Donald's Meat Processing, LLC: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2024 (USDA)

313.16(a)(1)

On Monday, September 16th, 2024, at approximately 12:14pm, while performing HATS category VIII, stunning effectiveness, and category IX, consciousness on the rail, of a directed Livestock Humane Handling Task in response to an enforcement action, IIC REDACTED observed the following noncompliance. REDACTED kill floor supervisor, moved a sow into the knock box. Once the animal was in the knock box, Mr. REDACTED used the squeeze chute and extender to limit the movement of the sow. Once, the sow was stationary Mr. REDACTED took a shot with the 22-magnum rifle. The sow squealed and jumped backwards moving to the back of the knock box. Mr. REDACTED reloaded the same 22-magnum rifle and immediately delivered a second attempt once the sow was correctly positioned. The second attempt was successful and the sow inside the knock box and was rolled out. Mr. REDACTED and HHC Mrs. REDACTED checked for signs of consciousness. Mr. REDACTED proceeded to stick the sow with a knife to bleed out. The animal remained unconscious through the sticking, shackling and bleeding processes. IIC REDACTED asked Mr. REDACTED which guns he used for the first and second shot. IIC REDACTED called SPHV REDACTED at approximately 12:16pm regarding the ineffective stun. After discussing the incident, IIC REDACTED placed a US Reject Tag No. B30899110 on the knock box. IIC REDACTED discussed with plant manager /HHC Mrs. REDACTED that this most likely will be an NR but would await correlation with the district office. The establishment is currently operating under a Consent Order and has a detailed written slaughter and humane handling SOP. The humane handling SOP protocol states they will use a 45-pistol on sows/older animals, but Mr. REDACTED does not feel comfortable using such gun on a hog. Mrs. REDACTED did adhere to the plan and turned away 3 other hogs that arrived with this sow due to their size, age, and anatomy. In addition, Mr. REDACTED followed protocol and used the same gun because he determined the ineffective stun was due to the sow moving its head at the last second, not allowing for the correct contact or placement to be made by the bullet. SPHV REDACTED called back at approximately 12:20pm and stated that Raleigh District Office DVMS Dr. REDACTED confirmed it will be a Noncompliance. IIC REDACTED removed the tag from the knock box. REDACTED kill floor supervisor, and REDACTED plant manager and Humane Handling Coordinator were both verbally notified of this noncompliance.

313.16(a)(1)

On May 7, 2024, at approximately 3:32 PM while performing a directed livestock humane handling task for the verification plan for an enforcement action and verifying HATS category VIII, stunning effectiveness, the following noncompliance was observed: Slaughter employee REDACTED attempted to stun a very agitated beef cow that was fully restrained (head caught and side squeeze engaged) using a .45 caliber pistol. The initial attempt was ineffective, and the animal remained standing. Mr. REDACTED retrieved a readily available pre-loaded back up .45 caliber pistol and immediately delivered a second shot. The second shot was successful in rendering the beef cow unconscious. The animal remained unconscious throughout shackling, hoisting, and bleeding. The knock box was tagged with Reject Tag B30899118 for consultation with PHV Dr. REDACTED, DVM and DVMS Dr. REDACTED, DVM. The tag was removed after consultation at approximately 4:03 PM. Upon further investigation of the skull, the initial stunning attempt entered the skull at approximately 1⁄2“ below the desired stunning point. This shot appeared to enter the skull straight, but probing of the hole revealed the bullet channel veered to the left side of the skull. The second shot, which was successful in effectively stunning the beef cow, was approximately 1⁄2” below the initial bullet hole in the skull. Ms. REDACTED, Plant Manager, was present on the kill floor at the time of the incident and was notified of the non-compliance. This document serves as written notice of the non-compliance.

