1. Past Questions
    1. In the form of a list, outline the questions you might have to address in a study about religious slaughter in relation to animal welfare.
    2. Outline what inferences you might make about the pre-slaughter welfare of pigs whose carcasses exhibited early rigor mortis and explain why.
    3. Write short notes commenting on the following headline "What the halal? Parents' outrage as 200 schools serve 'cruelty meat'", News of the World, 10 September 2010.
    4. A pheasant may be shot for sport (and food) and a chicken may be slaughtered for food. List some of the scientific measures that you could use to compare the welfare impact of these processes on animals.
    5. What are the main animal welfare concerns associated with the way broiler chickens are transported to slaughter?
  2. Possible Exam Questions
    1. Imagine you have become either an Animal Welfare Officer for a company owning several slaughterhouses or you are working as an independent auditor for a large retailer with a brand standard for animal welfare. (State which in your answer.) How would you assess animal welfare in a slaughterhouse for red meat species? What tools might you need?
    2. Mobile slaughter units have not yet been proved economically feasible in the UK. However, explain what the welfare advantages of mobile slaughter units would be compared to the processes involved in transporting red meat animals to large, centralised slaughtering premises. (You do not have to cover the disadvantages of transport via markets in your answer.)
    3. Explain what you would look for in the slaughterhouse or investigate in a scientific study to assess how broiler chickens' welfare is affected by the processes in the slaughterhouse from the point of hanging on to the shackle line to the point of loss of consciousness.
    4. Some gas killing mixtures and procedures are considered to have animal welfare advantages. Explain why you might be concerned from an animal welfare point of view about the Stork (high oxygen) two stage gas killing process?
    5. Imagine you are assessing welfare at an abattoir. You have just observed one captive bolt stun on a bullock, with all the signs of an effective stun and a good quick stick to stun time. Apart from watching more stunning, what else would you look at or ask about to assess whether the stunning of cattle at this abattoir was going on as well as it could be?
    6. While you were welfare auditing a slaughterhouse on behalf of a market leading retailer, you have observed an unexpected, severe incident of intentionally inflicted unnecessary suffering when a worker was using coercive handling methods inappropriately to move some cattle into a single file raceway from a pen. The particular incident has already been dealt with appropriately. In your report, what systemic factors in the slaughterhouse would you consider might have led to this incident and what recommendations might you make to prevent the re-occurrence of such excessive force or remove the apparent necessity for so much coercive handling systemically?
    7. Make brief notes on some of the ways in which animal welfare improvements in slaughtering processes for pigs and chickens could go along with economic efficiency benefits.
    8. Explain why a chicken going into a group electrical stunning water bath might not be immediately rendered unconscious or might recover consciousness before it is dead.
    9. In the supermarket, you pick up a packet of pork chops, and you notice that the meat is unusually pale and has a clear yellow liquid around it, more than the absorbent pad in the packet could absorb. What inferences might you draw about the pre-slaughter welfare of this pig and why?
    10. While working for a veterinary charity abroad in S America, you observe a traditional method of slaughtering an ox that begins by using 'puntilla.' What is puntilla, why is it used and what one major welfare concern might you have about it? Explain the neurophysiological difference between the passive state caused by puntilla compared to electronarcosis.
    11. Explain what electrical immobilisation is and why it is not a form of stunning.
  3. religious slaughter methods
    1. halal/ dzabiha, schechita, jhakta
    2. characterised by objections to stunning
    3. 85% of modern UK Muslim halal certification authorities now permit stunning
    4. schechita often involves inverted restraint
      1. ~~~~ removal of blood and blood vessels, concern about thorough bleeding out
      2. in fact, effectiveness of bleeding out depends more on severing the correct blood vessels, not causing a cardiac arrest, and gravity, not on the position of the body
    5. legal provisions
      1. must be in licensed slaughter house
      2. bovines must be restrained in an upright position in an appropriate pen/ crush
      3. animals not restrained before ready to make cut
      4. knife inspected must be sharp, undamaged, and large enough - length necessary to reach correct blood vessels
      5. both carotids and both jugulars must be severed by rapid uninterrupted movements
    6. welfare questions of religious slaughter methods
      1. is the pre-slaughter handling and restraint unnecessarily stressful? Inversion. Head-lifting.
      2. is cutting the throat painful without stunning? probably.
        1. would you want throat surgery without anaesthetic?
      3. in insensibility achieved soon enough after the incision?
        1. some recorded times to insensisibility: <7s for sheep 22-40s for cattle 10-120s for calves
        2. problems with neck sticking in cattle (part of Schechita): cattle have vertebral arteries which supply oxygenated blood to the brain after the carotid arteries have been cut - increasing time to loss of consciousness when neck cut instead of heart cut
          1. Subtopic 1
        3. ballooning of arteries can cause slower loss of blood pressure
  4. transport of red meat animals
    1. historical, economic context and impact of workers' conditions on animal welfare
      1. scale of operations, number of licensed abattoir premises and therefore distance of travel has increased dramatically in the last century
      2. mobile slaughter units would be ideal for welfare but so far have not yet been proved economically feasible
        1. but Eimarr is going to change this! :-)
      3. vast scale of modern centralised industrialised slaughtering facilities means slaughterhouse workers experience greater numbers of animals per day
        1. Dunbar's Number and objectification effect of such large numbers and throughput rate on psychological condition of workers and consequent animal welfare outcomes
        2. increased corporate stratification and potential for management stress on workers leading to worse handling and animal welfare outcomes
        3. potential for systemic improvements with a subsidiary concentric design of such large slaughtering facilities so that each unit processes ~/<150 animals per day and corporate management structure is less stratified in workers' daily experience
    2. transport via markets
      1. additional transport via markets causes more suffering and stress for animals
      2. doubling the loading and unloading handling operations
        1. also workers in markets have lower accountability and interest in animals than farmers, so handling often worse
      3. in the internet age, are physical markets really necessary? is the suffering caused by the market processes legally 'unnecessary' then?
