Black River Meats: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2023 (USDA)

313.2

On August 30th, 2023, while verifying HATS Category III, Water and Feed Availability, I, Dr. REDACTED observed the following noncompliance. At the start of slaughter, I went outside to verify that all cattle in holding areas have access to water. In the holding pen prior to the restrainer, I noticed that the cut in half 50-gallon barrel did not have any water in it and there were 5 cattle in this pen at the time. Cattle are held in groups in this holding pen for about 15-20 minutes and are taken one at a time to the stunning area. It was around 10:15am when I first noticed this holding pen did not have any water. I then proceeded to check in more cattle for antemortem inspection and then had to go back inside for postmortem inspection duties. Around 11:30 am, owner REDACTED came on the slaughter floor, and I told him of the noncompliance I observed and informed him that a written NR would follow. He then immediately had an establishment employee fill this empty water barrel. At 11:45am, I went back outside to verify that the water barrel was full, which it was. This NR is associated with NR CZX1708080130N. Recent NRs CZX5420061725N and CZX3508072703N were all issued for the establishment's failure to provide water access to cattle in holding areas.

313.2

On August 29th, 2023, while verifying HATS Category III, Water and Feed Availability, I, Dr. REDACTED observed the following noncompliance. Towards the end of slaughter, I observed 11 cattle get unloaded and placed into the pen closest to the barn (pen 1). After slaughter was finished, I went outside to get a head count of cattle held over and make sure all livestock had access to water. There were cattle held in two pens: the pen closest to the barn (pen 1) and the middle pen. The middle pen held 6 cattle, and they had a full water bucket and a half full bucket. The pen closest to the barn held 11 cattle, in which there was three empty cut in half 50-gallon buckets. Two of these empty buckets were tipped over. I observed a cow that was visually impaired due to an extensive pink-eye infection, tip one of these empty buckets in an attempt to drink, in which she was unsuccessful. She then slipped her head in between the rail connecting the first pen to the middle pen and attempted to reach the half full bucket of water that was in the middle pen, in which she was also unsuccessful. I then waited for an employee in the animal holding area for 10 minutes in order to communicate the necessity to provide animals in pen 1 with water. No one came out while I waited. I then went into the office and found REDACTED and REDACTED and told them that the cattle in pen 1 did not have access to water, and that I would be documenting an NR. REDACTED then immediately went outside and filled all water buckets for the cattle. This NR is associated with CZX5420061725N which was associated with NR, CZX3508072703N. This NR and the associated NRs were issued for livestock having no access to water.

313.2

On Friday, 06-30-2023, while verifying HATS Category III, Water and Feed Availability, I observed the following noncompliance. At 2:30 PM, the outside temperature was 84 degrees Fahrenheit, and water is provided to cattle in outdoor pens in cut down plastic 50- gallon barrels. In the holding run leading to the stunning area, I observed a singular water barrel in run, upon closer observations I found that this water barrel was empty. There were 7 cattle in this holding run at the time of my observation. The establishment has a 2:30pm company break and there was not an establishment employee outside. I found owner REDACTED inside the establishment and informed him of this noncompliance and that a report would be forthcoming. He immediately went outside to the holding pen and began filling the empty barrel with water. After company break was finished, I checked on the cattle in this holding pen again and observed one Holstein cow drinking water from this barrel. This NR is linked to NR#CZX5420061725N, both noncompliance dealt with cattle not having water in their water barrels.

313.2

On Friday, 06-23-2023, while conducting a routine DVMS verification visit, I was verifying HATS Category III, Water and Feed Availability, and I observed the following noncompliance. At 11:30 AM, I observed that water is provided to cattle in outdoor pens in cut down plastic 50-gallon barrels. Pens all had more than one barrel, and I noticed that the water was low in the first barrel I checked. I went from pen to pen checking barrels for water. When I reached the 3rd pen with cows in it, I saw three cows making a competitive effort to drink from an empty barrel. I checked two more barrels in the same pen and didn’t find water in any of the three (total) barrels. I observed the pen for two minutes and noted that all eight cows in the pen were making an effort to drink water from empty barrels. These cows had been on site for less than one hour. As I was walking back into the building I encountered Mr. REDACTED, and I informed him of the noncompliance I observed. He immediately brought a hose to the pen and began filling the empty barrels with water. I observed multiple animals in the pen as they drank water and then moved away from the barrels after drinking. I notified Mr. REDACTED that a noncompliance report would be forthcoming.

313.2,313.15(a)(1)

At approximately 1:45 PM while observing HATS category VIII, stunning effectiveness, and overall handling of livestock, I, Dr. REDACTED, observed the following noncompliance. A Holstein heifer was brought into the stunning area, the gate was locked behind it. The mechanical head restraint was attempted to be hydraulically placed. However, the heifer was small enough to slip out of the head restraint. In the chute, the heifer attempted to turn around, her head pointing to her tail. To try to get this heifer into the hydraulic head restraint again, I observed an establishment employee using a “raddle paddle” and hit this heifer in the face (jaw, nose, cheek) to point her head in the direction of the head restraint. This face slapping with the raddle paddle occurred multiple times to redirect this heifer’s head. After the heifer slipped out of the head restraint again, the establishment employee in charge of stunning attempted his first stun to this heifer with no mechanical head restraint. I observed the heifer slowly go down to a sternal position, with her head up. She was vocalizing, blinking, and able to visually track establishment employees near her. There was visible blood coming above her left eye from the captive bolt wound. This Holstein heifer remained in a sternal position with her head up until the establishment employee then reloaded his captive bolt gun and applied a second stun to the back of her head, which rendered the animal unconscious. I then placed a reject tag #574880 on the stunning box and informed REDACTED of the noncompliance and forthcoming NR and that the Des Moines District Office would be contacted. REDACTED informed me that no further heifers were going to be slaughtered the rest of the day, only large dairy cattle that fit in the mechanical head restraint. I then removed the reject tag and slaughter operations resumed. Examination of the head showed two holes: the first hole was to the left of midline of the skull (about 1.5 inches above the left orbital rim) and an additional hole was located behind and slightly ventral to the poll (trajectory going toward the atlantooccipital joint). This is a noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1) and CFR 313.2.

