Commercial moose meat production in Sweden

Livestock Production Science, 10 (1983) 507--516

507

Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam - - P r i n t e d in The Netherlands

COMMERCIAL MOOSE MEAT PRODUCTION IN SWEDEN

A.W.L. HAWLEY

Alberta Environmental Centre, Bag 4000, Vegreville, Alberta TOB 4LO (Canada) S. SYLV]~N and M. WILHELMSON

Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, S-750 07, Uppsala (Sweden) (Accepted 28 April 1983)

ABSTRACT Hawley, A.W.L., Sylvan, S. and Wilhelmson, M., 1983. Commercial moose meat production in Sweden. Livest. Prod. Sei., 10: 507--516. Moose meat is produced commercially in Sweden by the hunting of wild, free-range animals. Extensive forests, continual rejuvenation of the browse resource, a moderate climate, and the relative absence of natural causes of mortality contribute to the maintenance of a large and productive moose population. Hunting rights are owned by the landowner and both hunting rights and harvested animals are marketed. Exported moose meat is federally inspected and carcasses are processed in federally approved abattoirs. One commercial operation studied in detail in 1979 had fewer than 1% of its processed carcasses condemned. All traumatized tissue was removed from carcasses during proceasing. Weight loss associated with carcass cooling plus removal of traumatized tissue averaged 10% of fresh carcass weight. The average retail value of boneless moose meat sold on the Swedish market in 1979 was approximately U.S. $10.00 per kg. The annual moose harvest in 1981 totalled 152 000 animals with an estimated total carcass yield of 19.7 million kg. The present level of commercial production is insufficient to meet the demands of foreign or domestic markets. Not all harvested moose are marketed, however, and the commercial sale of moose meat is increasing, a trend that will probably continue if the recent levels of moose harvest are maintained.

INTRODUCTION

The rising interest in the sale of products from wild animals has led to several studies on the potentials for game ranching (Kyle, 1974; Telfer and Scotter, 1975; Greer and Doughty, 1976; King et al., 1977; Tennessen and Hudson, 1981). Velvet antler production appears to be flourishing while large scale commercial production of meat from traditionally non-agricultural species is less developed (Yudin and Dobryakov, 1974; Drew, 1976; Yerex, 1979). Commercial game production usually involves relatively intensive husbandry of habituated animals (Yazan and Knorre, 1964; Scotter,

0301-6226/83/$03.00

© 1983 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.

508 1965, 1972; Blaxter et al., 1974; King et al., 1977; Luick, 1978). Commercial meat production from truly wild populations is not prevalent and this may be associated with impediments related to profitability, health and sanitary requirements for commercial products, wildlife legislation, quality of the meat, quantity and reliability of the meat supply, consumer acceptance, and size of the market. Moose meat production in Sweden is one instance in which these impediments have been assuaged. In 1977, a b o u t 9 million kg of moose meat were produced in Sweden, equivalent to 2% of all meat p r o duced nationally (Hansson and Malmfors, 1978), and total moose meat production has increased every year since then. This paper describes the interplay of factors contributing to commercial moose meat production in Sweden and the characteristics of the industry and the product. PRECONDITIONS FOR THE INDUSTRY

Moose population characteristics The number of moose harvested annually in Sweden has increased exponentially since the early 1900s (Wilhelmson and Sylvan, 1979) and reached 152 000 in 1981 (Statens Naturv~rdsverk, Sweden, 1982, personal communication). The size of the Swedish moose population is n o t well known, b u t a large and productive animal population is a main requirement for a commercial meat industry. Habitat in Sweden is highly conducive to moose productivity. Sixty-one percent of Sweden's 41 million ha is forested (MalmstrSm and Arman, 1958). Most of this forest is taiga or mixed coniferous -- deciduous forests and these forest types constitute primary habitats for moose (Telfer, 1978). As is the case in Norway, forestry is a major factor affecting moose habitat (Krefting and Lykke, 1976). There are no large areas of senescent or virgin forests and approximately 300 000 ha of forest are clearcut annually (Swedish Institute, 1979). As a result, Sweden is comprised of large areas of more or less contiguous forests at varying stages of maturity with a large browse resource that is regenerated annually. This forest structure constitutes excellent habitat for moose and the high availability of browse contributes to high moose productivity (Cowan et al., 1950; Markgren, 1969, 1974; Krefring and Lykke, 1976; Sylvan et al., 1980). A shift away from forest grazing of domestic animals left more natural f o o d for wildlife and was coincident with the beginning of the exponential increase in the national moose harvest (Ahl6n, 1975). Other factors contributing to the large moose population include a relative absence of natural predators and virulent diseases, a moderate climate, and regulated hunting (Haglund, 1974; St~lfelt, 1974; Wilhelmson and Sylv6n, 1979). CHARACTERISTICS OF THE INDUSTRY