      4. physical markets maintained mainly because of tradition and farmers' social experience
      5. animals arriving at abattoirs via markets are far more often injured
      6. more agitated and fearful due to duration of travel and repeated handling
      7. more exhausted - lower glycogen means DFD lower quality meat
        1. legislation "animals are not fit for travel if ...fatigued"
      8. markets often mix established social groups of pigs and bullocks, causing fighting and stress, also DFD
      9. makes supply chain traceability more complicated and difficult so potentially increasing public health risk if there is a zoonotic disease outbreak
      10. increased transport also means increased risk of spreading contagious diseases
    3. 9 welfare concerns
      1. confinement - may be a strange and fearful experience for animals used to outdoor environment
      2. food withdrawal before loading probably increases susceptibility to stress
      3. isolation or mixing with strange animals/ aggression
      4. noise and vibration
      5. extremes of heat and cold
      6. fatigue/ energy reserves depletion
      7. injuries in loading and transport
        1. floor surfaces
        2. design of ramps - legal max 20degrees, but that is actually still too steep
          1. level loading bays and hydraulic tail lifts can reduce handling stress at loading
          2. cattle particularly have major biomechanical difficulty walking up steep ramps/ steps
        3. poor driving/ driving accidents
      8. mortalities in transport - if DOA rate increases above 'normal' baseline, why?
        1. ruminants 0.02% (2 in a thousand) - ruminants are physiologically very tough
        2. pigs - 0.1% (1 in a hundred)
        3. chickens - 0.2% (2 in a hundred)
        4. small percentages but absolute numbers affected are very high
    4. new legislation
      1. statute history
        1. EC Regulation 1/2005 came into force Jan 2007, amended version published 2009
        2. EC Reg 1/2005 revokes Welfare of Animals (Transport) Order 1997 statutory instrument based upon EC Directive 91/628 as amended by 95/29
        3. EC Regulation 1/2005 is enacted by statutory instrument 3260: the Welfare of Animals (Transport) (England) Order 2006 - this is the most recent UK legislation
      2. legislation covers 6 requirements
        1. fitness to travel
          1. "no animal shall be transported unless it is fit for the intended journey (not injured, infirm or fatigued), and all animals shall be transported in conditions guaranteed not to cause them injury or unnecessary suffering"
          2. However, sick or injured animals may be considered fit for travel if they are only slightly injured or ill such that the transport on the intended journey would not cause them additional suffering
          3. "slightly" = not so much injured, ill or fatigued that the intended journey would cause additional suffering
        2. duration of travel
          1. <8hrs using 'ordinary' vehicles
          2. >8hrs if using 'special' vehicles
          3. legal criteria for 'special' vehicles v lax, so <8hrs limit mostly ineffective
          4. maximum journey times with 'special' vehicles
          5. lambs, calves, piglets 9 + 1 (rest) + 9 = 19hrs* - i.e. max 21hrs
          6. adult sheep and cattle 14 + 1 + 14 = 29hrs* i.e. max 31hrs
          7. Pigs 24hrs* (with continuous access to water)
          8. Horses 24hrs* with continuous access to water and if necessary feed every 8hrs
          9. * all journey times may be prolonged by extra 2hrs due to unforseen driving conditions
        3. feeding/ watering intervals
        4. records of the journey
        5. appropriate design of vehicles
        6. ventillation, bedding, stocking densities
    5. economic incentives to improve welfare
      1. individual red meat animals are valuable - typically more than a worker's day wages
      2. poor management strategies lead to increased DOA rates, increased downgrading or rejection, lean meat quality defects
      3. substantial economic losses due to poor welfare
      4. alignment of economic incentives and animal welfare concerns means great potential for improvements
  5. lairage and handling within slaughterhouse
    1. routine processes and welfare questions at each stage
      1. assemble into groups - established groups may be mixed in order to sort into weights
      2. food withdrawal - reduces fouling in transport vehicle, injuries due to slipping, but increases susceptibility to stress
      3. loading onto vehicle
        1. appropriate ramp/ level loading bay/ hydraulic tail lift?
        2. level of coercive handling minimum necessary?
      4. transport to abattoir
      5. unloading - who unloads? when? how? is the AWO or Vet overseeing?
      6. holding in lairage - design of pens, acoustic insulation, water should be constantly available, food must be provided if transport+lairage has been >12hrs
      7. moving to stunning point - appropriate design of raceways? minimal use of coercive handling or goads? are animals left waiting in raceway able to see/ hear/ smell animal in front being stunned?
      8. stunning - is electric tong application correct? is captive bolt gun placement correct? is stunning effective in immediately inducing unconsciousness?
      9. sticking/ neck cut - are the correct vessels cut? is the knife a suitable length for actually cutting both jugulars or all the efferent vessels from the heart?
