Re: Foreign Road Stock Cars


SUVCWORR@...
 

The prevention of disease would be of much greater concern to someone shipping
spring calves to the Midwest for "finishing" than to someone shipping stock to
slaughter, where the stock likely had less than a week to live.

This is not necessarily true. During the mid 70's (yes after this list end date) when Herr's Island Pittsburgh was being redeveloped for office space (PA Dept EPA ironically) and upscale condos, excavation exposed a large cache of cowhides. Being somewhat suspect as no other remains had been unearthed we (county health dept) collected samples and submitted them to the state lab. Turns out the hides were laced with anthrax spores which 60 years later were still viable. This brought the state Vet into the mix. He did some research in state records and found there had been an outbreak of anthrax in the stockyard circa 1917-1918 (time frame for this list) wherein the state had ordered all stock killed and buried. All rail cars on the island at the time and the pens were burnt.

Can't say this was a common occurrence but the intransit animals infected or not were lost because of the infection as well as the rolling stock and the stock pens. So health of animals in transit to slaughter may not have been as important but was still a concern.

Rich Orr

-----Original Message-----
From: soolinehistory <destorzek@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Fri, Apr 8, 2011 5:49 pm
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Foreign Road Stock Cars




--- In STMFC@..., Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote:

Shippers were concerned about both insect infestation in old
bedding and manure, and with disease. The idea that one might put
clean bedding into a dirty car, or atop dirty bedding, would seem
untenable to at least some shippers. And of course the shipper's right
to refuse a dirty or unfit car extended to ALL car types.
Which brings up a couple of points:

The prevention of disease would be of much greater concern to someone shipping
spring calves to the Midwest for "finishing" than to someone shipping stock to
slaughter, where the stock likely had less than a week to live.

This makes the argument for reloading stock into the same cars after a rest.
Much less likely to contract any disease from their own dirty bedding than from
bedding that came in under a load of somebody else's animals. If the shipper had
the right to refuse a dirty car, but also had to pay for bedding, don't you
think that if cars were changed, the shipper's representative would want clean
bedding, but at the railroad's expense, since the switch was for the railroad's
convenience?

Dennis



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

Join main@RealSTMFC.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.