The moose meat industry in Sweden is based on a large consumer demand for moose meat associated with limited opportunity for the public to hunt

509 moose. Landowners own the right to h u n t on their land. Live wild moose are n o t privately owned, but slaughtered moose become the property of the landowner. Most of the hunting rights and most of the slaughtered moose are under private control because 75% of the woodland in Sweden is privately owned (National Board of Forestry, 1979). Hunting rights can be legally leased or sold and moose carcasses can be legally marketed.

Moose slaughter and processing techniques Moose are c o m m o n l y h u n t e d by organized teams that can involve more than 30 hunters. Hunting is often conducted from stands and sometimes involves driving the animals past the hunters. Quotas on moose harvests are assigned to hunting areas by c o u n t y game offices and landowners often pool their hunting areas to increase the number of moose harvested by a single group. The goal of the game managers has been to harvest approximately equal numbers of calves (animals under I year old) and adults and calves have comprised 35--50% of the total harvest in recent years (Hansson and Malmfors, 1978; Wilhelmson and Sylvan, 1979}. Korsniis-Marma AB (K-M) is the third largest private forestry c o m p a n y in Sweden (National Board of Forestry, 1977). This c o m p a n y produces moose meat as an industry ancillary to forestry and the production system employed by K-M will be used to illustrate the industry. During 1979--1981, an average of 3140 moose, or about 484 000 kg of carcasses, were harvested annually by K-M from about 665 000 ha of land in central Sweden. The c o m p a n y has three federally approved abattoirs for processing moose. Animals shot by K-M were eviscerated in the field and transported to the nearest abattoir. If carcasses were destined for the export market, viscera were placed in plastic containers and accompanied the carcasses to the abattoir. Both carcasses and viscera were inspected by a veterinarian. All traumatized tissue was trimmed from each carcass, and carcasses were cooled at 4--6°C for 1--7 days. Carcass handling and processing techniques and slaughterhouse facilities conformed to the health and sanitary regulations for domestic animals.

Carcass characteristics A potential problem with the harvest of wild game animals for commercial meat production involves the adverse effects of the slaughter m e t h o d on meat quality. Shooting sometimes results in massive tissue damage to the carcass. The removal of all traumatized or tainted tissue by K-M ensured t h a t meat quality was n o t reduced because of the presence of damaged tissue. The resulting trimmed and cooled carcasses processed by K-M in 1979 ranged in weight from a b o u t 50 kg for female calves to 200 kg for males over 3.5 years of age (Table I). Carcass weights reported by Hansson and Malmfors (1978) averaged 16% more than these values for respective sex and age

510 TABLE I Mean ± o n e s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n o f c o o l e d f o r e q u a r t e r a n d h i n d q u a r t e r w e i g h t s o f m o o s e carcasses p r o c e s s e d b y Korsn//s-Marma AB in 1979

Weight (kg) a Sex

Age (years)

No. o f

Forequarter

Hindquarter

Total

carcasses

Male

0.5 1.5 2.5 ~3.5

27 20 5 8

15.4 b 30.8 b 40.6 52.1

± ± ± ±

2.7 4.0 4.0 5.9

17.3 33.9 41.1 50.4

± 2.8 ± 3.5 -+ 3.8 ± 5.6

65.4 129.4 163.4 205.0

0.5 1.5 2.5 3.5

12 21 6 12

12.5 30.5 b 36.7 39.9

-+ 3.9 ± 4.5 ± 6.4 -+ 5.3

14.6 35.0 42.7 41.6

± 2.9 -+ 2.7 ± 4.0 ± 4.1

54.2 131.0 158.8 163.0

Female

a

.