    2. 4 purposes of lairage facilities
      1. to facilitate inspection of the animals for welfare, public health and business reasons
      2. to minimise risk of injuries
      3. lairage may possibly in some circumstances reduce stress
        1. does not apply to poultry
      4. as a reservoir of animals to ensure continuous processing and efficient use of skilled workers' time
    3. legislative provisions in lairage
      1. animals must be unloaded as soon as possible
      2. must have protection from adverse weather, including cooling by spraying water or by mechanical ventilation if necessary
      3. strange animals kept apart to minimise aggression
      4. suspected sick animals must be held separately until inspected by on-site Vet
      5. careful handling
      6. animals inspected regularly
      7. casualty animals must be killed immediately
      8. animals unable to walk without suffering must be killed by a permitted method where they lie
    4. environmental/ design questions for welfare
      1. adequate bedding provided if held overnight?
      2. drinking water must be provided at all times
      3. sufficient food on arrival and then twice daily if time since last feed until death will be >12hrs
      4. enough space to stand, turn, lie down
      5. suitable housing to hold animals overnight or longer than expected if there is an operational failure?
    5. coercive handling
      1. 5 legislative requirements
        1. force used must be minimum necessary, only if purpose is legitimate and necessary, if animal has space and time to respond and move
        2. no frightening or terrifying animals
          1. if **tonic immobility** observed as a result of coercive handling procedures then that is definitely causing 'unnecessary' suffering because it is evidently counter-productive
        3. no lifting or dragging in a way that would cause pain or suffering
        4. no kicking, hitting or grasping of sensitive parts -e.g. 'wool pull' in sheep, tail manipulation in cattle
        5. a goad may be used but only once and then give the animal time and space to move
      2. 3 systemic welfare considerations
        1. concept of graded escalation of force or restraint
        2. painful stimulus applied to one animal not very effective in moving a group
        3. could the design of facilities and equipment or the animal management system be changed so that the apparent necessity of force is removed?
        4. before using coercive handling, does the animal actually have space to move in front of it?
        5. is a painful stimulus perceived by the animal as a directional signal?
          1. our innate capacity to recognise directional signals is probably an evolutionary result of our ecological niche as a social hunting species, but the animal species which we eat for food probably do not recognise directional signals as much as we expect them to
          2. coercive handling or use of a painful stimulus to make an animal move is unlikely to be effective if it expects the animal to turn one way in a space where it could go either way or to reverse direction
    6. design of facilities and equipment to promote easy and welfare-friendly handling
      1. keep the environment bland, without distractions or excitement
      2. keep irrelevant people and objects out of the way
      3. design as much as possible so that animals can move at their own pace
      4. as much as possible design the facility so that reducing group sizes happens by animals moving voluntarily without necessity of coercive handling - good for welfare and for operational efficiency
      5. consider the animal's natural behaviour to move them with minimum coercion
        1. use the animal's natural flight zone to promote movement
        2. curved races are less likely to cause fear or apprehension in cattle than right angle bends
        3. consider the animal's field and depth of visual perception
          1. cattle and horses have less visual depth of field and visual acuity at short range but are acutely visually sensitive to movement
          2. what can they see from their height? can they see where they're going if it dark relative to where they've come from?
        4. is there anything on the ground or near the raceway that the animal might perceive as an obstacle or threat?
          1. cattle and horses have v different visual abilities than us and are often scared of reflective puddles of water because they can't see how deep they are.
          2. farmed animals' environments are very predictable compared to ours, strange objects are more likely to be perceived as a threat or interesting/distracting.
        5. animals, particularly pigs, are likely to be more stressed by moving them into single file than if facilities are designed to allow them to move in groups as much as possible
    7. legislation on use of electric goads WASK 1995
      1. electric goads can only be used on adult cattle and adult pigs which refuse to move forward
      2. shocks must be for no longer than 1s and giving the animal adequate time to respond and move
      3. animal must have space to move forward
      4. only applied on large muscles of hindquarters
      5. current legislation omits essential scientific point that prey species are unlikely to recognise a directional stimulus, so electric goad should only be used if the direction of movement expected of the animal is the only direction available to it
        1. this additional legislative requirement would replace the responsibility where it belongs for intelligent re-design of facilities so that routine, repeated goading is no longer necessary
        2. or, other workers can use pig boards to block off alternative directions of movement, but if this is needed routinely it will increase labour costs significantly and so legislative amendment would still strongly incentivise redesign of facilities to remove apparent necessity for routine, repeated goading
    8. shackling of poultry
      1. poultry are manually caught, inverted and hung onto a *moving* shackle line by their legs **before stunning**
      2. inversion is acutely stressful
      3. hanging by their feet is probably very painful
      4. legislation prescribes maximum times hung in shackles - chickens 2mins, turkeys 3mins
  6. handling and transport of poultry
    1. 7 processes
      1. selection of birds - flocks are often thinned at *28?* days
        1. catching large birds and leaving birds not yet at finishing weight likely to cause even more panic in flock than catching all birds
      2. food and water withdrawal
        1. in law and industry regulations, withdrawal is supposed to be strictly limited, but in practice how well is this applied and how is it monitored?
      3. catching and crating
        1. should be caught by two legs - only monitoring in practice is retrospective if downgrading rate increases
        2. how long are birds already caught and crated waiting before the modules are loaded onto the lorry - when does the counting of 12hrs max food and water withdrawal start?
