’s the whole story. Yet a lot of people make a huge deal of it, because “Nazi cows” is simply too entertaining for some individuals.
Myth #4: Heck cattle look like the aurochs, just smaller. This is a claim that is objectively wrong. I reviewed the quality of Heck cattle as a “breeding-back” result in this 2013 post. Heck cattle are noticeably different from aurochs on many aspects, not only the size. See down below for a drawing that illustrates the optical differences between aurochs and cattle:
Myth #5: The Berlin lineage and the Munich lineage looked identical, proving the success of the Heck brothers’ experiments. This myth also occurs from time to time and was created by the Heck brothers themselves. They claimed their results looked the same, although they used different breeds, what, according to them, proved that they did their work right. This is far from the truth because Lutz and Heinz Heck’s cattle did not look very similar. Lutz Heck’s cattle were greatly influenced by the Spanish fighting bull, while the cattle of Heinz Heck were heavier and also the horns were different. I do not know why the Heck brothers thought their cattle looked identical, it clearly was wishful thinking.
Literature
[1] Frisch, W.: Der Auerochs – das europäische Rind. 2010.
[2] Poettinger, J.: Vergleichende Studie zur Haltung und zum Verhalten des Wisents und des Heckrinds. 2011.
I have two publications by Lutz Heck on the "re-breeding of the aurochs".
ReplyDeleteOne was published in 1941 in the volume "Auf Tiersuche in weit Welt" (In search of animals in a wide world).
(https://www.booklooker.de/B%C3%BCcher/lutz-heck+Auf-Tiersuche-in-weiter-Welt/id/A02iKVNL01ZZ2).
The second one dates from 1952, published in the volume "Tiere - mein Abenteuer".
https://www.booklooker.de/B%C3%BCcher/Angebote/autor=Heck+Lutz&title=Animals+-+my+Adventure
With regard to the breeding process, both accounts basically contain the same (quite interesting) narrative. But in the first volume, this is embedded in a nationalist and evolutionary racist framing that is hard to bear. In the second volume, one finds the usual framing in the Federal Republic in the 1950s.
That Lutz Heck was strongly "involved" in National Socialism is well documented by historians (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutz_Heck). What his attitude was after 1945 is beyond my knowledge.
Unfortunately, it has to be said that the nature and conservation movement in Germany as a whole had very close ties to nationalist and National Socialist movements. There are examples of individual representatives rethinking this after 1945. For example, Bernhard Grzimek (who also formerly had Nazi connections) certainly took (contemporary) anti-colonialist and anti-racist positions in his works. Especially if you contextualise this historically, he was far ahead of the widespread reactionary attitude in Germany in the 1950s and 1960s.
The fact that Heck cattle in France are (were) called Nazi oxen and despised is politically very understandable. Scientifically, however, this has no relevance. The breeding of Heck cattle was an interesting experiment for the time. And the real "oxen" were not the Heck cattle, but the Nazis and their many fellow travellers. Heck cattle can't help their breeders.
They have proven themselves in many grazing projects. However, because of their questionable genetic starting point, I would no longer use them for backbreeding. That would also be my criticism of the Taurus project, which I otherwise greatly appreciate. There are convincing individual animals, but there are still many "failures". I suspect that the Heck cattle are prominently involved in this.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
What exactly do you mean by "questionable genetic starting point"?
DeleteI mean the initial breeds used (especially by Heinz Heck). The multitude of breeds used at that time could also be problematic? You yourself describe excellently how difficult it is to fix certain characteristics by breeding. Doesn't the problem increase with the number of initial breeds and their partly questionable suitability? If I am informed correctly, commercial breeding often tries to "improve" an existing breed by crossing one or two other breeds with one (or a few) additional desired traits into a relatively stable population with many desired traits - in order to stabilise, possibly with backcrossing of the initial breed, within the cross population (see the Luing cattle). Couldn't this be done with Sayaguesa as the initial breed? Doesn't the Auer cattle project follow this strategy in its basic tendency? But here, too, we now have the participation of more than four breeds - it remains exciting. By the way, I do not understand this as a criticism of Heinz Heck, you have to understand him from his time! But perhaps the source breeds predominantly used by Lutz Heck (Brava, Camargue and Corsican cattle) would have had better potential? Of course, it is always a question of the breeding objective! This must of course be defined differently for a grazing animal that is compatible with EU agricultural management.
ReplyDeleteYes, the more breeds used the more undesired traits the more difficult it is to fix the desired traits. Heinz Heck definitely used a lot of breeds that were of no good for the goal. Backcrossing with Sayaguesa is basically what is done in the Lippeaue. They rely heavily on backcrossing with that breed, Taurus cattle there are now up to 50% Sayaguesa or maybe more. I don't see that there are that many "failures" in the Lippeaue Taurus cattle population. Of course there are some individuals not fitting the breeding objective, but the reason for that is not that Heck cattle is so heterogeneous but rather that breeding/inheritance works with coincidence. Other projects will face that problem too in the future. The goal is to eradicate the undesired traits so that the number of individuals not fitting the objective is reduced to hopefully nill in the future.
DeleteI agree that Lutz Heck's breeds were suited better than Heinz Heck's. In fact I wrote in a very old blog post that it probably was a "missed chance and bad luck in the history of Heck cattle" that it was Heinz' stock that survived the war and not Lutz Heck's cattle.
Maybe "failures" is the wrong expression? But I have been observing the Taurus project for many, many years now and have the impression that it is difficult to stabilise the desired characteristics, especially in the females: Horn position, udder size and partly colour. I also think that the animals in the Hellinghauser Mersch are consistently more successful than those in the Kloster Mersch? Maybe they are also sorted there: The "first choice" goes to the Hellinghauser Mersch? But maybe we have to wait a few more generations for it to get even better? And maybe my expectations are too high? And yes: there are really remarkable successes in the phenotype of a number of individual animals. I think Taurus on the Lippe is a great project, also as a renaturation programme. And real experiments are open-ended! It is often sad to see Taurus cattle on external grazing areas that are not looked after by the ABU. It is a pity that they are obviously not subject to breeding selection. What I wonder: what if one had worked exclusively with selected Sayaguesa cattle from the beginning of the Taurus project and bred them further towards the original wild type? Or one would have selectively crossed with only a few suitable, more stable breeds - instead of Heck cattle. Would the results then have been better? I think Sayaguesa would have a lot of potential.
ReplyDeleteOnce again, the from time to time occurring "failures" are not the result of Heck cattle being so heterogeneous (in fact the Heck herd they used was comparably uniform), but is due to the fact that genetic works by coincidence and that the spectrum for non-desirable phenotypes is rather large while the spectrum for desirable phenotypes is very narrow. All the other projects will face that problem too. Just look at how heterogeneous the TaurOs cattle herds are, which did not use Heck cattle. Crossbreeding simply produces an at the beginning very heterogeneous population. The Heck cattle chosen by the ABU proved to be suitable to produce good results and are not any worse than the other founding breeds.
DeleteHi Daniel, Apologies for asking here (I wasn't sure what the best way to get in touch), but we were interested in possibly using one of your Auroch reconstruction drawings for a major upcoming exhibition on European Prehistory. If you're open to the idea, could you please email me at JWexler@britishmuseum.org? Many thanks, Jennifer
ReplyDeleteHi, I just sent you an email.
Delete