.

.

.

.

b Q u a r t e r weights were averaged first w i t h i n a n d t h e n b e t w e e n ammals. Mean h i n d q u a r t e r w e i g h t was significantly d i f f e r e n t f r o m m e a n f o r e q u a r t e r w e i g h t w i t h in an age class (t-test, P < 0.05).

classes. This difference m a y be related to differences in the a m o u n t of traumatized tissue removed. Hansson and Malmfors (1978) did not indicate that there was major loss of weight due to removal of traumatized tissue. Weight loss due to trimming is affected b y the number and location of shots. Subjective observation indicated that moose killed by K-M in 1979 were usually killed by one shot in the forequarter. The weight of removed traumatized tissue ranged from 0% (for animals shot in the head or neck) to 26% of cooled carcass weight in 178 randomly sampled carcasses, and averaged 3.9% of the cooled carcass weight of 12 carcasses examined in detail (Table II). When weight loss accompanying dehydration during cooling was included with trimming loss, the total loss averaged 10% (n=56; SD= 4.5%) of fresh carcass weight. Greater trimming weight losses have been reported for other species. Trimming losses as a percentage of cooled carcass weight as reported b y Field et al. (1972, 1973a,b) were 32% in elk (Cervus elaphus), 28% in mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), and 23% in pronghorn antelope (Antilocapra americana). Fewer than 1% of the carcasses processed by K-M in 1979 were condemned. The hindquarters of 2 calves and 1 yearling were c o n d e m n e d because of pale, soft, exudative meat. A similar condition observed in swine is generally attributed to animal stress before slaughter (Forrest et al., 1975). The condition was n o t observed in adults and no other conditions that might be attributed to animal stress before slaughter were evident. Therefore, animal stress associated with hunting was n o t seen markedly to affect meat quality or total meat production. Proportions of muscle mass in the proximal pelvic limb have been ob-

511 served t o be h i g h e r in m o o s e t h a n in cattle, suggesting a f a v o u r a b l e p r o p o r t i o n o f desirable cuts (Berg and B u t t e r f i e l d , 1 9 7 6 ; H a n s s o n a n d Malmfors, 1 9 7 8 ) . I n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y , h i n d q u a r t e r s were heavier t h a n f o r e q u a r t e r s in all sex a n d age classes o f m o o s e e x c e p t a d u l t males, b u t t h e d i f f e r e n c e was significant o n l y f o r y o u n g animals (Table I). T h e s e d a t a agree generally with those of Hansson and Malmfors (1978). T h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f m u s c l e a n d b o n e in m o o s e carcasses c o m p a r e s favourably w i t h c a t t l e ( H a n s s o n a n d M a l m f o r s , 1 9 7 8 ) . A p p r o x i m a t e l y 71% o f t h e c o o l e d m o o s e carcass was boneless, m a r k e t a b l e m e a t (Table II). M o o s e carcasses p r o c e s s e d b y K-M h a d a higher p r o p o r t i o n o f b o n e t h a n did cattle or m o o s e carcasses e x a m i n e d b y H a n s s o n a n d M a l m f o r s ( 1 9 7 8 ) . These differences m a y have b e e n related t o d i f f e r e n c e s in the a m o u n t o f m u s c l e lost b y r e m o v i n g t r a u m a t i z e d tissue. H a n s s o n a n d M a l m f o r s ( 1 9 7 8 ) f o u n d m o o s e carcasses t o be leaner t h a n c a t t l e carcasses. O f 1 2 4 carcasses e x a m i n e d d u r i n g t h e 1 9 7 9 K-M harvest, 21 a d u l t females, 7 a d u l t males, a n d 2 calves h a d a m e a s u r a b l e f a t d e p t h over t h e rib-eye at t h e l l t h rib. T h e m e a n fat d e p t h f o r these 30 carcasses was 3 m m . This was less t h a n e q u i v a l e n t f a t d e p t h s o f C a n a d a G r a d e A b e e f carcasses ( S m i t h et al., 1 9 7 5 ) . T r i m m e d sinew a n d fat t o g e t h e r c o m p r i s e d 2.2% TABLE