      4. transfer to vehicle
        1. sudden lurching movements or even dropping crates may cause injuries and stress
      5. unloading into lairage
        1. how are crates stacked to optimise ventilation?
      6. hanging onto shackle line
        1. how careful is handling?
          1. picking up by both legs
        2. is the shackle line clean and maintained to ensure consistent good electrical contact?
        3. how long are birds hanging inverted on the shackle line? they cannot breathe while they are inverted
          1. if there is a mechanical or personnel delay affecting the shackle line likely to cause the birds to be hanging longer than 2mins, they should be taken down and allowed to breathe
    2. 6 problems with manual catching
      1. unpleasant working environment - tends to make workers less patient and careful with animals
      2. feasibility of individual monitoring and care for each chicken?
      3. imposition of fear and agitation
      4. potential trauma to legs and wings
      5. carrying groups of birds by the legs
      6. inversion is stressful - more than it seems because birds are incapable of breathing upside down
    3. legislation states catching and carrying should be by both legs
      1. injuries rate increases 3-fold if birds caught and carried by one leg
    4. automatic poultry catching machines
      1. machine caught birds show quicker return of heart rate to normal in comparison to manually caught birds
      2. duration of tonic immobility (fear response) is much longer in manually caught birds
      3. machine caught birds typically show less physical damage
    5. food and water withdrawal
      1. food and water withdrawn usually night before catching
      2. legislation "suitable feed and water must be provided except in journeys lasting less than 12 hours"
        1. completely impractical to provide food and water in transport modules on a lorry, so in practice this legislation sets a maximum transport duration
      3. maximum stocking density 160cm2/kg for birds weighing 1.6-3kg
      4. stocking density should be adapted according to weather conditions
    6. 2 basic strategies to improve welfare in transport for poultry
      1. reduce severity of stresses by improving procedures
      2. reduce duration of exposure to stresses by reducing transport times
    7. welfare science of poultry transport
      1. mortality rate increases in probably exponential curve after 6hrs
      2. overall mortality rate in transport typically ~0.2% (2 in a thousand, so expect 12-13 per lorry of 6500)
      3. 4 causes of death in transport
        1. congestive heart failure - 51%
        2. physical trauma - 35%
        3. neck dislocation - 3%
        4. not determined, probably pre-existing condition exacerbated by transport - 11%
      4. poultry have very poor thermoregulatory capabilities
        1. 2 science points
          1. above 20C max daily temp in shade, mortality rate in transport increases exponentially
          2. temperature within different transport modules within lorry varies widely
        2. 4 welfare implementation
          1. welfare monitoring should include placement of 3-4 electronic thermometers transmitting wirelessly to a monitor in the cab with automatic recording
          2. some poultry transport lorries have AC - but v expensive
          3. bottom front modules tend to get hottest due to proximity to engine and lack of ventillation - good policy to leave these empty
          4. train lorry drivers to be aware of thermal comfort for poultry and modify packing and ventillation according to weather conditions
      5. 'unloading' into lairage facilities is not effectively unloading for the chickens
        1. appropriate design of lairage facilities
        2. temperature monitoring in lairage
        3. automatic ventilation in lairage
    8. 8 welfare concerns for poultry in handling and transport
      1. economic incentives not favourable
        1. vast scale of operations
        2. low value individuals
        3. small size
        4. produced in large numbers
        5. handled en masse
        6. difficult in practice to monitor or enforce good stockmanship
          1. 'stockmanship' = attention and care for the health and welfare of the flock and individuals
  7. Legislation and industry standards
    1. Statutes
      1. EU Directive 93/119/EC On the Protection of Animals at the Time of Slaughter and Killing
      2. WASK 1995 - Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing Regulations)
      3. Amendments to WASK almost every year since
      4. European Council Regulation 1099/2009
      5. to be implemented in UK by WATOK 2013 (not yet in force, scheduled for July 2013)
    2. General principles of legislation
      1. defines criminal offences for causing or permitting to be caused to an animal unnecessary suffering, pain or avoidable excitement (agitation)
      2. anyone carrying out handling, stunning, slaughter or killing of animals must be competent and hold a Registered Licence
      3. in new WATOK, every slaughterhouse will be required to have a competent licensed person to safeguard animal welfare
      4. only permitted methods may be used to stun or kill animals
      5. permitted methods will cause "immediate unconsciousness"
        1. therefore, puntilla - insertion of a knife between C3 and C4 to sever the spinal cord, is not a permitted method, as it causes paralysis and slow death by stopping breathing but does not induce immediate unconsciousness or cardiac arrest
  8. gas killing
    1. gas killing is not stunning because it does not immediately cause unconsciousness
      1. 10s in birds
      2. 30s in pigs
    2. killing of pigs by CO2
      1. legislation allows gas killing by CO2, with 3 conditions
        1. must be in suitable chamber and facilities for worker safety
        2. at least 70% CO2, in practice usually 90%
        3. each pig must be exposed to the gas for long enough to ensure that it is dead before any other procedure
      2. 6 relevant properties of CO2
        1. anaesthetic effect after initial aversive phase
