Swift Beef Company: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2023 (USDA)

313.2

HATS Category III. Water and Feed On 9-18-23 at approximately 1746 hours while performing HATS Category III verification I the first shift SPHV at establishment M969G observed the following non-compliance. The water tanks in pens twenty-one, twenty-two, twenty-three and twenty-four North of the catwalk were empty. Cattle contained within the pens were crowded around the tanks but were unable to drink. Livestock personnel in the pens were shown the non-compliance and moved the livestock to pens with water available. The Slaughter Superintendent was informed of the non-compliance and that a non-compliance record would be issued. The establishment has failed to comply with 9CFR 313.2(e). There have been no noncompliance records of similar root cause documented within the past 90 days.

313.16(a)(3)

HATS Category IX: Conscious Animals on the Rail On Saturday, September 16, 2023, while performing a routine Livestock Humane Handling task, I, the SCSI observed the following noncompliance at approximately 2255 hours: I was observing stunning hoisting and shackling next to the blood pit railing overlooking the carcass takeaway belt near the maintenance toolbox on the south side of the protective metal shield. At approximately 2255 hours I observed a sensible animal being hoisted. I determined sensibility by the observation of a righting reflex, eye tracking, and blinking. When I saw the animal being hoisted off the takeaway belt, I saw blinking and the head raise. I followed the animal to the stack, prior to where the animals are stuck and bled out and observed eye tracking, a righting reflex, and blinking. The animal flexed its head in the dorsoventral plane. I halted production and informed the Superintendent of my observations. He brought the knocker to the stack. The knocker asked me which animal was sensible. I identified the conscious animal in the stack. I observed that the animal was still exhibiting eye tracking, blinking, and attempting to lift its head. The knocker applied a stun after which the animal was immediately rendered unconscious. He applied a second security stun. Both stuns were performed with a handheld captive bolt instrument. Per 9 CFR 313.15 (a)(3), immediately after the stunning blow is delivered the animal shall be in a state of complete unconsciousness and remain in this condition throughout shackling, sticking, and bleeding. The SPHV was called to the floor by the establishment, at my request, and informed the establishment that the knocking box would remain tagged, and we would be contacting the Denver District Office immediately for further instruction. Regulatory control of the production line was released at approximately 2258 hours, and the establishment was informed that they could proceed with processing the cattle on the line. No further stunning was allowed. U.S. Reject tag B-45836026 was applied to the restrainer. The SPHV went to the floor and located the head, which was tagged and saved at the head chain and examined it with the faceplate skinned to the bone. The SPHV was able to verify that there were 3 holes in the skull and no more. Two knock holes were penetrating. One knock hole indicates an area of the skull that was fractured/fragmented into 4-5 fragments, but was not penetrated. There was no distinct hole and the SPHV could not probe into it. The cracked skull was depressed less than 1⁄4”. This area was located approximately 1” dorsocaudal to the left eye and 1 – 1.5” laterally.

313.15(a)(1)

Humane Handling Routine Task: HATS Category VIII: Stunning Effectiveness At approximately 0613 hours, Tuesday, August 8th, 2023 while observing stunning effectiveness; I, the SPHV, observed the following non-compliance: The stun operator, using a pneumatic captive bolt device was observed applying the initial stun on a beef heifer (Carcass: 080170). Following the first stun attempt, the animal remained with its head upright, fully conscious, and tossed its head up and down violently while on the belly-belt conveyor. The animal was alert and in distress with both ears upright, rhythmic breathing, blinking and eye tracking. The stun operator with the pneumatic captive bolt device immediately stopped the conveyer, tried to calm the animal, while the secondary stun operator retrieved the readily available handheld captive bolt device. After 38 seconds, the secondary stun operator successfully applied the second stun, which was effective at rendering the animal unconscious. Following the second stun, the animal remained unconscious during shackling, hoisting, sticking, and bleeding. The Harvest floor supervisors were verbally notified of the event and the carcass was retained with U.S. Retain tags: B41447761 and B41447738. Both parties were verbally notified of the forthcoming noncompliance record (NR), pending post-mortem inspection of the stun hole placements. The head was also retained with U.S. Retain Tag MPD67284740, and followed to the head disposition stand. Upon inspection of the dressed head, there was one hole located rostral to the left supraorbital foramen, and a second hole which appeared to be appropriately positioned. A Technical Services employee used a stun hole gauge to measure the holes and it was observed that the hole located rostral to the left supraorbital foramen was outside of the appropriate boundaries set forth by the establishment. The dressed head was then taken downstairs with the Harvest Supervisor, the Technical Services Supervisor and the Technical Services Slaughter Supervisor. The dressed head was split, and the two holes were back traced using a pen. The hole located rostral to the left supraorbital foramen did not appear to have entered the brain cavity, while the other hole was also back traced and confirmed to have entered the brain cavity. Upon verification of stun hole placements, the Harvest Floor Superintendent was also verbally notified forthcoming NR. This is not in compliance with regulation 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1): Immediate unconsciousness by captive bolt, in which animals shall be stunned in such a manner that they will be rendered unconscious with minimum excitement and discomfort. This non-compliance is not associated with any other non-compliances for same root cause within the past 90 days. This establishment operates under a robust systematic approach to livestock humane handling and slaughter. The Denver District management team was contacted through supervisory channels.

