The versatility of the camel and its ability to survive and perform in the harsh arid and semi-arid areas of the world have earned it names such as "ship of the desert", while its strength and docility have been exploited for agricultural, transport and riding purposes. It is, however, the animal's unparalleled ability to convert the scanty resources of the desert into milk, meat and fibre for the pastoralists of tropical Africa and Asia that have gained it the most reputation. Camel herders give deserved recognition to their animals and Sweet (1965) wrote that the camel is the basic resource among the Bedouin camel herding tribes of northern Arabia, such as the Rwala, Shammar and Mutair. The wide array of functions and products which the camel can provide is probably best summarized by Bulliet (1975), who wrote that the camel can be milked, ridden, loaded with baggage, eaten, harnessed to a plough or wagon, traded for goods or wives, exhibited in a zoo or turned into sandals and camel hair coats.
Unfortunately there are few data available on camel productivity under pastoral conditions. The present review is based on the limited existing information for the dromedary, and on results obtained using the Bactrian camel of the Asiatic regions.
It is difficult to estimate the daily milk yield of the dromedary under pastoralist conditions owing to the inconsistency of milking frequency. Camels may be milked once a day among the Murrah of Arabia (Cole, 1975), from two to four times among the Somali (Bremaud, 1969; Hartley, 1979) and the Rendille of Kenya (Spencer, 1973), and as many as six or seven times among the Afar of Ethiopia (Knoess, 1977). The latter may also leave their animals unmilked for a whole day, which may account for sporadic very high estimates of up to 13 kg of milk per day.
For an unspecified type of camel Williamson and Payne (1978) stated that a good dam could yield 9 kg of milk per day at the peak of her lactation. Bremaud (1969) and Knoess (1976) gave the maximum daily production of the Somali and Adal camels as 12 and 10.4 kg respectively. According to Dahl and Hjort (1976), Yasin and Wahid (1957) estimated that the Pakistan dromedary (bigger and reputed to be a better milker) can produce 9.1–14.1 kg of milk when well fed. Leese (192 7) said that the amount of daily milk recovered during the first 2 weeks postpartum may vary from 4 to 9 litres in addition to the share of the young calf. The dromedary, like most other species, gives most milk near the beginning of the lactation period. In a study of the camels of northern Kenya, Field (1979b) estimated their daily yield at 21 litres in the 2nd week of lactation, falling to 4.8 litres by the 16th week. One dam that had lost her calf at birth only gave 2.2 and 3.7 litres at the two respective times.
The average length of lactation in the camel is 12 months, but it may vary from 9 to 18 months (Bremaud, 1969 Leese, 1927; Field, 1979b; Mares, 1954). The variations for this trait depend mostly on management and environment (season, temperature and feed supply). Leese (192 7) described 8-month lactation periods which extended to 18 months after an improvement in grazing. The common practice of breeding camels to calve every 2 years, together with their limited breeding period, are conducive to extended lactation periods, especially under good nutritional levels. Dahl and Hjort (1976) quote Russian data showing that on the rare occasions when camels calve every year a lactation period of 7 months is normal.
In general lactational yield will vary with species, breed, individual, region, feeding and management conditions, stage of lactation (Dina and Klintegerg, 1977), type of work and milking frequency. Leupold (1968a) gave the average lactational production of Pakistan camels as 2, 700–3.600 kg under poor nutrition, not far from the estimates of 1,700 and 3000 kg given by ITV (1973a) for the same camel type under desert and favourable conditions (Table 10). The potential lactation yield of Adal camels in Ethiopia maintained on irrigated pastures was calculated as 2,847 kg from results given by Knoess (1976). Williamson and Payne (1978) wrote that the lactation yield (over 16–18 months) of a good unspecified dam under favourable tropical conditions could reach 2,722 kg or more. Dahl and Hjort (1976) gave ,the average daily milk production of the East and North African camel as 3.5–4 kg, i.e a 9- to 18-month yield of 945–1,080 to 1,890–2,160 kg.
Table 10. Characteristics of camel milk production potential.
Location or nutritional status |
Daily milk production (litres) |
Length of lactation (months) |
Lactation yield l (litres) 1/ |
Source |
Good animal |
9 |
9–18 |
2,500 |
Leese (1927) |
Pakistan (good feed) |
– |
9–18 |
2,700–3,600 |
Leupold (1968a) |
Pakistan (poor feed) |
– |
9–18 |
1,350 |
Leupold (1968a) |
Good feed |
– |
18 |
3000 |
ITV (1973a) |
Desert |
– |
9 |
1,700 |
ITV (1973a) |
Sahara |
2.8–5.11 |
12 |
1,022–1,865 |
Capot-Rey (1962) |
Eritrea |
5–6 |
12 |
1,825–2 190 |
Mason and .1Vaule(1960) |
Ethiopia (irrigated pasture) |
7.8 |
12 |
2,847 |
Knoess (1976) |
Kenya |
4.55 |
12 |
1616 |
Spencer (1973) |
Unspecified |
9.0 |
– |
2,722 |
Williamson and Payne (1978) |
Kenya |
2.2–21 |
11–16 |
1,897 |
Field (1979b) |
Well fed |
9.1–14.1 |
16–18 |
2,722–3,629 |
Yasin and Wahid(1957) |
Poorly fed |
3.6 |
9 |
1,134–1,588 |
Yasin and Wahid(1957) |
Tuareg camel |
10 |
– |
– |
Nicolaisen, 1963 |
Sudan |
5–10 |
10–12 |
1,200–2,600 |
El Amin (1979) |
Somalia |
9 |
12 |
1,800 |
Hartley (1979) |
East Africa |
3.5–4 |
9–18 |
945–2,160 |
Dahl and Hjort (1976) |
All these estimates indicate that the camel is potentially a better milker than many African zebu breeds of cattle. The lactation period and yield of the latter average 239 days (8 months) and 1,195 kg (based on data from Mahadevan, 1966, and Kiwuya, 1973a and b). Spencer (1973) confirmed that the amount of milk produced by one Rendille camel in Kenya far exceeds that of a zebu cow, estimating that 20 camels give as much milk as 80 Samburu cattle in the wet season. The average lactational yield of the Bactrian camel is about 800–1,200 kg, although it can reach 5000 kg (Williamson and Payne, 1978).