        2. heavier than air so easily contained safely
        3. cheap, byproduct of brewing industry
        4. forms carbonic acid when dissolved in saliva, pungent and irritant at high concentrations
        5. causes feeling of suffocation
        6. highly aversive >30%
      3. welfare pros and cons
        1. 5 advantages
          1. operation can be easily automated - less opportunity for mishandling
          2. pigs are immersed in gas so no opportunity for misapplication of stun/stick
          3. pigs are killed not just stunned so no chance of recovery of consciousness during later carcass dressing procedures
          4. new automated group handling systems reduce handling stress
        2. 2 disadvantages
          1. loading into walk-in gas killing chambers requires high levels of coercion and stress because pigs can smell the gas before they go in
          2. but in submersive automated group loading systems, little or no smell of CO2 until they are suddenly totally immersed
          3. CO2 is highly aversive at high concentrations and it takes 30s to induce unconsciousness
          4. disadvantages are not intrinsic to gas killing per se, could be avoided with automated group conveyor and submersive handling systems and anoxic gas mixture rather than high [CO2]atm
      4. 3 economic advantages
        1. bodies emerge relaxed, not in clonic convulsions, so accurate and effective sticking is easier
        2. pigs are completely dead when they emerge so no 'minimum required bleeding time', potentially speeding up a process that is normally a rate limiting step and increasing overall operational efficiency
        3. less handling and less skill required in well-designed automated systems may reduce labour costs of training and skilled personnel
      5. 2 different loading/ handling systems
        1. 4 disadvantages of old walk-in to restraint crate with two pigs at a time
          1. highly stressful, usually involves routine coercive handling and use of goads
          2. pigs are manually separated and restrained, which causes fear
          3. stop-go process increases waiting time and duration of handling stress for pigs
          4. also slow and inefficient
        2. 5 advantages of automated conveyor group handling systems
          1. pigs are automatically moved in groups by conveyor belts and-or moving partitions/ gates
          2. groups gradually subdivided by automated descending gates/ partitions
          3. animals not closely restrained
          4. no routine operational requirement for coercive handling or use of goads
          5. higher throughput rate by processing groups without requirement to move each pig faster
          6. synergy of economic and welfare benefits!
        3. potential further improvements
          1. better gas mixtures - using direct anoxia rather than high (>30%) CO2 concentrations
    3. killing of poultry by anoxic gas mixtures
      1. anoxic gas mixtures
        1. raised nitrogen + 30% CO2 so that [O2]atm <2%
        2. argon added to air so that [O2]atm <2%
        3. 30% CO2
          1. reduces anoxic convulsions and wing breakages
          2. reduces time to induction of unconsciousness
          3. ~10s reduction in time to loss of evoked responses in chickens
          4. ~20s reduction in time to loss of evoked responses in turkeys
          5. also reduces cost (CO2 is cheap industrial byproduct), so increases take-up of anoxic gas killing method which is overall an improvement in welfare
      2. advantages of gas killing of poultry
        1. anoxic gas mixtures are not aversive
        2. reduces downgrading due to breast haemorrhages caused by electrical stunning
      3. legislation
        1. "birds may be killed by an anoxic gas mixture which rapidly renders birds insensible to pain or distress in a chamber provided for the purpose"
        2. "argon, nitrogen or other inert gases in atmospheric air with a maximum of 2% oxygen by volume"
        3. any mixture [of the above] and carbon dioxide up to 30% CO2 by volume
      4. birds are very resistant to anoxia and will recover very rapidly from gaseous anaesthesia if not completely killed before being removed from the gas chamber
        1. no feather plucking or eviscerating procedures should continue until the birds have been in the gas long enough to kill them
      5. potential further welfare improvement if anoxia combined with rapid hypothermia?
        1. birds are more resistant to anoxia than mammals but more susceptible to hypothermia
        2. death by hypothermia is relatively non-aversive - similar to anaesthesia
        3. nitrogen gas is normally supplied in liquid form, so potential for using the cold property with no extra cost
        4. possible method - slatted floor of gas chamber with liquid nitrogen reservoir kept topped up by float valve to level just below floor to prevent cold burns
      6. how to monitor retrospective outcome measures of welfare without handling at hanging on line?
        1. if birds die before exposure to the gas, in transport or lairage, due to onset of rigor mortis, the feathers do not come out as normal in the automatic plucking machine, so actually good recognition rate of DOAs
      7. Stork (high oxygen) gas system for poultry
        1. currently illegal in UK
          1. but actually used in Northern Ireland
          2. WATOK will permit wider range of gas mixtures
        2. requires manual unloading of live birds - negating one of the welfare advantages of gas killing methods
        3. two stage process
          1. initial gas mixture is 30% CO2, 30% argon and 40% oxygen
          2. anaesthesia
          3. second gas mixture is >70% CO2
          4. kill
        4. transport modules are tipped while birds still alive and conscious
        5. after initial anaesthesia gas mixture, birds are hung onto a shackle line
        6. if there is any delay on the shackle line, birds will very rapidly regain consciousness before going into the >70% CO2 mixture - highly aversive
        7. not a welfare improvement method!