313.2

HATS Category III. Water and Feed On 4-4-23 at approximately 0530 hours while performing HATS Category III verification I the first shift SPHV at establishment M969G observed the following non-compliance. Pens twenty-three and twenty- four North of the catwalk were stocked with enough cattle to preclude the livestock from obtaining water or laying down. Further inspection revealed the same situation in pen eight South of the catwalk. The Animal Welfare QA was shown the non-compliance and informed that a non-compliance record would be issued. The establishment performed an immediate corrective action. The Denver District Veterinary Medical Specialist was contacted. There have been no noncompliance records of similar root cause documented within the past 90 days. The establishment operates under a Robust Systematic Approach to Livestock Humane Handling.

313.1

Humane Handling Routine Task: HATs Category II – Truck Unloading At approximately 1130 hours, I, the Supervisory Public Health Veterinarian, along with the Supervisory Consumer Safety Inspector were performing antemortem duties, when I observed the following non-compliance: A truck parked on dock 1 was approximately half way offloaded, when I heard shouting and observed signaling surrounding the back end of the truck. Establishment personnel ran back and forth between the scale house and the back gate of the truck. I quickly made my way down the catwalk and observed a black cow with it’s back legs hanging between a 2-3 foot gap. The hind limbs were suspended off the dock, between the dock and trailer, whereas the sternum and forelimbs were perched on the dock. As plant personnel were in the process of initiating their emergency action plan, the cow was able to wiggle enough to get it’s hind limbs onto the ground below. From there, the cow was able to bear weight on the hind limbs and leveraged it’s forelimbs down from the dock. The cow then took off running. The remaining cattle on that truck were behind a closed gate and no further cows were at risk of falling or jumping off the truck. The cow ran towards the north side of the building and dodged various parked vehicles, stationary equipment and ran by an open security gate. Establishment personnel and myself diligently followed behind the loose cow. I used my cell phone to call Technical Services Management and alerted them to the ongoing situation. Establishment security started to shut all open gates and plant personnel spent approximately 15 to 20 minutes tracking the cow from the north end of the property, back to the south end of the property. At 1158 hours, the cow ran under a parked trailer, where it laid down. Plant personnel were able to stun the animal with a hand-held captive bolt device, successfully rendering the animal unconscious on the first attempt. Dock 1 was temporarily placed under regulatory control, while I, the Supervisory Public Health Veterinarian contacted the Denver District management team through supervisory channels. The Supervisory Consumer Safety Inspector remained outside to monitor that no further cattle were offloaded on dock 1 and that the driver did not leave prior to gathering the needed information on how this occurred. The plant operates under a Robust Systematic Approach to Livestock Humane Handling. Upon my return to the pens, dock 1 was released, The driver was interviewed and reported to have left a 2-3 inch gap from the dock to the trailer. Upon noticing a cow had gotten it’s hoof stuck in the gap, the driver stated, “he got back into his trailer and pulled forward to try to assist the cow. It was then the truck lurched forward on the driver, causing a gap big enough for the cow’s hind end to slip through.” This non-compliance will be linked to: UOA5015021606N, which was dated 2/6/2023.