With regard to annual milk production, the haphazard management systems characteristic of nomadic pastoralists make it difficult to evolve any strict methods for obtaining records. Probably the best estimate of annual production is (LY÷DL) × 365, where LY is the lactational yield and DL is the duration of lactation in days. Estimates are bound to be biased by factors such as variations in lactation periods and milking frequencies. Moreover, no adjustment can be made for any of the possible sources of variation in camel milk production since little work has been carried out on the effects of physiological factors on lactation in the camel. Indications are, however, that the species, breed or type, age, stage and persistency of lactation, lactation number and length of the dry period all make some contribution to the variations in milk production.
The effect of oestrus and pregnancy on lactation is not very clear, but Knoess (1976) refers to a 3-month pregnant camel that was still giving 7.6 kg of milk per day in its 14th month of lactation. Field (1979b) observed a female which was still lactating 74 weeks after calving. He commented that probably she had failed to conceive in spite of having been mated. Hartley (1979) also observed that while a 365-day lactation was the rule for Somali camels, they would milk for a 2nd year if not put in calf. If the above formula is applied to present data, the annual milk yield of the camel can be estimated to range from 1,905 to 3,744 kg.
Milking the dromedary is a process which varies according to the different groups of pastoralists. It becomes less complex as the number of milkings per day increases, which is usual when maximum yields are required. Cole (1975) gives a good account of the procedure among the Murrah of Saudi Arabia, who generally milk their animals once a day. The animals are herded home soon after sunset, following a full day's grazing. They are bedded and allowed to rest, during which they start ruminating. After an hour's rest the lactating females are individually roused for milking. The woolen protector which prevents the calves from suckling while at pasture is removed and the dams are allowed to nurse. Milking is done by the men, although on occasion the help of the women is sought, and the milk is collected in large enamel bowls.
In his review of milking procedures among the Somali, who often milk their animals twice a day, Mares (1954) confirmed that a resting period after grazing is allowed. Milking times are about 2 hours after sunset and at early dawn. The Somali prevent calves from suckling while at pasture by ligating two or more of the teats (Cossins, 1971), the number depending on the strength of the calf and the milking ability of the dam. Hartley (personal communication) noted that they use a special string made from soft bark called mark. Cossins further observed that a dummy calf or even the skin of a dead calf may be used to stimulate milk let-down. Sometimes a clamp called the quoloh, which is fixed over the vulvar lips, is also used. The animal is tied up short (head to tail) and kept under this restraint for some time. On release of the rope and quoloh it will usually let down milk (Hartley, personal communication). Sometimes the same calf may be used to induce milk let-down in two lactating camels. In Kenya, Spencer (1973) reported that the Rendille milk their camels three times in 24 hours: once during the day and twice at night. Torry (1971) also gave an account of the organization of milking among these people.
Many pastoralists keep mixed herds with varying milking capabilities, thus assuring a continuous supply of milk throughout the year. Others, however, depend exclusively on the milk supply provided by their camels in an environment where other species would not survive, or if they did, would not give sufficient milk. Camel milk is thus a very important element in the diet of most camel herders. It is also the only source of nutrition for newborn calves in the first few weeks of life. Most pastoralists are experienced at striking a balance between the amount of milk taken out and that left for the calf, but in pastoral societies in which dependence on camel milk is high, competition may arise between the needs of man and those of the young calf, with detrimental effects on calf viability. Occasionally, male calves are slaughtered in order to conserve for human consumption the milk they would otherwise have consumed. Bremaud (1969) observed that the practice among the Somali was to leave half the dam's milk for the calves, while Williamson and Payne (1978) noted that for heavy-milking dams only one quarter of the milk is left for the young during the first 3 weeks, the allowance being increased thereafter. Leese (1927) and Lewis (1969) indicated that camel milk may occasionally be diluted with water to sustain horses and rear their foals in waterless countries.
The general practice is to consume the milk soon after milking, since it is difficult to keep fresh. Dahl and Hjort (1976) state that camel milk goes sour very rapidly. The itinerant life of the nomads also encourages direct consumption of the product, but some reports show that camel milk can be processed into other by-products. Mares (1959) noted that surplus milk among the Somali is soured and stored as a curd or made into cheese. Other reports indicate that camel milk can be made into tallowy white butter and ghee. Further reports from Somalia by Hartley (1979) indicate that customs regarding the handling of camel milk vary across the country. In some areas it is soured, in others it is sugared and sold at market. The Afar of Ethiopia, on the other hand, are known to be reluctant to allow the milk to pass away from the camel's presence (Knoess, 1976). Mares (1959) observed that the Somali herders are not very market conscious, but would be willing to sell some milk if there was a market at hand. Camel milk in the Sudan is not commercially exploited, according to El Amin (1979). Cole (1975) stated that the Murrah Bedouin do not depend on the sale of their animals or animal products to secure the additional foods they may need.
With regard to the nutritive value of camel milk, Mares (1954) observed that colostrum or dumbar is often consumed by the Somali, who regard it as a laxative. Camel milk compares favourably with cattle and goat milk but not with that of sheep (Tables 11 and 12). It is very rich in vitamin C (5 mg per 100 ml, according to Leupold, 1968a), a vital ingredient when fruits and greens are scarce (Knoess, 1976), and contains 70 calories per 100 gm. It is also high in water and mineral contents (El Amin, 1979). Dahl and Hjort (1976) calculated that 4 kg of camel milk would be needed to satisfy the daily calory requirements of one adult human being, while a consumption of 1.8 kg would meet his protein needs. It is estimated that 18–20 camels are required to meet the needs of a nomadic family throughout the year (Sweet, 1965; Lundholm, 1976), assuming that half the animals are in calf. Sometimes, however, a rich stockowner may have as many as 100 or even 1000 camels in his herd, as observed by Lewis (1969), who additionally points out that 10–20 animals will suffice to support and transport an average family in the Horn of Africa. These estimates were based on the fertility rate of the camel, the length of its lactation period, its daily milk production, and the nutritive value of the milk plus any other sources of food.
Table 11. Composition of milk from various species.
