BEF Foods, Inc.: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2022 (USDA)

313.2

On 9/15/2022 at approximately 9:40 am while in the old scale house area observing and verifying HATS Category VI Electric Prod/Alternative object Use, IPP observed the following non-compliance. I observed an employee attempting to move a sow into the two-lane chute area with the use of the sorting gate in the old scale house area. In the process, I observed the employee hit the pig with excessive force on the side of the face with the rattle paddle. As the pig continued to move around in the old scale house area, I then observed the employee use force while using both of his hands to quickly push the sorting gate into the right side of the sow that was facing away from the employee. Once the metal gate hit the sow, she vocalized. At that point, I asked the employee to stop what he was doing. I then asked to speak to the slaughter floor supervisor. I also took the regulatory action of tagging the electric stunning wand with tag NO. B35652392. REDACTED, the slaughter floor supervisor came out and I shared the observations with him. It was communicated with both REDACTED and REDACTED (plant manager) that a noncompliance record would be issued for not being compliant with regulations 313.2(a) and 313.2(b). I was informed by REDACTED that the immediate corrective action is the establishment removing that employee from that position for the time being. He also mentioned that the employee will not return to that position without being retrained. At that point, due to the corrective action given at approximately 9:46am, IPP removed the tag from the stunning wand returning the control back to the establishment. The establishment was non-compliant with 9 CFR 313.2(a) 313.2(b)

313.1

On 8/25/2022 at approximately 6:20 am while in the barn observing and verifying HATS Category II Truck Unloading, IPP observed the following non-compliance. While watching the truck driver attempt to usher the sows out of the back of the trailer through the open door to enter the barn; I observed the truck driver crawl up onto the back end of one of the sows with his knee elevating himself off the ground. As he did that his upper body was still up right and then he took his other knee and placed it on the back end of another sow. At that point he was completely elevated off the ground with one knee on the back of one sow and the other knee on the back of another sow. While kneeling on the backs of the sows he waved the paddle in front of the sows making contact with a few of the sows. Once the driver crawled onto the backs of the sows, I noticed the sows vocalizing loudly, were excited, moving forward as their back ends lowered closer to the ground under the weight of the driver. Once the driver removed himself off the backs of the sows, and some of the sows moved through the door into the barn, I asked the barn employee to call the harvest floor supervisor, REDACTED. I also asked the barn employee to stop the truck driver from moving any more sows. Once REDACTED came out to the barn, I shared by observations with him. After verifying my observations with the truck driver; REDACTED informed the truck driver that getting up onto the backs of the sows was inappropriate and not to do it again. At that point around 6:30am I informed REDACTED the truck driver could continue unloading the sows. I also informed REDACTED that the establishment would receive a non-compliance record due to the observed non-compliance. The establishment was non-compliant with 9 CFR 313.2(a)

313.2

On July 6, 2022 at approximately 0800 hours while performing verification observations for HATS Category V Suspect and Disabled, the following noncompliance was observed.  A single sow was isolated within holding pen number four.  The sow was positioned in the inner area of the pen, away from the automatic water bowls located on the perimeter.   Because the animal was down, it was unable to move towards the bowls to drink.  An employee was notified and provided a running water hose from which the sow readily drank.  The running hose was then propped and positioned in the area such that the sow could drink freely.  Establishment management was notified that the failure to provide accessible water for the sow was noncompliant with 9 CFR 313.2(e) which requires that water is available and accessible to livestock in holding pens.

313.15(a)(1)

HATS Category VIII – Stunning Effectiveness On 3/25/2022 at approximately 5:40AM while doing antemortem inspection. I, Dr. REDACTED, observed the following non-compliance. Animal Handler, REDACTED, attempted to captive bolt stun a non-ambulatory sow that was blocking the pen closure. After the first captive bolt shot was into the sow's skull the sow stood on the front legs and slowly returned to the laying position she was in before she was shot. She was still looking around, her eyes were still tracking movement, blinking, and she was breathing rhythmically just as before the first shot. REDACTED immediately loaded another charge in the captive bolt gun and shot the sow in the skull a second time, at which time the sow propelled herself forward using her front legs approximately eight feet from her original position. She remained in a sitting position with eyes still tracking, and rhythmic breathing. At this point REDACTED attempted a third stun after loading it with a third charge and REDACTED went to get a second hand-held captive bolt. After the third stun attempt the sow was still in a sitting position with tracking eyes and rhythmic breathing. REDACTED, another Animal Handler, arrived with the second captive bolt and stunned the sow; the sow collapsed and was rendered unconscious with the fourth stun being effective. I placed US Rejected tag No. B-45284992 in the stunning area and told the plant management no stunning until further notice. Operation Manager, REDACTED, and Harvest Supervisor REDACTED were notified that a non-compliance would be issued. The Plant was in violation of 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1) "The captive bolt stunners shall be applied to the livestock in accordance with this section so as to produce immediate unconsciousness in the animals before they are shackled, hoisted, thrown, cast, or cut. The animals shall be stunned in such a manner that they will be rendered unconscious with a minimum of excitement and discomfort." The situation was determined to be egregious humane handling non-compliance and a Notice of Intended Enforcement (NOIE) was issued by the Chicago District Office.

313.2

HATS Category IV-Handling During Ante Mortem Inspection At approximately 0955 hours, Post-Mortem Inspector, REDACTED, observed a sow running through the Harvest Room from the South end of the room to the North, quickly followed by 4-6 plant employees in pursuit of the animal. Inspector REDACTED stopped the slaughter line and noticed that the sow was slipping on the blood on the Harvest Room floor as it was running, but did not appear to be injured. The sow ran behind the mixers and Inspector REDACTED was no longer able to observe what was occurring. The plant employees took immediate corrective actions to corral the animal and to euthanize to prevent further distress or possible injury to the animal, and no other animals were affected. The plant management and maintenance also inspected the restraining and stunning equipment to determine cause and review ways to prevent reoccurrence. This is in violation of regulation 9 CFR 313.2 (a) “Driving of livestock from the unloading ramps to the holding pens and from the holding pens to the stunning area shall be done with a minimum of excitement and discomfort to the animals. Livestock shall not be forced to move faster than a normal walking speed.”

313.15(a)(1),313.15(b)(1)(iii)

On 11/3/2021 at approximately 5:12 am while in the barn observing and verifying HATS Category VIII Stunning Effectiveness, I, Dr. REDACTED observed the following non-compliance on a larger sow that refused to stand back up during antemortem. I observed the plant employee discharge the captive bolt gun as the sow moved her head and vocalized and remained in a dog sitting posture and conscious. There was one plant employee standing with a sort board at her right hip area to restrain her. The slaughter floor supervisor REDACTED then discharged the back up captive bolt gun and effectively rendered the sow unconscious. Once the sow was effectively euthanized, the observation of two circular wounds were made. There was a circular wound near the right ear that penetrated the skin and soft tissue and the second wound in the forehead penetrating the skull. Once this observation was made, REDACTED was informed that the establishment would receive a non-compliance record. The establishment was non-compliant with 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1) and 313.15(b)(1)(iii). This document serves as a written notification that continued failure to meet regulatory requirements can lead to enforcement action as described in 9 CFR Part 500.4