313.1,313.2

Humane Handling Routine Task: HATS Category IV,V, & VII: Handling during antemortem, Handling of suspect and disabled cattle, and Observation for Slips and Falls: At approximately 1058 hours on Monday, February 6, 2023, while observing antemortem I, the Supervisory Public Health Veterinarian observed the following non-compliance: A Holstein steer out of REDACTED, Lot: 820, was off loaded from a truck on dock 2. The steer had gotten stuck in between a walkway opening leading into the scale house. I observed that the steer was collapsed in a sternal position, and was stuck along the mid-thoracic region, while actively flailing it’s limbs in an attempt to rise. Despite it's efforts, the steer remained stuck and was unsuccessful at rising. I alerted the pens employee to stop antemortem and address the trapped steer. The pens employee indicated that nothing could be done for the animal until REDACTED was provided and therefore proceeded to present animals for antemortem inspection. I took regulatory control action and temporarily suspended antemortem inspection. During this time, I waived down another pen employee, and QA personnel through an opened window leading into the scale house. I alerted them about the trapped animal. The pen employee inside the scale house replied, “We’re aware of the situation.” However, over the next couple minutes, I continued to observe the steer go from flailing to resting and flailing to resting, with no success in rising. Using my cell phone, I called Technical Services Management and Fabrication Floor Management at 1115 hours. During this time, the steer had worked 3⁄4 of the way through the opening and was stuck at the pins, along the hips. By 1120 hours, numerous supervisors arrived at the scene, and the steer was successfully stunned by a pen employee, without the use of REDACTED. The carcass was then disposed of accordingly and antemortem inspection continued. The forthcoming NR was relayed to the QA Supervisor, Harvest Floor Supervisor, QA Superintendent of Harvest, and the Pen Supervisor. Upon walking into the scale house to sign antemortem cards, I observed remnants of black and white tufts of hair stuck to the fence posts where the animal was trapped. This noncompliance is not linked with any other associated non-compliances. The Denver District management team was contacted through supervisory channels. This establishment operates under a Robust Systematic Approach to Livestock Humane Handling.

313.15(a)(1)

On Friday, 1/13/23 at approximately 2:00, I SCSI REDACTED observed the following noncompliance. While performing the ante-mortem inspection task I observed that pen personnel had separated a steer off by itself in a small pen on the west side of the scale house. The animal in question was a black steer that was able to stay on its feet but was not mobile enough to make its way up the serpentine chute to the knocking box. The steer was standing still with its head down and showed no signs of agitation or aggression. Slaughter General Foreman, REDACTED was donning the required PPE in preparation of knocking the steer. Mr. REDACTED then entered the pen and approached the steer which continued to stand still. As Mr. REDACTED reached in front of the head to knock the steer it moved its head slightly but continued to stand still. Mr. REDACTED used the and held stunner on the steer which failed to go down, the steer turned to the left and took a few steps. I could see the sight of the failed knock near the poll on the left side of the steer's head. The steer continued to stand still as Mr. REDACTED attempted a second knock which was again ineffective, I did not see the exact placement of the second knock as I was standing behind the site when the knock was applied. The animal moved its head slightly and took a few steps around the pen still showing no aggressive behavior. On both attempts to knock the steer Mr. REDACTED was very tentative and hesitant, his knocking approach was ineffective making him unable to render the animal insensible. This is in violation of 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1). At this time Mr. REDACTED made the decision to use xylezine in order to properly and safely render the animal unconscious. Once the REDACTED took effect the animal was rendered insensible with one knock. I verbally notified Mr. REDACTED and A Shift QA superintendent, REDACTED that a noncompliance report would be issued. This noncompliance report is not being linked to any prior noncompliance reports.

313.2

HATS Category IV: Ante-mortem Inspection On Thursday January 12, 2023 at approximately 1845 hours, while performing a routine Livestock Humane Handling task, I, the SPHV, observed the following noncompliance. While walking on the catwalk above the livestock holding pens, I observed the pens employee who was driving inspected cattle into the drive alley drive a black steer at a running pace. The single animal was still in a holding pen that had been otherwise emptied and the pens employee aggressively snapped his driving aid which consisted of a handle and a plastic bag at the animal without striking the animal. The pens employee then took off running at the animal and the animal in turn went running into the drive alley. I called out to the pens employee to stop chasing the animal. No regulatory control action was taken as the activity ceased. I saw an employee from the scale house nearby and informed her of the incident. This employee brought Pens Supervisor and the establishment's humane handling QA outside and I explained what I observed the employee do and informed them of the forthcoming noncompliance. It is noncompliant with 9 CFR 313.2(a) to force animals to move faster than a normal walking speed. The District Veterinary Medical Specialist was notified of the noncompliance. There have been no noncompliance records issued for the same root cause in the past 90 days.

313.1

HATS Category I – Inclement Weather HATS Category IV – Ante-mortem Inspection HATS Category VII - Slips and Falls On Monday, November 28, 2022 at approximately 1210 hours I, the DVMS, was performing ante-mortem inspection at the establishment outdoor uncovered holding pens while it was snowing and observed the following noncompliance. A group of approximately forty heifers and steers were being driven from pen #1 into the alleyway and then back into pen #1. I observed a red bovine slip and fall onto it left side. The bovine stayed in left lateral recumbency until the other cattle had moved past and then the bovine was able to rise on its own. I did not observe the animal to have sustained any injuries. I verbally notified the Yard Lead Employee that a noncompliance record would be issued for a slip and fall due to the inclement weather conditions. There have been no noncompliance records issued for the same root cause within the past 90 days.