Species |
Water |
Total |
Fat |
Protein |
Lactose |
Ash |
Source |
(%) |
Solids (%) |
(%) |
(%) |
(%) |
(%) |
||
Camel |
85.6 |
14.3 |
5.5 |
4.5 |
3.4 |
0.9 |
Knoess (1977) |
Camel |
86.96 |
13.04 |
3.3 |
3.87 |
5.15 |
0.72 |
Dahl and Hjort (1976) |
Camel |
87.24 |
12.76 |
4.2 |
3.7 |
4.1 |
0.76 |
ITV (1973a) |
Camel |
86–90 |
– |
4–5.5 |
3.6–4.7 |
– |
0.8–1.0 |
El Amin (1979) |
Pooled average for camel |
86.6 |
13.36 |
4.33 |
4.02 |
4.21 |
0.79 |
Author |
Cow |
86.2 |
13.8 |
4.4 |
3.8 |
4.9 |
0.7 |
Ensminger (1969) |
Goat |
87.0 |
12.9 |
4.1 |
3.7 |
4.2 |
0.8 |
Ensminger (1969) |
Horse |
90.1 |
9.9 |
1.0 |
2.6 |
6.9 |
0.35 |
Ensminger (1969) |
Pig |
82.8 |
17.2 |
5.1 |
7.1 |
3.7 |
1.1 |
Ensrninger (1969) |
Sheep |
82.0 |
18.0 |
6.4 |
5.6 |
4.7 |
0.91 |
Ensminger (1969) |
Human being |
88.0 |
12.0 |
3.8 |
1.2 |
7.0 |
0.21 |
Ensminger (1969) |
Table 12. Chemical composition of casein in camel, cow and goat milk (in g amino acid per 15.6 g N).
Constituents |
Camel |
Cow |
Goat |
Amino Acids | |||
Alanine |
3.05–.20 |
3.41 |
3.55 |
Arginine |
3.15–.26 |
4.14 |
2.10 |
Aspartic acid |
7.65–.56 |
7.47 |
7.38 |
Glycine |
1.57–.14 |
2.08 |
2.10 |
Glutamic acid |
23.40–.78 |
23.16 |
20.32 |
Histidine |
2.51–.20 |
3.02 |
4.99 |
Isoleucine |
6.40–.28 |
6.60 |
4.31 |
Leucine |
10.44–.52 |
10.00 |
9.94 |
Lysine |
7.58–.28 |
8.06 |
8.23 |
Methionine |
3.47–.19 |
3.19 |
3.54 |
Phenylalanine |
5.64–.29 |
5.41 |
6.00 |
Proline |
13.28–.82 |
11.83 |
14.59 |
Serine |
5.88–.26 |
6.60 |
5.16 |
Threonine |
6.31–.19 |
4.30 |
5.73 |
Tyrosine |
5.76–.42 |
5.80 |
4.77 |
Valine |
7.40–.35 |
7.47 |
5.69 |
Other | |||
Ammonia |
1.72–.15 |
1.81 |
2.16 |
A detailed account of nutritive requirements is also given by Field (1979a). He observed that among the Rendille of Kenya the average family consisted of 12 members. Adopting daily calory and protein requirement levels of 13,800 kcal and 318 gm, as recommended by Dahl and Hjort (1976) for a family of 6, he calculated that a Rendille family of 12 would need 39 kg of camel milk to meet its daily calory requirements and 17 kg to meet its protein needs. Rendille camels give about 1,300 litres of milk per year or 3.5 litres per day. A family of 12 would thus need 11 and 5 camels to meet its daily calory and protein requirements respectively. However, the average herd only includes 8 lactating females, and the deficit usually has to be met from the milking of smallstock. The Rendille raise an average of 120 sheep and goats per family, the lactating females of which yield about 17,500 kcal per day, producing an overall surplus of almost 10,000 kcal.
Camel meat is rarely consumed among the camel herders of Africa. It is only eaten in critical periods of food shortage, or when entertaining guests, or for ritual and sacrificial purposes (Dahl and Hjort, 1976). Camels may sometimes be slaughtered in case of imminent death, or even after death (Spencer, 1973). The consumption of camel meat is considered a luxury among pastoralists.
Non-camel herding societies have only recently begun to awaken to the meat producing potential of the camel. There are few reports of efforts to breed and select the camel for meat characteristics in Africa. Nonetheless, Chatty (1972) stated that since the role of the camel as a beast of burden was fast becoming obsolete, the camel nomad has tended to respond by breeding for meat production. He quoted Coon (1952) as observing that the Rwalas are now raising more camels than ever before. Leupold (1968a) stated that the only safe future for the dromedary was as a meat animal.
There is one major area of Africa in which trade in camels for slaughter appears relatively well developed. Williamson and Payne (1978) wrote that in Kenya, Ethiopia, Sudan and Somalia, which together contain almost half the camel population of Africa, a considerable number of camels are managed and bred specially for slaughter. The area is undoubtedly a net exporter of camel meat. Bremaud (1969) pointed to a clandestine trade in slaughter animals over the Kenya–Somalia border, involving 600–1000 camels per month. He estimated that 25–30 animals were presented per day at Bulahaji market, and referred to a specially constructed camel abattoir at Archer's Post, where a total of 60,000 animals had been slaughtered over several years. At this facility products such as meat powder, bone meal, meat extract, fat, hides and manure had been produced. Leupold (1968a) estimated that 15,000 animals were slaughtered in Somalia every year, although the figure given by UNECA/FAO (1972) is almost 10 times higher. In Ethiopia, Knoess (1976) wrote that a large number of animals were exported for slaughter to Libya and Saudi Arabia yearly, and that the average price paid was about US $ 0.35 per kg liveweight. In Sudan, which has the largest camel population in Africa, camels account for 5.4% of the national meat and milk producing stock (Wilson, 1978). Official slaughter figures for that country varied between 15,477 and 30,385 from 1970 to 1974 (El Amin, 1979). Besides meeting domestic demand, Sudan exports camels to Libya, Egypt and the Gulf States.
In a review of the meat industry of Egypt, Alim (1976) indicated that the indigenous camel population had declined by 37.7% from 175,000 to 109,000 between 1967 and 1974. The decline coincided with an increase in slaughter figures from 53,000 to 64,000 camels in 1973 and 1974, during which time the contribution of camel meat to domestic meat supplies rose from 14,000 to 17,000 t.
The only other area of Africa in which camels are thought to be fairly extensively used for meat is northern Nigeria, where Dada (1978) estimated that 3,410 animals were slaughtered between September and December at one abattoir in Kano.
Some governments, e.g. the Indian Government (Bhargava et al, 1965), now maintain extensive camel breeding farms. Large breeding farms are found in Russia, where the Bactrian camel is raised (Keikin, 1976). Commercial operations of this kind are, however, almost non-existent in Africa, where most pastoralist breeding and selection efforts have tended to emphasize baggage and riding characteristics more than meat production. This kind of selection has often resulted in distinct riding and baggage camel types and breeds, and these are the varieties which are generally marketed. The animals presented for meat are often worn out, incurably injured or barren (Williamson and Payne, 1978).
Knoess (1977) hinted that camel production is sometimes regarded as a primitive practice and is discouraged by certain governments in favour of cattle, sheep and goats.
