Ida-Beef LLC: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2022 (USDA)

313.15(a)(1)

HATS Category VIII:  Stunning Effectiveness On Monday, August 8, at approximately 1300 hours, I, the CSI observed two plant employees attempting to get a dairy cow to rise from a sternal position that went down halfway in between the chute the stun box. I observed the plant employees appropriately utilize rattle paddles and then one plant employee applied the hand-held battery-operated electric prod once.  The cow did not rise. After attempting unsuccessfully to get the cow to rise, the plant employee confirmed with me to stun the cow where she lay and drag her out of the serpentine. I told the plant employee to verify stunning the cow where she lay with the SPHV, before proceeding. After verifying with the SPHV that stunning was the appropriate step, I observed the establishment attempt to stun the cow. The first stun attempt with a hand-held captive bolt (HHCB) device was unsuccessful at rendering the cow insensible, as the bolt penetrated her the skull at the apex of the poll ineffectively. I observed the cow to remain conscious with her head up, eyes tracking and blood at the site of bolt contact. The stun operator immediately grabbed a second HHCB device, which misfired, not making contact with the cow. The third stun attempt with the reloaded HHCB device penetrated the front of the skull at roughly a 45-degree angle but was also ineffective at rendering the cow unconscious, as I observed the cow continue to hold her head up with eyes tracking. The fourth and final stun attempt with the reloaded HHCB device was made by the kill floor supervisor which effectively rendered the animal unconscious at approximately 1304 hours.  The SPHV observed the fourth and final stun attempt that effectively rendered the cow unconscious and verbally notified the plant management of the noncompliance. A temporary withholding action was taken by placing U.S. Reject Tag #B35780499 on the handle of the stun box pending appropriate written humane handling corrective actions by plant management. There have been no noncompliance records issued for the same root cause within the past 90 days.  The establishment operates under a Robust Systematic Approach to Livestock Humane Handling.

313.15(a)(2),313.2

HATS Category VI: Electric Prod Alternative Object Use  On Wednesday, May 11, 2022, the USDA SPHV observed the plant employee that works in the pens striking the cows that were in the round pen of the serpentine with the rattle paddle.  The employee was standing behind the metal framework of the round pen and had the rattle paddle extended through a small opening.  The SPHV could only see the rattle paddle and the shoulder/arm of the employee through the slit in the metal framework.  The SPHV observed the employee raise the rattle paddle above his shoulder using a full arm/shoulder motion and then bring the rattle paddle down onto the cattle to drive them into the single file serpentine.   The SPHV observed the rattle paddle contact the face of one cow and the body of another cow.  The SPHV immediately advised the Slaughter Manager that driving implements are not to come into contact with an animal's face.  The Slaughter Manager shouted to the employee to advise the employee to stop his actions.  The SPHV verbally notified the Slaughter Manager that the incident would be documented in a noncompliance record regarding the striking of the animal on the face with the rattle paddle.  The Slaughter Manager denied that the rattle paddle came into contact with any of the animals.  The SPHV advised the Slaughter Manager of the Establishment's right to appeal the noncompliance record. The District Veterinary Medical Specialist was notified through supervisory channels. This noncompliance record is being associated with MOI#AKL0014051206G issued on 5/6/2022 for the same root cause.

313.2

HATS Category VI - Electric Prod/Alternative Object Use On March 8th, 2022, at approximately 0815 hours, I was observing an establishment employee drive cattle into the stunning area when I noticed that he was having trouble moving a black cow into the stunning area. I observed the establishment employee use the hotshot once. After using the hotshot, he started to use the air vibrator on the black cow between the pins and the area at the base of the tail. I observed the establishment employee aggressively jabbing the vibrating rod into the cow. When I observed blood on the black hide and on both sides of the cow. I told the establishment employee to stop his actions and after taking a closer look I observed blood dripping from approximately 5 different spots of the cow. I proceeded to ask a QC Technician, who was in the area, to call the Slaughter Floor Supervisor, and the SPHV to the stunning area. When the Slaughter Floor Supervisor arrived in the stunning area, I pointed out the bloody areas on the black hide of the cow. I notified the Slaughter Floor Supervisor that I was going to reject the knocking box. The SPHV was also shown the deficiency. I immediately took regulatory control action and Rejected the knocking box with U.S. Rejected tag # B-45945233. The Denver District Office was notified through supervisory channels. There have been no noncompliance records issued for the same root cause within the past 90 days.

313.1

On January 10th, 2022, at approximately 7:20 AM, I was performing antemortem inspection at Ida-Beef LLC (M45948) as a relief SPHV, when I observed the following non-compliance. Between 7:20 AM and 7:35 AM, I inspected three groups of cattle. The cattle did not have any difficulty ambulating in the pens in which they were housed. However, every time the cattle were moved through the central alley for inspection, I observed approximately two cows in every group slipping and falling. The speed at which the cattle were being driven was acceptable. I observed ice that coated much of the central alley, and the ice appeared to be the principle reason why the cattle were slipping and falling. At least three cows, all groups considered together, slipped onto the “knee” and the cannon bone of their forelimbs. At least three cows, all groups considered together, fell onto their ventrum/udder due to the ice. After these three pens of cows had been inspected, no further antemortem inspection was needed at that time. At 8:00 AM, I tagged the central alley of the pen yard with U.S. Reject tag B-45946068, and informed the supervisor of the cattle pens that the alley could not be used to move cattle until the ice coating the alley was addressed. The supervisor informed me that he would correct the problem, and that no additional antemortem inspection would be needed until 9:00 AM. At 8:50 AM, I returned to the pens to observe the progress of the corrective actions. As I walked through the door from the stunning area, the supervisor directed my attention to a small loader machine, which was dumping sand and gravel across the entire alley. All icy areas were completely covered. I removed the U.S. Reject tag and informed the supervisor that the alley could again be used for inspection, though a noncompliance report would be issued for the observed slips and falls due to failure to address the ice before the first round of antemortem inspection. At 9:00 AM, I performed antemortem inspection of another pen, and no cattle that walked through the alley slipped or fell. There have been no noncompliance records issued for the same root cause within the past 90 days.

