Letters to the Editor
本文评论了Yarwood和Evans关于威尔士牲畜的论文，指出其对英国羊养殖的描述过于理想化，忽略了现代商业养殖的实际情况，并建议重新思考相关概念。
A comment on ``A Lleyn sweep for local sheep?Breed societies and the geographies of Welsh livestock'' Dear Editor Writing in volume 38 of this journal, Yarwood and Evans (2006) present a paper which first explores human and farm animal relationships.The paper goes on to develop this theme through a case study of Welsh livestock and its associated breed societies.Whilst this work discusses different farm animal types, significant concentration appears to be on sheep and sheep farming in the UK, and it is on this area that this comment is principally focused.There are a number of difficulties and inaccuracies with the paper in this respect that deserve redress.The first part of the paper, which utilises Bordieu's concept of habitus to provide ``insights into the relational identities of livestock and people in networks of farming practice'' (Yarwood and Evans, 2006, page 1308), undoubtedly has value in recognising the multifaceted nature of animal geographies.However, the picture of UK sheep farming they present to illustrate the habitus concept, in part through reference to Gray's (1996; 1998) work, is a highly idealised one of genetically closed flocks, hefting, and in-bye and out-bye land.Dealing with each of these phenomena in turn, whilst most modern commercial farmers producing butchers' lambs will follow the breeding of their stock with care, especially when selecting terminal sire tups (1) for carcase conformation, few are likely to ``build an association ... with a specific line in sheep whose characteristics embody the natural qualities of the ground on which they graze'' (Gray, 1998, page 351); at least not a strong one.The reality of the matter is that for most lamb meat producers (and let us not forget that meat production is the main raison d'e tre for the UK sheep farming industry) breeding ewes are often bought in from outside sources as lambs or shearlings, worked until no longer economically viable at about six to eight years of age, and then sold into the cull ewe trade.It is only producers of highly regarded pedigree breeding stock who are likely to be forming the very close association with the genetic probity of their animals which Gray describes, and Yarwood and Evans support.Turning to the practices of in-bye and out-bye land and hefting: these refer exclusively to extensive hill sheep farming in remoter parts of the UK, typically mountainous and open moorland areas.Gray's longitudinal ethnographic study, for instance, focused on one upland valley in the Scottish Borders.Many UK sheep are not farmed on this basis; their natural hefting instinct being subdued by fixed field boundaries.Thus, the facts on which Yarwood and Evans have built their case for habitus in sheep farming are somewhat amiss and, whilst this does not necessarily undermine their thesis per se, a rethink is certainly needed.In particular, that rethink will need to take into account that farming is more complex and has greater geographical nuances and local variation than is often credited.Indeed, they themselves have recognised that when efforts have been made to study farming in a more animal-centred manner, geographical studies of animals and farming ``have oversimplified the farming regimes