II

Distribution and value of merchantable components in moose carcasses processed by Korsn~s-Marma in 1979

Weight as mean % ± SD of cooled carcass weight a

Commercial value ($US kg-1)b

Component

Adult (n=9)

Calves (n=3)

Wholesale c

Retaild

Tenderloin Fillet Boneless steaks and roasts Stew meat Ground meat Traumatized tissue Sinew and fat Bone Total saleable cuts

1.8 2.4 25.2 11.7 33.1 3.4 2.9 19.4 73.8

1.6 2.0 22.9 11.3 30.1 5.2 1.4 25.5 68.0

13.41 10.29 7.17 5.97 5.97 0 0 0 --

21.46 17.15 11.26 8.25 8.25 0 0 0 10.14

4.56

7.19

± 0.1 +- 0.2 -+ 2.1 ± 1.4 ± 2.2 ± 2.2 ± 1.3 -+ 1.9 ± 2.0

Weighted mean value per whole carcass kge

± 0.2 +- 0.2 ± 0.8 ± 1.9 ± 3.0 ± 0.7 +- 0.6 +- 1.3 ± 0.8

aFrom S. Sylvan (1979, unpublished results). bRepresentative prices for 1979 assuming US $1 = 4.17 SKr. c Prices quoted by Swedish Farmers' Cooperative, Uppsala, Sweden, for carcasses pre-cut by wholesaler. dSuggested retail prices, ICA Hakon AB, Hakonshus, S-721 84 V~isterSs, Sweden. e Data pooled for adults and calves.

512 of cooled carcass weight (Table II). The season of slaughter could affect the amount of fat on males because of the weight loss usually displayed by rutting male cervids (Wood et al., 1962). The K-M animals were killed during the regular hunting season of 15 October to 14 December. This was after the rut that usually occurs during September and October (Markgren, 1969). Moose carcasses were sold on the wholesale market" in quarters. Quarters were graded into three classes by the Swedish Farmers' Cooperative (Farmek), Uppsala, on the basis of the age of the animal and whether the quarter had been damaged by shooting. Calf and yearling quarters were assigned to the highest category of Class 1 except for quarters with bullet wounds that were assigned to Class 2. Adult quarters were assigned to Class 2 except for bullet-damaged quarters that were assigned to the lowest category of Class 3.

Scale and economics o f the industry Assuming an average carcass weight of 130 kg (Hansson and Malmfors, 1978), moose meat harvested in Sweden in 1981 totalled about 19.8 million kg. A limited amount of this meat reached the retail market. For example, of the 2793 moose shot on K-M land during the 1979 hunting season, approximately 600 (78000 kg of carcasses) were processed in K-M abattoirs and less than 50000 kg of carcasses were sold on retail or export markets. The remaining meat was donated to K-M employees, retained by the hunters, or sold directly from the abattoir. The average retail value of moose meat sold on the domestic market in 1979 was approximately U.S. $7.00 per kg of carcass or U.S. $10.00 per kg of boneless meat (Table II), corresponding to an estimated total value of U.S. $106 million. The wholesale prices received by K-M in 1979 for carcasses destined for export or domestic markets were U.S. $3.00 per kg and U.S. $2.64 per kg, respectively. Wholesale prices per kg of carcass paid to hunters by Farmek varied with the grade of the quarter and ranged from U.S. $0.90 per kg for Class 3 adult forequarters to U.S. $3.66 per kg for Class 1 calf hindquarters. Hides purchased by Farmek had a maximum wholesale value of U.S. $0.36 per kg and averaged approximately 8 kg in weight for calves and 25 kg for adults. Transportation costs incurred by K-M in 1979 ranged from U.S. $0.24 to U.S. $0.48 per kg of moose carcass processed. Transportation costs could be much greater under less intensive forestry conditions. The intensity of the forestry industry has resulted in an excellent system of roads that provides vehicular access to most forest areas. The extraction distance from timber to the nearest road averages 500 m nationally (Swedish Institute, 1979). Other processing costs as recorded by K-M totalled from U.S. $0.72 to U.S. $0.96 per kg of carcass. Hunters were not remunerated financially because the privilege to hunt was considered compensatory. This was important to