313.2

HATS Category V: Suspect and disabled On 1/5/2022, at approximately 1100 hours, while observing the stunning and driving of animals as part of the routine humane handling task, I observed the following incident. When I walked outside to watch the driving of a black Angus bull from the knock alley into the stun box, I observed that the bull was backed up a few feet from the entrance to the stun box. I then heard vocalizing from below the bull and observed a Jersey cow on the ground vocalizing and being stepped on intermittently by the same black Angus bull’s hind feet. Directly behind the down Jersey cow was a second Angus bull, and behind that second bull was another Jersey cow. That last Jersey cow was squeezed up against a closed gate. The establishment yards employee was a few feet away standing behind the gate that was closed behind the last jersey cow, and I immediately notified him that a cow was down in the chute and that a bull was stepping on her. The yards employee attempted to move the bull forward, but that did not work and the down Jersey cow continued to vocalize when she was being intermittently stepped on. The yards employee then attempted to open the gate to back the cattle out of the chute, but the second Jersey was squeezed against the gate, so pushing on the gate made the standing Jersey cow move forward slightly and resulted in the bull in front of it to move forward and start stepping intermittently with its front feet on the down Jersey cow. This resulted in the down Jersey cow vocalizing again when being stepped on by a second bull. I then opened the door to the stun area and notified another establishment employee that we needed extra help. The second establishment employee helped move the first bull in the chute forward while the first establishment employee was able to get the gate open and back the other cattle out. Once the first bull was moved forward into the stun box and the chute gate was opened to allow the other two cattle to back out, the jersey did rise on her own. I applied U.S. Reject Tag No. B-45946063 and notified Denver District of the incident via supervisory channels. This is a noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.2(a). There have been no noncompliance records issues for the same root cause within the past 90 days.

313.15(a)(1)

HATS Category VIII – Stunning Effectiveness On 12/20/2021, at approximately 1300 hours, while watching an establishment yards employee stun a non-ambulatory disabled Holstein cow, I observed the following noncompliance. The employee placed the handheld captive bolt device against the cow’s head and fired the hand-held captive bolt device. The stun was ineffective, and the cow proceeded to blink multiple times and move its head in a controlled movement away from the employee. The employee immediately grabbed the backup handheld captive bolt device and applied a second ineffective stun. I observed bleeding from the hole in the cow’s head and I observed the cow completely rise to its feet, stagger for approximately 10 seconds, and then fall down. The employee reloaded the hand-held captive bolt device and applied a third ineffective stun attempt, where the cow continued to blink and attempted to rise again. The employee reloaded the handheld captive bolt device again and approximately 1 minute after the third stun attempt, a second yards employee ran over and applied the fourth stun attempt, which was successful in rendering the cow unconscious. At approximately 1310 hours I applied US Reject tag No.B-45946131 to the stun box. I verbally informed QA Manager REDACTED of the regulatory control action taken due to the humane handling incident, and the Denver District Office was contacted via supervisory channels. This is a regulatory noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1). There have been no Humane Handling NR’s or MOI’s documented for this same root cause within the past 90 days. This event was an egregious noncompliance to 9 CFR 313.15 regulations and resulted in an Administrative Enforcement Action (Notice of Intended Enforcement – NOIE).

313.2

Category III Water and Feed Availability On Monday November 15, 2021 I, Dr. REDACTED, was outside in yards to perform antemortem inspection. As part of this task I checked water troughs to verify that all animals held in pens had access to water. At approximately 7:18AM I observed that the water bucket for pens 3 and 4 was pushed back slightly and that there was no water in the bucket. Cattle were present in both pens 3 and 4. I notified the establishment yards person who began the process of filling the bucket and I went inside and verbally notified Slaughter Floor Supervisor REDACTED and Establishment Consultant REDACTED of the noncompliance at approximately 7:22AM. A review of records identified a similar noncompliance, NR number AKL4617102301N from October 1, 2021, and this NR will be associated.

313.2

Category III Water and Feed Availability On Friday October 1, 2021 at approximately 3:15PM, I Dr. REDACTED, went to yards to perform antemortem inspection. I observed that the establishment was using the drive alley next to the serpentine as a holding pen. Five head of cattle were present in the pen. I went through the gate to the area outside the yards to observe the water bucket in the area where the cattle were held. It did not contain water and no other water buckets were accessible by the cattle. I notified the establishment employee who was with me that the cattle had no access to water. He opened the gate between the alley and the suspect pen to allow the cattle access to the suspect pen which had a full water bucket. No regulatory control action was taken as water was provided immediately. I verbally notified QC technician REDACTED of the noncompliance at approximately 3:17PM. After finishing antemortem I verbally notified QC Manager REDACTED of the noncompliance. A review of the previous 90 days did not identify similar noncompliances therefore this noncompliance record will not be associated.