  9. stunning
    1. signs of an effective stun - 4 routine checks in slaughter house
      1. collapses immediately
      2. no rhythmic breathing
      3. tonic - clonic phases
        1. tonic- still, stiff, typically 5-10s
        2. clonic - spasmodic movements, like an epileptic seizure
      4. relaxed jaw
    2. other scientific measures of unconsciousness/ time to unconsciousness
      1. EEG
        1. evoked responses - 4 methods
          1. VER = Visually Evoked Response
          2. time to cessation of evoked response in brain activity measured by EEG
          3. no corneal reflex - measure of brain stem activity, if no response either the animal is dead or the reflex arc has been damaged
          4. no response to pin prick to snout/ muzzle
          5. auditory evoked response (e.g. execution of Languille 1905)
    3. 'stunning' by definition is recoverable
      1. 'recoverable' i.e. will probably or in most cases regain consciousness if not killed first, not that it is survivable
      2. legal categorisation as 'recoverable' is intended to emphasise that a further slaughter or killing method must follow as soon as possible (in law), also industry standards specify maximum times
    4. captive bolt, concussion
      1. captive bolt gun/ pistol
        1. cause immediate unconsciousness, typically <10ms, good
        2. types
          1. penetrative - partially destroys midbrain and possibly part of brain stem
          2. e.g. Shermer or Cash Special brands
          3. trigger or contact fired
          4. concussive guns (e.g. Accles & Shelvoke 'Cowpuncher')
          5. preferable in cases of suspected BSE, less risk of cross-contamination with brain material
          6. in young calves/ lambs, may not be effective
          7. pneumatic bolt guns - need less maintenance, but less flexible to use so may lead to less than ideal placement
        3. welfare issues
          1. weekly maintenance essential
          2. back-up should be within arms-reach at all times
          3. appropriate cartridge selection - lambs 1.25 grains of gunpowder, large cattle 3-4 grains, normally colour-coded.
      2. pole-axe/ sledgehammer
        1. if done competently, actually a v effective humane stunning method
        2. time from impact to loss of consciousness probably <150ms, i.e. too fast to consciously register any pain
      3. position and trajectory of shot/ impact important
        1. where skull is thinnest and in trajectory to cause maximum damage to midbrain and brain stem
        2. on cattle and pigs, in between the ears on the front of the skull
        3. on horned sheep/ goats, the optimal position may be behind the horns instead
    5. electronarcosis
      1. five basic points how it works
        1. high current across neural membranes
        2. 300-350V
        3. sine waveform, frequency important, ideally 50Hz
        4. disrupts normal electrophysiological activity
        5. profound changes measurable in EEGs
        6. epileptiform changes persist after the stunning current has been removed
        7. similar epileptiform EEGs in humans reported complete unconsciousness
      2. fulfils legislative requirement for immediacy - causes unconsciousness in 10-20ms, far less than 150ms
      3. transformers and safety
        1. modern electrical stunning equipment uses indirect current induced by a transformer
        2. current only induced when secondary circuit completed by *both* terminals contacting animal
        3. much lower risk of accidental electrocution of workers
        4. much lower risk of accidental electrocution of animal before correct positioning of tongs on both sides of the head
      4. WASK Regulations 1995 three basic requirements
        1. electrodes must span the brain
        2. appropriate measures to ensure good electrical contact
        3. strength and duration of the current must be sufficient to ensure animal is rendered immediately unconscious and remains so until it is dead
      5. correct/ incorrect positions of electrodes
        1. head only or head-to-back
          1. head only - tongs must span the brain by the path of least resistance
          2. both above the eyes or one electrode above the eye and one behind the ear
          3. head-to-back
          4. second electrode on spine just beyond the heart
          5. higher current needed to immediately stop normal neuro-electrical activity in both brain and heart simultaneously
          6. used in automatic conveyor systems with pigs where no risk of accidental electrocution of worker with much higher current than in head-only application
        2. incorrect positions
          1. electrical immobilisation
          2. an electrical current not spanning the brain will cause paralysis but not unconsciousness
          3. electrical paralysis sometimes used as a restraint method - still used in Ireland, although arguably illegal by EU Directive
          4. base of neck to base of spine electrical paralysis with insufficient power used in Chinese fur factories for skinning animals
          5. animals often still conscious but paralysed
          6. regain consciousness when already skinned, die slowly of blood loss, loss of body temperature, massive shock
      6. electrical stunning waterbaths in poultry
        1. cleaning and maintenance of shackles essential for good electrical contact and effective humane stunning
        2. I2=V/R, when V is constant I2 proportional to R
          1. i.e. current varies exponentially dependent on resistance
        3. group stunning in electrified water bath
          1. resistance of birds varies (size, breed variations in feet, body fat, hydration)
          2. effective current per bird therefore varies exponentially dependent on differences in resistance of birds
          3. current used is an average of currents required to effectively stun without causing wing breakages or too much haemorrhaging
          4. poultry stun monitor - pair of smooth crocodile clips, measure individual current across a range of birds
        4. frequency vs. current
          1. higher frequencies produce fewer wing breakages and fewer breast haemorrhages
          2. at higher frequency, higher current is required to induce unconsciousness or cardiac arrest
          3. modified wave forms can reduce direct muscle stimulation, reducing downgrading due to wing breakages and breast haemorrhages
  10. restraint
    1. WASK Regulations 1995 - restraint is a legal requirement before stunning or slaughter
      1. small animals restrained manually is sufficient
      2. pigs and sheep may be restrained in automatic conveyors
      3. cattle need to be restrained in a stunning pen/ box
      4. head restraint in cattle is controversial - makes it safer for workers, may improve placement of shot, but may cause extra agitation to the cattle
      5. must be no delay between restraint and stunning
  11. retrospective outcome measures of welfare
    1. abnormally increased mortality rate in transport or lairage
      1. DOA dead on arrival
        1. cattle - very rare
        2. pigs - 0.03-0.1%
        3. chickens - 0.2-0.5%
      2. possible causes if DOA rate increases
        1. pre-existing infectious disease
        2. severe trauma during catching and loading - particularly affects poultry
        3. poor transport conditions - severe injury due to inappropriate flooring, suffocation
        4. over-heating - particularly affects poultry and pigs, which have poor thermoregulatory capabilities