Writing generally about the indigenous livestock of eastern and southern Africa, Mason and Maule (1960) estimated that the average liveweight of the Kababish baggage camel was 450 kg and 350–400 kg for the Somali camel. Pratt and Gwynne (1977) estimated the average weight of the East African camel to be 400 kg, although mature males and females may attain weights of 550 and 500 kg, with a height (including the hump) of just above 2 m. Bremaud (1969) gave figures which yield an average weight of 450 kg for the Somali camels of northern Kenya. Dina and Klintegerg (1977) quoted the results of a French team which calculated the average liveweight of Somali camels in the Ogaden region at 554 kg and 309 kg for males and females respectively. Wither height varied from 165 to 215 cm. All recent figures are consistent with the range of 453.5–557.9 kg earlier given by Leese (1927).
In a recent study by Knoess (1976), who proposed a modified formula for estimating the liveweight of camels, the liveweight of mature Afar animals in the Awash valley of Ethiopia rarely reached 500 kg. The wither height was calculated as 1.75 m and the heart girth and abdominal circumference of three stallions averaged 1.85 and 2.12 m respectively.
The shoulder height of Darfur camels in southern Sudan ranged from 180 to 200 cm in females (Wilson, 1978). Wilson also found that girth circumference was not a very good indicator of individual weights, although it gave a fair estimate of group averages. Field (1979b), on the other hand, demonstrated a very high correlation between the three body measurements of shoulder height, heart girth and hump girth. The sum of these could be used to predict body weight, using a regression equation.
Williamson and Payne (1978) concluded that the average dromedary weighs 454–590 kg, while the average Bactrian camel is slightly heavier.
There is thus considerable phenotypic variation in the liveweight of mature dromedaries, whose age at full growth ranges from 6 to 7 years for males and 7 to 8 for females. As regards daily weight gain, Khatami (1970) refers to the results of feeding trials in Iran: in one case a ration of 15–20 kg of straw, beet pulp silage, molasses and barley was used, the barley not exceeding 10–15% of the ration, while in another the feeding experiment was carried out at a sugar beet farm where some animals were allowed to graze the sugar beet tops. Female and male animals gained about 0.95 and 1.4 kg per day respectively. By comparison, zebu cattle gain 0.11 kg when poorly managed, and 0.34 kg when well managed from weaning to maturity (Ledger et al, 1967).
Khatami (1970) gave the average carcass weight of the Iranian dromedary as 300–400 kg, with that of the females being 250–350 kg. The same author further gave a figure of 650 kg as a possible carcass weight for the male Bactrian camel. Bremaud (1969) gave figures from which the average carcass of Somali camels in northern Kenya can be estimated to weigh 286 kg. He reported that the limbs are severed at the femero-tibial and humero-radial joints, and that these appendages could weigh up to 44 kg, yielding a further 22–26 kg of meat. The majority of the animals presented for slaughter were females. In a slaughterhouse study involving 60 camels, Wilson (1978) derived some very useful results which are reproduced in Table 13. The average liveweight of Darfur camels was 426.2 kg while the carcass weight was 208.5 kg, yielding a dressing percentage of almost 49%. His results also indicated that males generally have a higher dressing percentage than females.
Table 13. Liveweight, carcass weight and dressing percentage of Darfur camels.
Males |
Females |
Total | |
Number of Animals |
21 |
29 |
50 |
Liveweight (kg) | |||
Mean |
447.9 |
41,4.4 |
426.2 |
SD ± |
84.10 |
50.83 |
65.74 |
Range |
305.5–581.0 |
307.5–522.5 |
305.5–581.0 |
Carcass weight | |||
Mean |
231.3 |
196.3 |
208.5 |
SD ± |
49.18 |
24.94 |
38.73 |
Range |
104.0–310 |
141.0–248.8 |
141.0–310.0 |
Dressing percentage | |||
Mean |
51.4 |
47.4 |
48. 8 |
SD± |
2.88 |
3.25 |
3.65 |
Range |
46.2–55.6 |
41.3–53.5 |
41.3–55.6 |
Source: Wilson, 1978. | |||
The dressing characteristics of the camel are summarized in Tables 14 and 15. On the basis of the review by Dahl and Hjort (1976), it is evident that in general the dromedary has a higher dressing percentage than pastoralist cattle. It is not clear, however, whether the dromedary is capable of sustaining these high percentages under all management and ecological systems.
Table 14. Dressing percentage in camels and pastoralist cattle.
Animal type |
Dressing percentage |
Source |
Dromedary camel |
41.3–55.6 |
Wilson (1978) |
54–57 |
Congui (1953 ) | |
56–57 |
Dina and Klintegerg (1977) | |
57 |
ITV (1973b) | |
52.8–76.6 |
Kuznetsov and Tretyakov (1972) | |
Bactrian camel |
50–63 |
ITV (1973b) |
56–70 |
Williamson and Payne (1978) | |
48–50 |
Dahl and Hjort (1976) | |
Pastoralist cattle |
45–50 |
Dahl and Hjort (1976) |
Table 15. Weight of camel carcass, organs and appendages as percentage of liveweight.
Weight (kg) |
As % of liveweight | ||||||
Mean |
SD± |
Range |
Mean |
SD ± |
Range | ||
Carcass | |||||||
Forequarter |
120.2 |
22.21 |
79–183.5 |
35.0 |
1.51 |
31.42–38.15 | |
Hindquarter |
84.5 |
14.53 |
59.5–124.5 |
24.7 |
1.38 |
20.98–28.53 | |
Hump |
4.0 |
4.3 |
0–20.0 |
1.1 |
1.04 |
0–4.45 | |
Total |
208.5 |
38.78 |
141–310 |
60.7 |
2.09 |
55.75–65.11 | |
Organs | |||||||
Heart and lungs |
8.4 |
1.13 |
6.5–10.5 |
2.5 |
0.33 |
1.78–3.36 | |
Liver |
7.5 |
1.45 |
4.5–11.0 |
2.2 |
0.41 |
1.47–3.45 | |
Appendages | |||||||
Head (skinned) |
12.1 |
1.81 |
8.5–16.5 |
3.6 |
0.32 |
2.8–4.49 | |
Feet |
14.6 |
2.25 |
10.5–19.5 |
4.3 |
0.37 |
3.31–5.16 | |
Hide |
34.8 |
6.11 |
22.5–47.0 |
10.2 |
0.81 |
8.50–11.76 | |
Assuming an average offtake of 4% for slaughter and a dressing percentage of around 50%, camels probably contribute about 100,000 t per year to African meat supplies, most of which are consumed on the continent.