313.1

March 2023 Humane Handling NR Report For No Water In Cow Pens For Cows Held Over While performing HATS Category III, Water and Feed Availability task, I CSI REDACTED observed the following noncompliance, cattle had no water available. On March 21-2023 Black River Meats held over eight cows for kill on March 22-2023. After arriving at Black River Meats on March 22 at 6:30AM I walked out to check on the cows. During the night more cows had arrived. There were now three pens of cows. These pens are open air pens with no roof or barn area for the cows to go into to get out of the weather. The weather at the time of the check was rain snow mix with an air temperature of 33 degrees F. One pen held four beef cows. These cows had a cut in half barrel that held water for the cows to drink. The second pen held sixteen dairy cows and their cut in half water barrel had about a half inch or less of water in it. The third pen held thirteen dairy cows and their cut in half water barrel had no water in it. The water barrels were sitting in the pens and not attached to anything and had no hose or tap to keep the barrels full or at least have some water available for the cows to drink. There was also no water tank heater in the barrels to make sure the water did not freeze overnight. Prior to leaving Black River Meats on March 21 Dr. REDACTED had gone out to make sure that the original eight cows that were being held over had water and they did. Plant Owners REDACTED and REDACTED were notified that an NR will be given. REDACTED said that he would take care of the issue. Upon going back out the cow pens about 20mins later. I noticed that each pen had to buckets full of water in them. This NR is link to a recent NR that Dr. REDACTED had wrote for the similar issue. In that NR Dr. REDACTED noticed that the cows water barrels were frozen over.

313.2

On March 17th, while preforming the HATS water availability task, I, Dr. REDACTED, observed the following noncompliance. In all three pens that were holding cattle, I observed either no water or frozen water. The temperature today was ~15 degrees Fahrenheit and the holding pens that the cattle are kept in are open to environment. I did not see any heating elements in the pails to prevent the water from becoming frozen. The cattle in the holding pens did not have access to water. This is a noncompliance with 313.2 (e)-animals shall have access to water in all holding pens. I informed REDACTED of my observations and stated a written NR would follow. REDACTED immediately filled new pales of water for the animals. I did not observe any additional noncompliance with frozen water for the rest of the day.

313.15(a)(1)

At approximately 11:15 AM while observing HATS category VIII, stunning effectiveness, I, Dr. REDACTED, observed the following non-compliance. A dairy cow was brought into the stunning area, the gate was locked behind it and a mechanical head restraint was hydraulically placed. The establishment employee in charge of stunning applied the first stun and a “popping” noise occurred. I went over to check the animal and saw no penetration from the captive bolt. The animal did not seem distressed from the incident. I told REDACTED of my observation and he went and got new ammunition for the captive bolt. About 10 minutes later, I was observing another dairy cow go through the stunning area. The establishment employee in charge of stunning applied the first stun. I observed that the cow was still standing, vocalizing, blinking and thrashing. REDACTED, who was behind the chute in the run, then opened the gate, walked toward the front of the chute, reloaded the gun, and applied a second stun. During this second attempt, the cow was thrashing her head to avoid the stun. This second stun rendered the animal unconscious. I then placed a reject tag #727597 on the stunning box and stopped slaughter. I informed REDACTED that I would need to contact the Des Moines Office and my supervisors for further guidance. After discussion I informed REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED and REDACTED that I need written corrective actions since this is the second ineffective stun in two days. This establishment’s corrective actions are as follows: 1. Current establishment stunner is removed from position and a more experienced employee will replace him. 2. A second loaded captive bolt is kept next to the stunning area when slaughtering 3. A company was immediately contacted to install a chin hold to prevent animals from swinging their head. 4. Larger beef cows will be killed with a 45-caliber rifle. After I received written corrective actions, I removed the reject tag and slaughter operations resumed. Examination of the head showed two holes: the larger hole was again toward the right of midline of the skull (about 2 inches above the right orbital rim) and the smaller hole was located on midline of the skull. This NR is associated with an NR from yesterday (1/5/23), record number CZX5609012206N. The previous NR also dealt with an ineffective stun from poor placement. Both dairy cattle were not immediately rendered unconscious by a single captive bolt stun. This is a noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1).

313.15(a)(1)

At approximately 5:00 PM while observing HATS category VIII, stunning effectiveness, I, Dr. REDACTED, observed the following non-compliance. A dairy cow was brought into the stunning area, the gate was locked behind it and a mechanical head restraint was hydraulically placed. The establishment employee in charge of stunning applied the first stun. I observed that the cow was still standing and immediately went to the stunning area. The cow tracked my movement with her eyes, was vocalizing, blinking her eyes, and continued to remain standing. I observed blood on the animal’s forehead from the bolt wound. The establishment employee then reloaded his captive bolt gun and immediately applied a second stun, which rendered the animal unconscious. I then placed a reject tag #075758 on the stunning box and informed REDACTED of the noncompliance and forthcoming NR and that the Des Moines District Office would be contacted for further guidance. Examination of the head showed two holes: the larger hole was to the right of midline of the skull (about 1.5 inches above the right orbital rim) and the smaller hole was located on the midline of the skull. This is a noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1).