      3. large variation in DOA rates between countries
        1. Denmark 0.03% - Germany -0.5% - 15x difference!
        2. DOA rate significantly affected by breed selection strategies and management system
        3. above 17C average day temperature DOA% increases exponentially
          1. Germany is in the middle of the continent, Denmark is coastal
    2. injuries evident on carcasses
      1. bruises and lacerations from fighting in pigs especially when established groups have been mixed in transport or lairage
      2. "stick marks" haemorrhage patterns showing pre-mortem bad handling
      3. "Downgrading"
    3. pre-existing long-term conditions and injuries
      1. legislation - animals must be fit to travel, not injured, infirm, or fatigued
      2. in cattle, lameness, leg injuries, leg abscesses
      3. pigs - severe tail biting injuries
      4. pigs - severe lameness
      5. lambs - wool pull, haemorrhaging of the skin where handlers have pulled the wool, also against WASK 1995 legislation "no person shall lift or drag... by the head, horns, ear, feet, tail, *fleece* or any part of its body in such a way as to cause it unnecessary suffering"
    4. lean meat quality defects
      1. DFD - Dark Firm Dry, or in cattle, aka 'Dark Cutting Beef' pH 6.2
        1. chronic stress ante-mortem
        2. often caused by mixing groups of pigs, leading to severe fighting
          1. also, long marketing times, particularly repeated transport
          2. long periods of feed withdrawal
          3. DCB - dairy cows particularly susceptible to stress from unfamiliar events and environments, probably because they are conditioned to such a highly predictable environment
        3. often associated with obvious skin damage due to fighting
        4. exhausted glycogen reserves
        5. reduced pH fall post-mortem
        6. incomplete acidification after death means early onset of rigor mortis and delayed release from rigor mortis
        7. DFD meat has increased susceptibility to spoilage
      2. normal meat pH 5.7
      3. PSE - Pale Soft Exudative pH 5.2
        1. acute stress ante-mortem, typically excessive goading in pigs
          1. also, breeding selection strategies for leaner pigs has increased stress susceptibility
        2. normal glycogen levels at time of death
        3. abnormally rapid pH fall post-mortem
  12. legal killing/ slaughter methods
    1. mechanical methods
      1. pithing - destroying the brain and spinal cord through the hole made by percussive stunning
      2. cervical/ neck dislocation or severance of the spinal cord by decapitation (emergency culling of injured/ ill poultry)
        1. poultry killing pliers/ calipers - not particularly effective compared to manual dislocation
          1. stretching - 100s to brain death, crushing, ventral - 150s crushing, dorsal - 250s
        2. permitted for disease control/ casualty birds only
        3. neck dislocation also permitted for rabbits, for disease control purposes
        4. bird brains are resistant to anoxia so consciousness may be maintained for some time after decapitation
        5. not recommended due to slow effect, only to be used in disease control/ euthanasia cases when doing nothing would be even worse
      3. free bullet - very effective, probably loss of consciousness <150ms so too fast to feel anything
        1. free bullet guns not normally used in abattoir environment because dangerous for workers - risk of ricocheting bullets
        2. in boars and bulls with thick skulls and energy absorbing tissues above the skull (adaptations for inter-male competitive fighting), concussive methods are relatively ineffective and ordinary free bolt may not penetrate far enough - then free bullet is the best option
      4. shotgun - common backup for humanely killing casualty animals
        1. should be aimed on a trajectory that will go directly through mid-brain and brain stem
      5. percussive/ concussive guns for poultry
        1. Cash poultry percussive guns/ modified Draper nail gun
        2. highly effective immediate kill, best method for killing poultry humanely, especially in small operations
    2. bleeding/ exsanguination
      1. neck or chest stick
        1. legislation says "at least one carotid artery or the vessels from which they arise"
        2. both jugular veins and both carotid arteries should be cut
          1. veins contract when cut and blood flow will decrease, causing slow loss of blood pressure
          2. carotid arteries are deeper within neck than jugulars
          3. blood in arteries is under higher pressure, will pump out much faster
          4. sheep - both carotids cut - time to loss of VER - 14s one carotid and one jugular - 70s only jugulars - 298s (5mins)
          5. poultry - cardiac arrest - time to brain death - 2mins 2 carotid arteries - 3mins 1 carotid - 5mins 2 jugulars - 5.5mins 1 jugular - 6mins conclusion: poultry are bloody hard to kill cleanly!!