513 the economic feasibility of commercial moose meat production because of the large amount of time required to harvest moose. Hunting time as estimated by K-M averaged 4.8 hunter-days per moose harvested during 1979-1981. PROSPECTS FOR THE INDUSTRY

The sustainable maximum moose harvest in Sweden is not known. The present level of harvest is sufficiently high to support producing moose meat commercially. The industry could expand under the present level of production because only a small proportion of harvested moose are marketed. Logging companies and the state are in an excellent position to expand into the industry because they own large tracts of forested land and therefore own the hunting rights to large areas. Indeed, the counties with the highest proportions of company-owned forests also support the highest moose harvests (National Board of Forestry, 1979; Statens Naturv~rdsverk, Sweden, 1980, personal communication). The profitability of commercial moose meat production by K-M is currently being evaluated by the company. Since the present level of production is insufficient to meet the demands of either domestic or foreign markets, it appears that the prospects for expansion of the retail industry are good if the existing levels of moose harvest are maintained. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study was supported by a National Science and Engineering Research Council Postdoctoral Fellowship to the Department of Forest Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, and by the Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala. The senior author was also supported by the Alberta Environmental Centre, Vegreville. Special thanks are extended to Korsn~-Marma AB, Sweden, and R.J. Hudson, Department of Animal Science, University of Alberta, for their support of this research. We gratefully acknowledge the valuable reviews of G. Berglund, Korsn~-Marma AB, S-811 00 G'~vle, Sweden, R. BergstrSm, Swedish Sportsmen's Association, Wildlife Research Unit, S-750 07 Uppsala, and H. yon Sydow, Joint Committee of Swedish Forest Industries, Villagatan 1, S-114 32, Stockholm.

REFERENCES Ahl~n, I., 1975. Winter habitats of moose and deer in relation to land use in Scandinavia. Viltrevy (Stockholm), 9 : 45--192. Berg, R.T. and Butterfield, R.M,, 1976. New Concepts of Cattle Growth. Sydney University Press, Sydney, 240 pp.

