Gunnoe Sausage Company, Inc.: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2022 (USDA)
See the detail of the non-compliance of humane livestock handling that the USDA observed at the Gunnoe Sausage Company, Inc. slaughterhouse establishment in 2022.
You can also see other establishments that were non-compliant in 2022.
313.30(a)(4)
At approximately 7:10am, I, IIC REDACTED, verbally notified Mr. REDACTED, Establishment Manager, of my decision to take regulatory control action to prevent the slaughter of animals. I advised Mr. REDACTED that I was contacting Dr. REDACTED, PHV and who would be contacting Dr. REDACTED, Raleigh DVMS, about possible enforcement action due to an egregious humane handling noncompliance and that the District Office may be following up with a written suspension. I based my decision to take a regulatory control action on the following: On Thursday, December 9th at approximately 6:50 AM, while performing HATS Category VIII Stunning Effectiveness, I, IIC REDACTED, observed a sow (backtag #NC DM 8 612 and eartag #NC 345507) regain consciousness on the roller platform that is used for bleeding out, after being both electrically stunned and stuck. At the time, 4 sows had been electrically stunned (head only) and the second one in the line showed multiple signs of consciousness. While laying on her right side, with her back facing the kill floor, she began to rotate her body in a clockwise motion in attempt to right herself onto her sternum. Simultaneously, she lifted and turned her head which exposed her eyes that presented with a regular blinking pattern. Immediately, plant personnel, REDACTED, who was administering the sticks, noticed the sow lifting her head and applied another stick. I, IIC REDACTED, immediately notified the floor leader, REDACTED, of the egregious incident and the implementation of the regulatory control action to stop slaughter. A US rejected tag No A4592499 was placed on the knock box and SPHV Dr. REDACTED was contacted for an action plan on how to move forward. The remainder of the stunned sows (2 head) were allowed to move through the slaughter process. The establishment does not have a written robust systematic approach to humane handling.
313.16(a)(1)
On November 12th, 2021 during a semi-annual PHV humane handling assessment, I, REDACTED IIC and Dr. REDACTED observed a noncompliance while performing the review and observation component of the Livestock Humane Handling Task and verifying HATS category VIII, stunning effectiveness. At approximately 6:45am, during antemortem inspection, a nonambulatory sow was observed in pen #2. The sow was lying on her left side and attempted to right herself several times but was unable to rise. All other sows were moved from the pen and the suspect sow was given a chance to rest to further determine if she could stand. At approximately 7:45am Mr. REDACTED, plant manager, determined that the sow was unable to rise and attempted to stun her using a .22 long rifle. The sow remained in lateral recumbency while Mr. REDACTED discharged the firearm. The attempt was ineffective and the sow began to vocalize and attempted to right itself to a sternal position. Gunshot residue was noted on the sow's head and blood was seen running from its nose. Mr. REDACTED immediately administered a second shot with the same weapon as it contained an ammunition clip. The second attempt was successful, rendering the animal unconscious. The sow was bled in the pen before being carried by tractor to the kill floor. Examination of the scull revealed only a single large hole that was approximately 1 inch to the left of center. The diameter of the hole along with observations during the stunning process indicate both shots were administered in the same location. Mr. REDACTED, plant manager, was notified of the failure to meet the requirements of 9 CFR 313.16 (a)(1) verbally and in writing with this NR. The establishment does not have a robust systematic approach to humane handling.