Chatty (1972) and El Amin (1979) stated that camels mature comparatively slowly. Dahl and Hjort (1976) wrote that camels can be slaughtered at between 4 and 10 years. With increased age, however, there is an increase in meat toughness; the meat also becomes less tasty and of inferior quality. Quoting Russian work, the latter authors suggested that the best age for slaughter is 2.5 years, a figure consistent with the 3 years given by Dina and Klintegerg (1977). At this age the animals average about 300 kg and are not yet fully grown. Their meat is young and tender.
Most pastoralists prefer the meat of young camels aged 4 to 6 months, often associating indigestion with the consumption of meat from calves of 3 months or less (Dahl and Hjort, 1976). Leupold (1968a), Fischer (1975) and Knoess (1977) all assert that the meat of young camels is comparable in taste and texture to beef. Leupold (1968a) described the meat of the camel as palatable, coarser than beef, varying in colour from raspberry red to brown-red and having white fat. It contained a lot of glycogen and was therefore sweet in taste, like horse meat. Khatami (1970) indicated that in appearance and colour, texture and palatability, camel meat is very similar to beef, adding that the carcass of a well fed camel is uniformly covered with a thin layer of good quality fat.
Nasr et al (1965) indicated that the meat of young camels (below 5 years) has a higher moisture content (78.27%) than that of older animals (76.24%) and estimated the protein, crude fat and ash contents of the two age groups as 20.07 and 22%, 0.92 and 1.01%, and 0.76 and 0.86' respectively, with no significant difference between the sexes. Despite the higher moisture content, meat extract output was 1.5–2.5 times higher than for beef, owing to the high creatinine content. Little marbling was associated with camel meat. Comparative meat composition figures for the various animal types given by Nasr et al (1965) are shown in Table 16. Dahl and Hjort (1976) adopted figures of 21% protein and 1% fat as standards for camel meat in their calculations.
Table 16. Mean values of different meat components in bulls, cows, steers and camels.
Type of Animal |
Water % |
Protein % |
Fat % |
Ash % |
Bull |
76.41 |
20.95 |
1.20 |
1.05 |
Cow |
75.52 |
21.19 |
3.99 |
1.02 |
Steer |
72.98 |
20.41 |
4.88 |
0.97 |
Camel 5 yr or more |
76.24 |
22.02 |
1.01 |
0.86 |
Camel under 5 yr |
78.27 |
20.0 7 |
0.92 |
0.76 |
Unfortunately, in spite of all the indications of the superior quality of meat from younger animals, there is a great reluctance on the part of camel herders to sell off their stock at this age. Most trade therefore consists of meat from much older animals, the low quality of which has a direct bearing on the extent of demand for camel meat outside the camel herding societies. A typical example is given in the study by Bremaud (1969) in northern Kenya, in which data collected at Wajir market showed that the average age of 26 animals slaughtered was 14.5 years. It is therefore hardly surprising that camel meat is often labelled inferior in urban societies, and its consumption is considered fit only for the poor (Cole, 1975). Nevertheless, evidence is emerging that when certain standards are set and adhered to, camel meat can be successfully marketed alongside that of cattle, sheep and goats.
Some nomadic peoples consume the blood of camels. There is no indication as to how much blood can be recovered at slaughter, but Wilson (1978) has estimated that the amount of blood and fluids lost at slaughter is equivalent to 9.1% of the final carcass weight. In the case of Sudanese camels, losses ranged from 31 to 53 kg for 14 mature males. Pratt and Gwynne (1977) indicated that in Turkana camels are extensively used to provide blood for human consumption. An adult camel will yield 5.5 litres per bleeding and may be bled twice a month.
While the role of the camel as a major means of transport is diminishing with the advent of more modern methods, the riding camel is still an efficient means of communication in remote areas. It is used by police patrols, extension agents and the nomadic people themselves, and is unlikely to become wholly redundant in the foreseeable future. In fact it is conceivable that as world fuel reserves run down, the role of the camel as a means of transport will be maintained. The function of the riding camel in times of peace and war in the past is well documented (e.g. Robertson, 1938; Green, 1885/86). Green indicated that mounted camels were probably used in warfare as far back as 190 B.C. Nowadays, camel racing is still a popular sport throughout the Arab world.
The riding camels of Arabia, Egypt and the Sahara are known as the Dilool, the Hageen and the Mehara respectively (Leese, 1927). Within this broad classification many local riding types are found.
There are few indications as to the qualities expected of the ideal riding camel, but there is some agreement that the Beja types of the Sudan come nearest to the ideal. The best descriptions of Sudanese riding camels are given by Gillespie (1962) and Epstein (1971). They refer to the Beja camels of the Bishar, used by the Amarar, Hodendowa, Benir Amir and Habaab tribes of the Red Sea coast and Eritrean hills, and also to the Anafi or Shukria camel found east of the River Nile in Sudan. Unless otherwise stated, the following account is based mainly on the observations of these authors.
The riding camel should be slender and long-legged, with a strong but not coarse bone structure. A mature riding bull should display the signs of masculine strength, boldness and symmetry. A short head with a high domed forehead, a roman nose and a fairly deep muzzle with firm, even lips are expected, combined with large prominent eyes and small pointed ears well pricked forward to give an alert expression. The neck should be slender, short, muscular, high set and blending evenly into the shoulders. The general line from the chest should be straight forward for two fifths to a half of its length, before it makes an abrupt upward turn. The set of the head in relation to the vertical neck portion should simulate an inverted L and the head should be maintained almost level with the hump. The shoulders should be deep, strong and well covered. The animal should show strong chest and upper arm muscles, the elbow being carried clear of the lower chest. The chest proper should be wide with deep, well sprung ribs. A short back and symmetrical hump are characteristic of animals in good working condition, and full, well muscled loins are also normally expected. A dropping rump of medium length is characteristic of riding camels. The animal's thighs should be broad, thick and full, such that when viewed from the back the animal should not appear too "split up". The second thighs should be broad and muscular. Muscular forearms and strong, heavy knee joints, combined with moderately straight, closely set hocks are considered the ideal. The cannon bone should be clean and flat. The front feet are expected to be fairly straight while the back ones should be slightly turned out. Tough, horny soles showing even wear are considered ideal, camels from hilly terrain being often recognized by the hypertrophy of the soles and the uneven wear of their nails.