514 Blaxter, K.L., Kay, R.N.B., Sharman, G.A.N., Cunningham, J.M.M. and Hamilton, W.J., 1974. Farming the Red Deer. Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland, Edinburgh, 93 pp. Cowan, I., Hoar, W.S. and Hatter, J., 1950. The effect of forest succession upon the quantity and upon the nutritive values of w o o d y plants used as fopd b y moose. Can. J. Res., 28: 249--271. Drew, K.R., 1976. The farming of the red deer in New Zealand. World Rev. Anita. Prod., 12: 49--60. Field, R.A., Smith, F.C. and Hepworth, W.G., 1972. The pronghorn antelope carcass. Univ. Wyo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. No. 575, 6 pp. Field, R.A., Smith, F.C. and Hepworth, W.G., 1973a. The mule deer carcass. Univ. Wyo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. No. 589, 6 pp. Field, R.A., Smith, F.C. and Hepworth, W.G., 1973b. The elk carcass. Univ. Wyo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. No. 594, 8 pp. Forrest, J.C., Aberle, E.D., Hedrick, H.B., Judge, M.D. and Merkel, R.A., 1975. Principles of Meat Science. W.H. Freeman, San Francisco, 417 pp. Greet, C.E. and Doughty, R.W., 1976. Wildlife utilization in China. Environ. Conserv., 3: 200--208. Haglund, B., 1974. Moose relations with predators in Sweden with special reference to bear and wolverine. Nat. Can. (Quebec), 101: 457--466. Hansson, I. and Malmfors, G., 1978. Meat production from moose, Alces alces (L.). Swed. J. Agric. Res., 9: 155--159. King, J.M., Heath, B.R. and Hill, R.E., 1977. Game domestication for animal production in Kenya: theory and practice. J. Agric. Sci., 89: 445--457. Krefting, L.W. and Lykke, J., 1976. A comparison of moose habitats in North America and Norway. International Union o f Forestry Research Organizations World Congress, 16: 731--743. Kyle, R., 1974. Meat production in Africa - - the case for some new domestic species. Blue Book for the Veterinary Profession, 24: 65--72. Luick, J.R., 1978. Reindeer, horse and yak production in Northeastern Siberia, U.S.S.R. University o f Alaska Northern Ecosystems Project 0205-21, Fairbanks, AK, 54 pp. MalmstrSm, C. and Arman, V., 1958. Forest areas. Atlas 5ver Sverige. National Atlas of Sweden. 1953--1971. Svenska si/llskapet fSr antropologi och geografi, Stockholm, pp. 87--88. Markgren, G., 1969. Reproduction of moose in Sweden. Viltrevy (Stockholm), 6: 127-299. Markgren, G., 1974. The moose in Fennoscandia. Nat. Can., 101 : 185--194. National Board of Forestry, 1977. Swedish Forest. National Board of Forestry, J~nkSping, Sweden, 88 pp. National Board of Forestry, 1979. Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 1977. National Board of Forestry, JSnkSping, Sweden, 275 pp. Scotter, G.W., 1965. Reindeer ranching in Fennoscandia. J. Range Manage., 18: 301-305. Scotter, G.W., 1972. Reindeer ranching in Canada. J. Range Manage., 25: 167--174. Smith, K.D., Berg, R.T., Hawkins, M.H., Stiles, M.E. and McFadyen, S.C., 1975. The new beef grads. Univ. Alta. Bull., 41 pp. St~lfelt, F., 1974. Algpopulationera i l~in reed samordnad ~lgjakt. (pp. 5--23). In: F. St~lfelt and I. Norling (Editors), Rapporter ang~ende f~rs~k reed samordnad ~ilgjakt. Statens Naturv~rdsverk Publ. No. PM 485, 43 pp. Swedish Institute, 1979. Forestry and forest industry in Sweden. Publ. No. FS 25, The Swedish Institute, Stockholm, 4 pp. Sylvan, S., Hawley, A.W.L. and Wilhelmson, M., 1980. Study o f the reproductive organs of female moose in Sweden. Proc. North Am. Moose Conf., 16: 124--136. Telfer, E., 1978. Habitat requirements o f moose - - the principal taiga range animal. Proc. Int. Range Cong., 1: 462--465.

515 Telfer, E. and Scotter, G.W., 1975. Potential for game ranching in boreal aspen forests of western Canada. J. Range Manage., 28: 172--180. Tennessen, T. and Hudson, R.J., 1981. Traits relevant to the domestication of herbivores. Appl. Anim. Ethol., 7: 87--102. Wilhelmson, M. and Sylv6n, S., 1979. The Swedish moose population explosion, preconditions, limiting factors and regulation for m a xi m u m meat production. Proc. North Am. Moose Conf., 15: 19--31. Wood, A.J., Cowan, I. and Nordan, H.C., 1962. Periodicity of growth in ungulates as shown by deer of the genus Odocoileus. Can. J. Zool., 40: 593--603. Yazan, Y. and Knorre, Y., 1964. Domesticating elk in a Russian national park. Oryx, 7: 301--304. Yerex, D., 1979. Deer farming in New Zealand. N.Z. Agric. Promotion Associates, Wellington, 120 pp. Yudin, A.M. and Dobryakov, Y.I., 1974. Reindeer antlers. (Translated from Russian). J.R. Luick and C.M. Anderson (Editors), Univ. Alaska, Fairbanks, AK, 20 pp.

