The Sheep Drive in London is to mark and display the historic right of the Freemen of the City of London to cross London Bridge with ‘their tools of the trade’ without paying a bridge toll. Sheep were brought to market over that bridge.
The first official Sheep Drive occasion was arranged in 2013 by the Worshipful Company of Woolmen ‘for Freemen of the City and their guests to “drive” sheep across the bridge’.
There is a Livery Fair in association with the Sheep Drive. The Fair ‘enables a number of the 110 City of London Liveries to showcase to the public what they do and the charitable work they support’. It is stated that ‘All proceeds from the annual Sheep Drive & Livery Fair support the Woolmen’s Company Charitable Trust [WCCT] and Lord Mayor’s Appeal’. The objects of the WCCT are ‘To promote the wool industry and interest in wool products, sheep farming, shearing, wool production and textiles and design; research into appropriate veterinary procedures and practices; education relevant to the wool industry; and to promote the City of London in general and the Livery movement in particular.’ And the WCCT, with The Company of Merchants of the Staple of England, ‘have initiated a prize in the UK for innovation in the use and application of wool’. Support for the prize comes from the Campaign for Wool, whose Patron is HRH The Prince of Wales. The role of The Lord Mayor’s Appeal is ‘to find solutions to London’s most pressing societal issues.’
So, there are a lot of ‘rights’ to the event.
Now to look at the occasion more closely. This year’s Sheep Drive occurred on Southwark Bridge, and with the Livery Fair situated beyond each of the Bridge’s ends. There were around thirty North of England Mule sheep for driving, and whose ‘headquarters’ were at the Bridge’s north end. They had arrived in time for a drive for the media. From soon after 10am until 4pm, and put into smaller groups, the sheep crossed the Bridge to and fro. Each crossing was in four stages. Each small group of sheep had times when it was not making bridge crossings. The sheep had time to rest in between times of movement. Hay and water were always available to them.
The division of the drives across the Bridge into four portions made it possible for 96 groups of participants - Freemen and family and friends who had paid handsomely for the privilege - to ‘drive’ some sheep on the Bridge. Each group of those behind the sheep was composed of 10 paying participants together with necessary official helpers. Tightly in front of the sheep were official helpers who walked backwards with their arms outstretched, the aim being to contain the sheep group and stopping its members from scurrying, rushing or straying.
There were other live sheep present than those participants in the Sheep Drive: these were at two of the Livery Fair stands. At one was a small group of sheep, demonstrations of shearing of whose fleece were being done - the old way, by means of hand shears. Another small group of various breeds of sheep were part of a stand of a shepherdess provider of rugs etc. Both lots of sheep had their trailer nearby and so somewhere was available for the sheep to have some respite from the crowds.
At 10am, shepherdess, and writer and celebrity, Amanda Owen, accompanied by the Lord Mayor of London and other worthies, had set off driving quite a number of sheep from north to south of the Bridge. The combination of dignitaries behind them, and the media in front of them facing them, and official helpers ahead and facing them, and public all alongside, set the scene for not all to go smoothly. It was too much for the sheep. They tried to turn back. As the professional, Amanda had been advising that more space be given to the sheep, but it was not to be.
Humans clearly had their rights and wishes met on, and by, the day. Right to cross a bridge, right to drive sheep, right to make money or give money to charitable causes, right to earn a living, right to provide a media item, right to have an enjoyable day out. But what about the rights of those who provided the opportunity, and without whose presence the day would have been ‘one among many other such’ and/or less lucrative? Were sheep’s rights met, and were they even considered?
Let us look at sheep and what can be seen as their rights, and taking into account their nature, characteristics and daily norms and what is their species’ habitat. Let us consider what are their reasonable expectations of life. As a basic fundamental are The Five Freedoms of animal welfare, and which are of long-standing. Particularly relevant to the context of the Sheep Drive are these four: freedom to express normal behaviour; freedom from fear and distress; freedom from pain, injury or disease; freedom from discomfort. A rightful expectation that all The Freedoms should be given was not met - in the instance of four out of the five. The other of the five, freedom from hunger and thirst, was given, albeit that the context and opportunities for eating and drinking were not great. Sheep are sentient beings. Sheep are prey animals, they are nervy, and they get easily stressed. Sheep are natural to countryside and to pasture, not to town and hard-surfaced road. In the daily life, sheep do not see many people other than their regular carers. Sheep eat for long hours, and their way of processing food and getting nutrition means that they need time in each day to lie down and ruminate (chew the cud).
It can be seen that the Sheep Drive and its circumstance is scarcely a fit with sheep’s customary experience and what sheep could reasonably regard as their right.
Accepting that the Sheep Drive could never be right for sheep, what can be noticed as leading to it being worse for them than it needed to be, or what can be seen which could have been done to make the event less awful of them? It must have been at the outset - the time of planning - that the timbre of the day’s crossings was determined. In general and throughout, the sheep had far too many people around them. Sheep are simply not used to such a circumstance. There were too many people driving the sheep - doubtless this was because of a wish to make as much money from the exercise as possible. But they should have been managed better and indulged less so that they kept to a regular and less intrusive distance. Those charged with containing the sheep faced them closely, up-front, which must have felt threatening to the sheep. In essence, sheep were being ‘sandwiched’. And too in general, nervousness and uncertainty about what was happening brought sheep sometimes to turn to go in a wrong direction or to veer against and into metal hurdles siding their path. Sheep’s distress, terror and discomfort were palpable.
The drivers, having paid to be on a drive, doubtless felt they had a right to ‘get their money’s worth’ from the occasion, a right to enjoy themselves, and, as laypersons they likely did not know sheep and their traits and preferences, and probably did not realise that they were coming too close, and being too noisy, for the sheep’s liking.
And, crucially, it seemed that many of the official helpers in front of the sheep did not have awareness or experience of how best to treat sheep and to make them feel as calm and as little frightened as possible. Altogether, the two immediate lots of humans fore and aft of the sheep, and the surrounding general public in the near background, produced fear and discomfort in the sheep. With good management by the event providers, and with the event providers giving more information about sheep to those non sheep-professionals present, the situation for the sheep could have been ameliorated; though intrinsic to the situation was that it could never have been nice for the sheep.
The plain thing is that the sheep were being used. Without their presence an event to celebrate Freemen’s ancient rights to cross a bridge toll-free, and with a ‘right’ objective to raise money for charitable purposes, would likely attract less attendees. The prime purposes for the sheep to be there were to provide an attraction, and to be entertainment and spectacle - throughout a day.
In the instance of the Sheep Drive, by virtue of their rights, humans have used sheep and ignored that sheep too have rights, such as to be in a suitable and unthreatening environment.
Perhaps, humans’ excuse and belief would be ‘it’s only a bit of fun’. But it’s not fun for the sheep.
Was it right or wrong that sheep should be there, in the Sheep Drive? Wrong.
30th September 2021