Bligh et al (1976) gave an account of the special adaptive mechanisms and anatomy of the camel foot, which help the animal to travel and work in the sandy and often rough terrains in which it lives. The elaborate design of the foot is shown in Figure 10. It resembles a tyre, but is filled with fat rather than air. The fat is arranged in a series of fatty pads separated by cartilagineous septae and surrounded by a strong collagenous wall, except at the rear end where elastin is the major component. Above and below the fatty pads, there is a 1 cm layer of thick, rubbery epidermis, which is constantly moistened by the sweat glands running through it. These fatty pads are mainly composed of neutral triglyceride, consisting of 75% unsaturated fatty acids. This type of fat becomes fairly liquid at low temperatures, thus enabling the camel to walk on cold surfaces without the pads becoming solidified.
Figure 10. Longitudinal section through the foot of the camel (C. dromedarius) with (on left) the sole shown in greater detail.
Source: Bligh et al, 1976.
In general a thin, supple skin is the expected norm for riding camels. The hair of the Beja camels is short and closely set, but they may carry a full growth around their shoulders and throat, especially during the winter. Young and female camels often have more hair than the males, while castrates develop more curly hair, especially round the hump. Colours vary between breeds. The Bishari camel may be sandy, grey or white in coldur, the latter being the most highly prized.
Turning to the Anafi camel, this breed is also said to be a good riding animal, although not of outstanding quality since it is bred for speed rather than for stamina. It is less robust than the Bishari, but fast and smooth, having no rival for distances of up to 40 km.
With regard to the performance of riding camels, Dina and Klintegerg (1977) refer to some outstanding feats of speed and endurance. When only one rider is carried with about 54 kg of baggage, the camel is capable of 10 km per hour and may cover 48 km a day for long periods. If no baggage is carried the animal may move at 15–19 km per hour, covering 80 km a day for 2 weeks (Leese, 1927).
Leese described four speeds or paces for riding camels: walk, jog, fast run and canter. He indicated that the normal walking speed is 4 km per hour, while that of the jog, the pace most frequently used, is around 8–12 km per hour on level ground. During the fast run, which he described only for the North African and Arabian camels, speeds of 14–19 km per hour may be recorded. This speed should not be maintained for longer than 1 hour, and camels should never be made to canter, since both the animal and the rider quickly become exhausted. Gillespie (1962) recommended that the canter should be used only for short periods, e.g. for shows or races. He observed that every riding camel has an optimum speed for comfortable riding. For the Beja camel (reputed to be the best riding type) it is 8 km per hour. He categorizes the riding paces as the "jog" or "slow trot" (8 km per hour) and the "fast run" (16–32 km per hour). Figure 11 depicts some of these paces, as described by Cauvet (1925).
Figure 11. The three common paces of the dromedary.
Indian authors offer some extensive descriptions of the raising and breaking in of 'riding camels. Singh (1963) and Matharu (1966) recommended that the best age for breaking in a riding camel is about 3 years. Waiting until after this time may result in stubborn and troublesome animals (Nanda, 1957). Knoess (1976) reported an incident in Ethiopia where a 7- year-old Adal camel had to be roped and starved for 3 days to break him in. Initial obedience training consists of head control, which is achieved with a headrope in conjunction with a nosepeg made of wood, bone or metal. Next the camel is taught to sit and stand on command, and to submit to mounting in the sitting position (Leese, 1927). Camels often tend to take off when the rider is only half mounted and special care has to be paid to this shortcoming during initial training. The animal is then taught how to respond to reins, before being subjected to the various paces. Before the age of six, the animal should never be given an adult load. Amounts of luggage are gradually built up in proportion to the animal's age and strength. Singh (1963) warned that riding camels should never be struck on the back of their necks, recommending that the best point t6 "tickle" a camel was behind the right leg of the rider.
The riding camel may be driven by means of a nosepeg, nosering, bridle or halter. Singh (1963) recommends piercing the camel's nose at an early age when the nosepeg or ring is to be employed for riding. Different peoples prefer different instruments for riding, e.g. the nosepeg or ring in India, bridles in Egypt and the halter in Sudan (Leese, 1927). Leese observed that the nosepeg is often used in association with one or two strings, depending on how many nostrils are pierced. The same type of nosepeg may be used to drive both riding and baggage camels. Noserings are usually small (about 1 cm in diameter), made of silver or silver plated, avoiding iron which leads to heat and rust problems. Bridles used for riding are like those of pack camels but smaller, and are used with leather straps and nosebands. Halters are only considered suitable for riding docile animals of placid temperament, used to handling from an early age.
Some of the various types of riding saddle are illustrated in Figure 12. Two types are described by Leese (1927): the Arab markloofa used by single riders, and the Indian pakra employed when two riders mount the same animal (Figure 12.1). The former is a general term for a lighter saddle designed for more rapid paces, typified by the North or South Arabian and Saharan saddles (Figures 12.2–12.6). A sheepskin is sometimes used on top of the saddle. Bulliet (1975) gave an extensive account of the North Arabian saddle (Figures 12.2 and 12.3), invented around 500 to 100 B.C. In this type the rider is located on top of the hump, whereas with the South Arabian saddle he is seated behind the hump.
Figure 12. Riding and baggage saddles of the dromedary.
12.1. The Indian Pakra saddle for two riders.
12.2. The North Arabian saddle used in the Sahara.
12.3. Typical sitting position with the North Arabian saddle.
12.4. The Mauritanian rahla saddle.
12.5. The Teda terke saddle.
12.6. 1 and 2 from Mauritania; 3: used amongst the Tade
12.7. Baggage saddles or hawia, from Sudan.
Source: Adapted from Bulliet (1975) and Acland (1932).
Variations of these two basic types are found in most camel herding societies. The North Arabian saddle primarily consists of two arches (saddlebows), shaped like an inverted V. The two arches are attached to one another by straight or crossed horizontal bars or sticks on each side, to give a rigid, square structure with a hole in the middle. One arch is located in front of the hump and the other behind it. The open space in the middle is filled with cushioning, e.g. a blanket or sheepskin. The saddle is designed so that the rider's weight is distributed evenly over the rib cage, rather than directly over the hump. Bulliet noted that in the Middle East variants of the North and South Arabian saddle constitute the entire range of saddle designs.
Three types of saddle are found in the Sahara, all designed so that they rest on the camel's shoulders, in front of the hump. The Saharan shoulder saddles offer many advantages, one of which is better animal control, since the rider rests his feet on the animal's neck. Examples are the terik and tahyast saddles of the Tuareg. Other advantages of shoulder saddles over the Arabian saddles are their light weight, simple, single-girth attachment to animals and the need for fewer alterations to padding to accommodate changes in the size of the hump. Although a shoulder saddle, the rahla saddle from Mauritania and the western Sahara (Figure 12. 4) does not allow foot control, owing to the presence of an arch located in front of the rider. The terke saddle (Figure 12.5), common among the Teda people of the southern Sahara, is an intermediate type between the North Arabian saddle and the shoulder saddle. Although for the most part it resembles the former, its back arch slants backwards, with the side bars attached higher and closer together, making the front end broader. The rider perches at the very front, often in front of the hump (Bulliet, 1975).