313.16(a)(3),313.16(a)(1)

On Thursday, January 4th, 2024, at approximately 2:10pm, while performing HATS category VIII, stunning effectiveness, and category VIIII, consciousness on the rail, of a Livestock Humane Handling Task, IIC REDACTED (nee REDACTED) and CSI in training REDACTED observed the following noncompliance: REDACTED, kill floor supervisor, moved a very large sow into the knock box. Once the animal was inside the knock box, Mr. REDACTED utilized the side squeeze to limit free movement of the animal. Once the animal was restrained, Mr. REDACTED took a shot using a .45 caliber pistol. The animal dropped inside of the knock box and was then rolled out. Mr. REDACTED evaluated the sow for eye movement and proceeded to stick the animal with the knife to bleed it out. IIC REDACTED noted no vocalization or rhythmic breathing but due to positioning could not evaluate eye tracking. Once the animal was stuck it began to kick and then rolled to its sternum righting itself. The sow then rose to a standing position and began to walk towards the back of the stunning area towards the entrance to the knock box. At this time, Mr. REDACTED retrieved the same .45 caliber pistol and took a second shot rendering the animal unconscious. Once the animal was unconscious, IIC REDACTED requested the head be skinned out to determine shot placement. Both shots appeared to be in the same place as only one hole was observed in the skull. This hole was slightly to the left of the proper location. IIC REDACTED contacted SPHV REDACTED at approximately 2:13pm regarding the incident. After discussing the incident, IIC REDACTED informed Mr. REDACTED of the placement of US Reject Tag No. B30899119 on the knock box. IIC REDACTED also informed plant supervisor and humane handling auditor, REDACTED, that the District Office may suspend slaughter operations. At 4:00pm, REDACTED, humane handling auditor and plant supervisor, that the Raliegh District Office was re-instating the suspension of slaughter operations. The establishment has developed a comprehensive Slaughter SOP with written humane handling procedures as a corrective action in response to the Re-instatement of Suspension issues on December 13th, 2023. REDACTED, kill floor supervisor, and REDACTED, plant supervisor and humane handling auditor were both verbally notified of this noncompliance. This noncompliance record serves as written notification.

313.2

On January 3, 2024, at approximately 9:20am, while performing humane handling verification in response to an enforcement action (Notice of Reinstatement of Suspension Held in Abeyance issued December 26, 2023) and verifying HATS category III, water and feed availability, I, SPHV REDACTED, DVM, along with IIC REDACTED (REDACTED), observed the following noncompliance: During antemortem inspection and observation for water availability it was observed that the market swine in pen #3 had no water in their water pan as well as the pan appeared dry. In addition, the market swine in pen #4 had no water pan in their pen. I observed the swine in pen #4 being unloaded at approximately 9:15am. Discussion with IIC REDACTED (REDACTED) revealed that those swine in pen #3 had been held overnight. Slaughter supervisor, REDACTED, provided water to both pens at approximately 9:25am and the swine in pen #3 appeared thirsty, immediately drinking a small amount water. In addition, slaughter pre-operational records for today had been completed and indicated that pen water buckets were acceptable. Kill floor supervisor, REDACTED, and Plant Manager, REDACTED, were notified verbally of this noncompliance and in writing with this noncompliance record. The establishment has developed a comprehensive Slaughter SOP with written humane handling procedures as a corrective action in response to the Reinstatement of Suspension issued December 13, 2023. Specific procedures for water availability and cleanliness are outlined in this SOP and were not implemented.

313.16(a)(1)

On Wednesday December 13th, 2023, at approximately 9:28am, while performing HATS category VIII, stunning effectiveness of the Livestock Humane Handling Task, IIC REDACTED (nee REDACTED) observed the following noncompliance: REDACTED, kill floor supervisor, brought two lambs (#3 and #4 of the day) into the stunning area and restrained them using a lamb stand. Using a semi-automatic .22-caliber rifle, REDACTED attempted to stun lamb #3 on the forehead standing behind the animal. The first shot was ineffective, and the lamb remained standing. At this point, IIC REDACTED moved toward the stunning area. REDACTED then attempted a first shot on lamb #4 from the front, which was also ineffective, and the lamb remained standing. Immediately, REDACTED repositioned the .22-caliber rifle to an upright angle and took a second shot on lamb #4 from the front which dropped the animal rendering it unconscious. REDACTED then took a second stun attempt on lamb #3 from the front and rendered the animal unconscious. IIC REDACTED did observe lamb #4 have nerve responses causing the body to jerk around while still restrained in the lamb stand. To confirm this was what was observed, IIC REDACTED tested eye-tracking by using a finger and moving it in front of the animal’s eyes. Once it was confirmed that both animals were unconscious, REDACTED released the lambs from the lamb stand. During postmortem inspection, IIC REDACTED requested for the heads of both lambs to be skinned out to verify shot placement and angle. IIC REDACTED used a zip tie, as well as a pipe cleaner, to verify shot angle. Both shots on lamb #3 were centered but no in the same place, and after further investigation the angle on one of the shots appears to be incorrect; it was not a straight angle. Both shots on lamb #4 were in the proper location and in the same spot. Due to both shots being in the same location, it is difficult to verify the angle of the shots other than what was observed at the time of the stun attempts. At approximately 9:33am, IIC REDACTED contacted SPHV REDACTED regarding the incident. After discussing the incident, IIC REDACTED informed kill floor supervisor REDACTED of the US Reject Tag NO. B30899130 being placed on the stunning area. IIC REDACTED also informed REDACTED that the district office may suspend slaughter operations. The establishment does not have a written robust systematic approach to humane handling. REDACTED, kill floor supervisor, and REDACTED, plant manager, were both verbally notified of this noncompliance. This noncompliance record serves as written notification.