        3. exsanguination in poultry
          1. neck cut should be ventral to ensure correct blood vessels are cut
          2. if dorsal, neither carotids or jugular will be cut (illegal), but sometimes done because trachea and oesophagus will not be cut which makes it easier to remove them at evisceration stage
        4. or cut both major arteries leaving the heart
      2. death occurs by anoxia due to massive loss of blood pressure
      3. bleeding out also preferred for meat quality/ consumer preferences
      4. legislation on minimum bleeding time before any other procedures may be performed
        1. turkeys and geese - 2 minutes
        2. any other bird, 90 seconds
        3. cattle, 30 seconds
        4. sheep, goats, pigs and deer - 20 seconds
      5. suitable length of knife
        1. particularly when chest sticking cattle, a longer knife is preferable for quickly and effectively cutting all the major vessels leaving the hearth
        2. legislation designed to improve worker safety has limited the maximum length of knives used
  13. overview of industry
    1. scale
      1. 2m cattle, 12m sheep and lambs, 10m pigs, 900m chickens
    2. changing consumption patterns
      1. historical decreasing trend in red meat consumption
      2. greater than corresponding increase in poultry consumption
    3. changing cultural value attributed to position of stockmen
      1. relatively low wages
      2. high proportion of migrant workers
      3. unpleasant working conditions in most abattoir facilities
      4. reduced status of manual work
    4. new legislation main difference is increased requirements for education and training
      1. Certificates of Competence for all roles in slaughterhouse processes
      2. mandatory Animal Welfare Officer role in all slaughterhouses when EC Reg 1099/2009 WATOK comes into force in UK, probably this year
    5. Animal Welfare/ Rights organisations
      1. Animal Aid
      2. Animal Welfare Trust
      3. Compassion in World Farming
      4. Humane Slaughter Association
      5. Humane Society International
      6. RSPCA
      7. WSPA
      8. PETA
    6. controversies over covert monitoring
      1. in UK, public controversy over court judgement against admissability of evidence in court if covert video recording is used to evidence animal cruelty without consent or legal authority on private premises
      2. in USA, new law criminalises animal welfare/rights activists who attempt to covertly monitor by gaining employment while working undercover for an animal welfare/rights NGO or by covertly placing video recorders to collect possible evidence where animal cruelty crimes are suspected or protesting in the vicinity of a production animal business premises
    7. Assurance Schemes/ Industry Codes of Practice / Brand standards
      1. Brand standards require (in-house) inspection and (independent) auditing for effective customer assurance
        1. suitability of environment and design of facilities
        2. inspect animals' condition
        3. monitor processes and overall operation
        4. assess animal behaviour and responses to processes
        5. retrospective outcome measures - stick marks, carcass defects or lean meat quality defects
        6. validate external measures by experimental/ controlled research on physiological stress measures, EEG and evoked response studies
        7. tools - stopwatch, hand clicker counter, digital thermometer(s), infra-red camera, ammonia meter, pH meter, decibel meter
        8. analysis of operational records, training records, animal transport records, premises and staff licenses and CoCs
        9. inspect company welfare policies, SOPs, equipment maintenance records
        10. What kind of state are the workers in? Exhausted, stressed or managerially harassed workers tend to be far less patient, empathic and respectful in handling animals. If a company genuinely wants its workers to treat the animals well, it should start by treating its workers well!
          1. What proportion of workers are sneezing or coughing? Ask them if exhaustion due to work was a contributing factor in their illness.
          2. How long are their shifts, intervals between breaks, what are their total working hours per week, commuting time, how much holiday allowance do they get? ask them about their last holiday.
          3. What does the workforce on the factory floor sound like? Is there a murmur of happy chatting? Is it even possible for workers to hear each other while working? Is it so hard for workers to talk and hear each other that it may adversely affect animal welfare or risk worker safety?
          4. How many tiers is the corporate hierarchy? Are managers consistently present or available? Is there a company HR department, how good are their procedures and attitudes to employees?
          5. Where do the workers rest in breaks, do they have lunch together with managers? Are any refreshments provided for workers by the company? What does the state of the toilets say about the company's attitude to its employees or the employees attitude to their workplace?
          6. What kind of company structure, do the workers have an economic stake in the company's profit or loss, what are their wages like and what is the wages ratio within the company? How are the workers represented at Board level?
          7. Are there any agency workers or workers on temporary contracts? What roles are agency workers in? Are shift contracts zero guaranteed hours? How insecure do workers feel their jobs are?
          8. What is the educational profile of the workforce? How engaged are they with the new legislative requirements for education and training for slaughterhouse roles? Is training time counted as part of their paid working hours? Does the company or retailer provide or support any additional training over and above the legal requirements, ongoing regular CPD, refresher/ review courses/ away days?
          9. Training and support for career progression within the company? What is the turnover rate of workers like?
          10. Is worker health and safety treated as a real priority or a minimal strategy to avoid litigation?
          11. What proportion of workers are in a trade union? What is the company's attitude and pattern of behaviour in regard to labour rights and unionisation?
          12. Are whistleblowing policies and procedures in place so that all levels of workers can safely and easily report animal welfare, public health, health and safety or personnel concerns to Board level and to the relevant auditors if necessary?
          13. How do animal welfare inspections and auditing affect workers? How do they perceive being monitored and the requirements to keep records?
          14. Do workers have any feedback or suggestions for improvement to e.g. operational procedures, facilities, or record keeping systems?
          15. Does the independent auditing role have authority to interview any worker privately and confidentially? Would randomised ad hoc confidential interviews with lowest paid workers be a useful measure as part of animal welfare auditing?
          16. How about a locked box with a slot for workers to post feedback notes anonymously that only independent auditors have access to? How do the senior management respond to the above question? I.e. How confident really is the company that it's policies and SOPs are actually applied in practice?