Bulliet (1975) indicates that in spite of the recognized superiority of the Saharan shoulder type, saddles for the women of the Sahara region (Figure 12.6) are usually constructed along the lines of the North Arabian saddle. Paradoxically, however, in northern Arabia saddles for women are based on the South Arabian design.
There is no general agreement on the ideal physique of the baggage camel. Acland (1932) suggested that the first consideration in selecting a baggage camel is whether the animal is to be used for walking or for trotting. It should be robust, heavy and well furnished with bone and muscle. Acland (1932), Leese (1927) and Mason and Maule (1960) also indicated that either a small or a large head with a narrow roman nose, prominent eyes and large lips may be favoured. The neck should be medium to long, resulting in the head being carried high, and should be set low down the chest. The chest should be deep, with ribs that are neither too flat nor too round. The last three ribs should be well developed. The hump should be firm and well developed. There should be plenty of space behind the hump for the saddle. The forelegs should be straight but may be wide apart. Turned-out toes tend to predispose to–“brushing” at the elbow. The leg bones should be heavy. Fairly large and flat hooves are also indicators of good baggagers. The hindlegs should be heavy and well muscled so that the animal is not too "split up". Straight hocks are also preferred. The tail should be high.
Major determining factors of the loads carried by both riding and baggage camels include the breed, size and age of the camel, and the distance to be covered. Additional influences are the terrain, the pace and the amount of available grazing on the route (Singh, 1966). Baggage and pack camels should not be driven for longer than 8 hours a day, and not longer than 6 hours without rest. If an average speed of 3–5 km per hour is maintained, then 30 km or more can be covered per day, which is considered adequate. Higher speeds may result in shifting loads and sore backs, which may damage animal performance. A single camel or a group of three moves faster than a column or caravan.
Williamson and Payne (1978) estimate that a load of 159–295 kg can be carried by a baggage camel for 24 km per day over an indefinite period, while 544 kg may be carried over a shorter distance. They also cite the work of Podberezkin (1951), who noted that the Bactrian camel can pull a load of up to 1,500 kg. Green (1885/86) reported that some Egyptian camels were able to carry 160–180 kg and two riders without showing distress. These estimates compare favourably with reports on the Turkana camel, estimated to carry 100 kg without stress (Pratt and Gwynne, 1977) and the Bactrian camel in Mongolia alleged to carry 130 kg for long journeys covering 35–50 km per day, or 275 kg for shorter trips of 85 km (ITV, 1973b).
Leonard (1894) recommended that the hours of 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. should be left for grazing, since it was preferable to move during the cooler parts of the day. On the rare occasions when camels have to be driven for 12 hours a day (a practice which is difficult to justify), the animals should be rested for a full day in every four of such extended marches. It is advisable to rest the animals in a kneeling position, as standing with a full load is conducive to rapid exhaustion. At the end of the day's march the pack saddle should trot be removed immediately after the baggage, in order to avoid rapid chilling and possible blood vessel congestion, which will damage the back skin.
Camels are poor climbers, and shorter stretches are recommended on uphill terrain. They are almost helpless under muddy conditions because of constant slipping, and although they are good swimmers they may have to be forced into the water.
The baggage camel is introduced to work at 5 years but should not be given full loads until 6 years old (Matharu, 1966). However, it can be broken in at any time after 2 years (Leese, 1927). Various ways of managing young camels between 2 and 5 years old are given. Generally, the young are taught how to stay in the line of trek by having a rope or halter tied round their necks and attached to a quiet adult. This part of the training is considered complete when the young camel can be led by a rope tied to the tail of the adult in front. When the nosepeg is used for driving, the nostrils have to be pierced at least 1 month before the instrument is inserted. During this time the young camel is taught how to sit in response to noserope commands during halts, carrying a baggage saddle which is loaded with increasingly heavy weights. Only when it is fully grown should it be given a full load, which is always proportional to its strength. A travelling column of camels is usually led by the finest and strongest bull. The animals are usually connected by a noserope to the tail of the animal in front. It is also possible to drive camels without these leads, a practice which is discouraged wherever motor traffic might be encountered. If camels in desert conditions can be led unattached, the advantage of allowing some limited and vital grazing en route is gained, although this will undoubtedly slow down the pace.
Different types (Indian, Arab and Somali) of pack saddle were described by Leese (1927). A typical baggage or pack saddle from Sudan, called the hawia, was illustrated by Acland (1932). It is made of two arches joined by side bars, like the North Arabian riding saddle (Figure 12.7). The structure is then fitted, either by means of two pads stuffed with grass or on four bedids (leather pads) kept in. position by leather loops, which also allow for easy detachment. When pads are used, their inner sides should be made of canvas. It is always important to ensure that the saddle fits the camel properly, especially after the rainy season when the conformation of the animal generally changes. Poorly fitted saddles result in sore backs. For this reason, extra grass is always carried to adjust the shape of the pads, which should also be emptied frequently to avoid their becoming too hard and nobbly. Acland also noted that some native saddle pads are made entirely of grass, with no canvas bag.
Although commercial saddles are available, it is generally felt that each camel should have its own specifically designed pack saddle. A well fitting saddle to a great extent determines the output of baggage and pack camels. Pack camels are loaded by balance, and the best system is thus to have all items divided into two equal halves which are then slung on either side of the hump. Flattened packages of uniform size and weight are always preferred. In case of rain all the ropes should be adjusted, as they tend to contract arid can cause pressure sores.
In addition to the head gear and saddles, other items which are used or carried while riding include loading ropes, leg-ropes or hobbles, a feeding bag, a saddle repair kit and a blanket for the night. Further equipment might include breast pieces, a crupper and tarpaulins. Nets have also been used for loading, but loading ropes are usually preferred.
The draught camel may be used for a variety of functions, including pulling carts, drawing wheels, ploughing, and conveying water. It is also used in processing plants, e.g. sugar cane crushers and oil mills (Matharu, 1966). The physical conformation of the camel is not considered very conducive to these tasks, although some encouraging results have nonetheless been achieved. There is no available description of the ideal draught camel, but the main qualities utilized are the brute strength of the animal, its ability to go without water for long spells, and its flat feet, which are considered ideal for treading on sandy surfaces. It is often used is a general term for a lighter saddle designed for more rapid paces, typified by the North or South Arabian and Saharan saddles (Figures 12.2–12.6). A sheepskin is sometimes used on top of the saddle. Bulliet (1975) gave an extensive account of the North Arabian saddle (Figures 12.2 and 12.3), invented around 500 to 100 B.C. In this type the rider is located on top of the hump, whereas with the South Arabian saddle he is seated behind the hump for draught is thought to be increasing in both Africa and Asia.