313.16(a)(1)

On Monday, November 6th, 2023, at approximately 2:39pm, while performing HATS Category VIII, stunning effectiveness of the Livestock Humane Handling Task, IIC REDACTED and IPP in training REDACTED, observed the following noncompliance: REDACTED, kill floor supervisor, attempted to stun a steer with a 40-caliber pistol. After the shot, the animal hit the ground, plant employees released the head catch, and the animal was rolled out of the knock box. REDACTED then proceeded to cut the nose, place the hook through the nose, hoist the animal up, and stick the neck of the animal with a knife to allow the animal to bleed out. At this time, IIC REDACTED observed rhythmic breathing and vocalization come from the animal. IIC REDACTED then verified consciousness by testing eye-tracking. During this time, IIC REDACTED observed blinking followed by eye-tracking movements. REDACTED attempted a second shot with the same 40-caliber pistol, and it was a misfire. REDACTED reloaded the same 40-caliber pistol to attempt a third shot, and it was another misfire. While the stunning attempts resulting in misfires took place, the animal was still showing signs of consciousness through vocalization, rhythmic breathing, blinking, and eye-tracking. After the misfires, REDACTED asked REDACTED, kill floor employee, to bring him the 22-magnum rifle. REDACTED attempted a fourth shot, this time using the 22-magnum rifle, but the stun was ineffective resulting in the animal to vocalize again. REDACTED reloaded the 22-magnum rifle, and REDACTED took the fifth and final shot, rendering the animal unconscious. During postmortem inspection, IIC REDACTED requested for the head to be skinned out to evaluate shot placement. It was determined that the first shot was slightly left of the correct placement. What appeared to be the second shot, was low and centered. The final shot was determined to be in the correct placement. At approximately 2:50pm, IIC REDACTED notified kill floor supervisor, REDACTED, of the US Reject Tag NO. B30899097, being placed on the knock box and that the district office may follow up with a written suspension. The establishment does not have a written robust systematic approach to humane handling.

313.16(a)(1)

On Monday, October 30th, 2023, at approximately 2:23pm, while observing HATS category VIII (stunning effectiveness), the following noncompliance was observed by IIC REDACTED (‘REDACTED’): A market swine was moved into the knock box. Plant employee, REDACTED, took the first shot using a semi-automatic .22-magnum rifle. After the first shot was taken, the animal fell to the floor of the knock box and began to vocalize loudly. Immediately following this, REDACTED, Kill floor supervisor, took a second shot using the same semi-automatic .22-magnum rifle, rendering the animal unconscious. IIC REDACTED consulted with SPHV REDACTED regarding placing a retain tag on the knock box. The decision was to not tag the knock box because it was not an egregious incident and did not warrant a suspension of operations. During post-mortem inspection, IIC REDACTED requested REDACTED to skin the head out to analyze shot placement. After analyzing the shot placements, it was determined that the first shot was slightly high and far left (almost above the eyeball), and the second shot was acceptable. The establishment does not have a robust systematic approach to humane handling. Kill floor supervisor, REDACTED, was verbally notified of this noncompliance. This noncompliance record serves as written notification.