RESUME Hawley, A.W.L., Sylvan, S. et Wilhelmson, M., 1983. La production commerciale de viande d'~lan en Suede. Livest. Prod. Sci., 1 0 : 5 0 7 - - 5 1 6 (en anglais). La viande d'~lan produite en Suede provient de la chasse. La vaste ~tendue de terrains forestiers, le renouvellement continu des ressources arbustives, un climat mod~r~ et l'absence relative de pr~dateurs naturels contribuent ~ maintenir une population d'~lans importante et productive. C'est le propri~taire qui poss~de les droits de chasse. Ces droits et les animaux abattus peuvent ~tre vendus l~galement. La viande d'~lan export~e est sujette l'inspection v~t~rinaire et la transformation des carcasses se fait dans des abattoirs agrees par l'~tat. Dans un abattoir ~tudi~ en detail en 1979, moins de 1% des carcasses trait~es ~tait ~limin& T o u t le tissu traumatis~ ~tait enlev~ avant la vente des carcasses; la perte de poids, due au refroidissement de la carcasse et ~ l'enl~vement des tissus traumatis~s par les balles, repr~sentait en m o y e n n e 10% du poids de carcasse chaude. Le prix m o y e n du d~tail de la viande d'~lan d~soss~e vendue en Suede en 1979 6tait ~ peu pros de $10 (amfiricain) par kg. En 1980 la production totale a fit~ de 152 000 animaux fournissant environ 19,7 millions de kg de carcasses. La quantit~ de viande d'~lan produite actuellement ne suffit pas ~ couvrir les demandes des march~s int~rieurs et ~trangers. Cependant, tons les glans abattus ne sont pas commercialis~s. La commercialisation de la viande d'61an augmente et cette tendance ce poursuivra probablement si les niveaux r6cents d'abattage d'~lan se maintiennent.

KURZFAS_SUNG Hawley, A.W.L., Sylv~in,S. und Wilhelmson, M., 1983. Gewerbliche Produktion yon Elchfleisch in Sweden. Livest. Prod. Sci., 10:507--516 (auf englisch). Das Fleisch von erlegten, wild lebenden, Elchen wird in Schweden auf gewerblicher Basis genutzt. Die ausgedehnten Waldgebiete, die st~ndige Erneuerung der Elchweide, das gem~issigte Klima und den relativen Mangel an natiirlichen Sterblichkeitsfaktoren, tragen dazu bei hohe und produktive Elchenbest~nde zu handhaben. Die Ausiibung des Jagdrechts steht in Schweden den Landbesitzern zu, die sowohl dieses Recht als auch die erlegten Tiere ver~ussern diirfen. Exportiertes Elchfleisch wird staatlichtier~ztlich iiberwacht und die Schlachtki~rper werden verarbeitet in staatlich genehmigten Schlachtbetrieben. In einem, im Jahre 1979, eingehend verfolgten Betrieb wurde festgestellt,dass

516

weniger als 1% der verarbeiteten TierkSrper verworfen wurden. Alle verletzten Gewebeteile wurden vor d e m Verkauf des TierkSrpers entfernt. Durch Gewichtsschwund beim Abkiihlen eines TierkSrpers sowie durch Entfernen der v o m Geschoss verletzten Gewebeteile gehen im Durchschnitt 1 0 % v o m warmen Schlachtgewicht verloren. Der Durchschnitts Einzelhandelspreis fiir eintbeintes Elchfleisch betrug 1979 in Schweden etwa $10,00 pro kg. Im Jahre 1980 betrug die Zahl der abgeschossenen Elche 152 000 mit einem Schlachtk~rpergewicht yon insgesamt sch~/tzungsweise 19,7 Millionen kg. Die derzeitigen erzeugten Mengen reichen nicht aus, u m den in- und ausl~indischen Bedarf zu decken. Es wird jedoch nicht alles erlegte Elchfleisch verkauft. Der Handel mit Elchfleisch zeigt eine zunehmende Tendenz, die auch anhalten diirfte, wenn die Elchjagd auf d e m gegenw~/rtigen Niveau fortgesetzt wird.