The draught camel is capable of ploughing at a pace of approximately 2.5 km an hour. It is recommended not to work camels for longer than 6 hours a day, 4 hours in the morning and 2 in the afternoon (Nanda, 1957). In Ethiopia experiments have shown that one Adal camel performs work equivalent to two Harar oxen. In a ploughing experiment, Knoess (1976) reported coverage of 500 m2 per hour or 1 ha per 20 hours, ploughing at 16 cm depth. He found camels better for work than cattle, since they were easier to train and maintain, more hardy under heat and radiation, could be locally purchased and required lower feed costs as they utilize a wide variety of local herbage. Reporting on draught camels in Sudan, Wilson (1978) estimated that the dromedary could exert the equivalent of 1 hp of energy during ploughing, covering 1 ha in 11.25 hours. The energy output was slightly higher during oil milling, at about 1.2 hp. In both respects the camel was better than most other domestic species except the horse. A major difference between using oxen and camels for ploughing is that the labour requirement is generally higher for camels : one person is usually required to lead the animal, while the second works the plough from behind. Camel-operated wells have also proved efficient along the northern fringes of the Sahara, where they provide water for many artificially irrigated plots.
The wide range of uses to which the camel can be put has resulted in considerable variation in the implements used to exploit the animal's abilities and strength. Knoess (1976) reported on the modification of the ox-plough to fit the camel. Leese (1927) reported that more than one camel can be harnessed together, and the equipment used in such cases is also described in detail. The type of cart and harness used is a major factor in determining output: with ordinary harnesses Indian camels drew 326 kg, but by using a specially harnessed cart the weight could be increased to 816 kg (Singh, 1963).
The temperament of the camel has been described as passive (Leonard, 1894). Williamson and Payne (1978) described the camel as an amenable, patient animal easily trained for work. Singh (1963), however, cautioned that in spite of this docility the camel can be savage and violent when improperly handled. It is capable of sudden fits of rage, pronounced among males during the rutting season, for which reason it is always advisable to separate the sexes during work (War Office, 1908). Leonard (1894) described a few unfortunate experiences, ranging from simple kicking to severe injury. Geldings are always easier to handle than entires. Reports have been made (BMA, n.d.) that certain breeds become timid in the presence of Europeans, while others, like the Somali camel, become nervous and panic at night.
The camel possesses tremendous powers of endurance and hardiness. It is recorded that pain is borne by these animals with unusual stoicism. They will continue to labour without showing marked symptoms until they are completely exhausted by disease or privation (War Office, 1908). It is therefore imperative for camelmen to keep a constant watch on their animals, since they may easily be overworked to death (Nanda, 1957). It. is this capacity to work under difficult conditions, and its ability to go without water for long spells, that differentiate the camel from other transport or draught animals. It is noted that after reaching the limits of its endurance the camel will either die or take a very long time to recover. Immature animals should not be given excess loads and very old animals should not be forced to overwork. The fact that castrates work better than entires and are more docile should not be overexploited. When properly handled and looked after camels may live up to 45 years.
In hot climates camels do not develop long coats, with the result that there are very few data on camel hair in Africa and Arabia. However, given below is a brief summary mainly using data from India, Russia and other areas where production is more common.
Camel hair is light and durable and has low conductivity. It is thus considered excellent for making blankets and other warm garments. The best hair is supposed to come from young animals or those in the wild state (Singh, 1966). In India it is common practice to clip the camels in spring, when 1–1.5 kg of hair may be recovered, but animals from colder areas may yield up to 5.4 kg per clipping (Nanda, 1957; Singh, 1966). Leupold (1968a) observed that the annual wool production of the Bactrian camel ranges from 5 to 12 kg per animal, with a yield of 76–83% after cleaning. The best quality came from 1-year-old animals, where 85% of the hair was pure wool with a diameter of 16–18. He noted that by contrast most dromedaries give only 1 kg of wool per year. Hartley (1979) estimated that Somali camels are capable of providing 0.5 kg of hair per year. The hair could be clipped or simply pulled.
Keikin (1976) reported on wool production from a herd of 4,300 camels in Russia. Annual wool production in 1970 and 1974 was 557 kg and 576 kg respectively. Williamson and Payne (1978) quoted Russian data indicating that the Bactrian camel is capable of providing 4.5 kg of hair per yield, the quality depending on the age, sex and breed of the camel. Young Bactrian camels are reported to yield higher quality hair than older animals. Knoess (1976) observed that dromedary foals under 2 years old have a very fine undercoat that tends to fall off and should be cropped by hand. Asad (1970) reported that camel hair was excellent for weaving tents and rugs.
Camels are clipped with hand shears. Efforts are made to shear as close as possible, taking care not to injure the skin. On working animals the saddle seat is left unclipped in order to guard against galls. Young calves are not clipped in India since their hair protects them against the hot monsoon winds. In the cold season, clipped animals should be covered with a blanket at night.
Animal care after clipping often includes oiling the body. The animal is shaded for some time to avoid blistering when exposed to the sun. Two days after oiling the camels' bodies are covered with mud which is removed by stripping three days later. This practice is an attempt to minimize parasites, and has been found satisfactory (Nanda, 1957; Singh, 1966).
Camel hides are little used for leather making since yields are alleged to be poor. Almost no data are available on this subject.
A traditional function of the camel: moving camp in the Afar area of Ethiopia.
Balancing the load correctly is an important skill when using the camel as a baggager.
Fetching water in the dry Afar country of Ethiopia; once trained, camels can be easily led in a column.
Mature male harnessed for ploughing trials in the irrigated Awash Valley of Ethiopia.
A Sudanese riding camel, equipped with the north Arabian saddle, positioned over the hump.
Watering a large herd in southern Sudan: the need to add salt in a watering trough considerably lengthens the task.
The best camel wool comes from young animals: a suckling calf at Omdurman market, near Khartoum.
Conserving water by reducing exposure to heat: while resting, camels huddle together facing the sun to reduce sweat loss.
Walking to the start o f a camel race, a popular sporting attraction in Khartoum and throughout the Arab world.
The winner, in the traditional sidesaddle riding position combining comfort with easy animal control, even while racing.
