Star Valley Meat Block: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2024 (USDA)

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

HATS Category VIII: Stunning Effectiveness On 08/26/2024 at approximately 0953 hours while verifying humane handling at the stunning area, CSI directly observed the establishment employee attempt to stun a lamb in the stun box. Prior to the stun attempt, the CSI observed the lamb was fully secure in the head restrainer. The stun operator applied the initial stun, utilizing a .22 (short barrel) caliber handgun, which was ineffective at rendering the animal unconscious. The CSI observed the lamb was still standing and the eyes were still blinking. The CSI also observed some blood drip from the lamb’s nose. The stun operator touched the lamb’s eye and the eye twitched. The stun operator promptly applied a second stun attempt that rendered the lamb insensible. After the lamb was bled; the CSI observed the dressed head and identified two penetrating holes in the front of the skull. One hole was on the midline at the level of the lateral canthus (outside corner) of each eye; the second hole was on the midline in the center of the forehead. The CSI applied USDA Reject tag #B45316730 to the stun box and the Denver District Office was notified through supervisory channels. The establishment owner was verbally notified of the forthcoming noncompliance record (NR).

313.16(a)(2),313.2

HATS CATEGORY VI: Electric Prodding / Alternative Object Use HATS CATEGORY VII: Slips and Falls On Tuesday, 13 August 2024, at approximately 1208HRS (Star Valley Meat Block, Thayne, WY). While observing humane handling at the establishment’s outdoor covered holding pens, IPP observed the following non-compliance. For approximately an hour and a half establishment employees attempted to load a single steer into the loading chute and stun box from the holding pen. The establishment employees utilized a combination of driving implements including sorting sticks with flags, rattle paddles, the animals flight zone and minimal use of a hand-held battery-operated electric prod, but the animal continually circled within the holding pen, vocalizing and kicking and refused to proceed up the single-file chute and into the stun box. The establishment management contacted the producer and asked the producer to come retrieve the steer. Upon arrival, the producer took possession of the hand-held battery-operated electric prod and was observed using the electric prod on the steer, multiple times, in an attempt to move the animal to the chute. IPP observed the establishment employees asking the producer to stop using the electric prod, in which the producer did not stop. Use of the electric prod proved to be ineffective and caused unnecessary discomfort and excitement to the animal as IPP observed the animal continue to vocalize, kick, circle and also slipping on two occasions. After observing use of the electric prod on the animal’s nose, IPP instructed establishment employees to cease all slaughter operations. U.S. Retain Tag No. B-46 631013 was applied to the handling facilities. The Denver District Management Team was notified through supervisory channels. The establishment management was verbally notified of the forthcoming noncompliance record. There have been no NR’s issued for the same root cause in the past 90 days. This establishment has not implemented a robust systematic approach to the humane handling of livestock.

313.16(a)(1),313.16(a)(3),313.16(b)(1)(iii)

HATS Category VIII: Stunning Effectiveness On 07/22/2024 at approximately 1015 hours, I, the CSI, while performing HATS verification of stunning effectiveness Category VIII, directly observed the establishment employee attempt to stun a market sized pig in the stun box. Prior to the stun attempt, I observed the pig freely moving around in the stun box. The animal turned around in the chute and was facing in the opposite direction of the normal position. The stun operator decided to stun the pig from the opposite end of the chute. The stun operator applied the initial stun, utilizing a .22 (long)caliber handgun, which was ineffective at rendering the animal unconscious. I observed the pig still standing, and the pig backed up to the front end of the stun box where I had good visibility. I saw the pig’s rump then the pig walked back towards the stun operator. Without any prompting, the establishment operator provided me with the verbal warning that the firearm was going to be discharged again. There was a delay, and the second stun attempt was taken utilizing the same .22 caliber handgun. The second stun attempt was effective at rendering the animal unconscious, and the animal remained unconscious throughout the shackling, hoisting, and bleeding process. Upon inspection of the dressed head, two penetrating stun holes were observed. One hole (top left) did not fully penetrate the skull and had metal fragments. The second hole (bottom center) fully penetrated the skull. USDA Reject tag #B45316716 was applied to the stun box and the Denver District Office was notified through supervisory channels. The establishment owner was verbally notified of the forthcoming noncompliance. This noncompliance is being associated with noncompliance record #KVD2709075112N 1, issued on July 12,2024 due to same underlying root cause.

313.2

HATS Category VI: Electric Prod, Alternative Object Use On 7/22/24 at approximately 9:45am, I, the CSI observed an establishment employee excessively prodding multiple swine while sorting the animals in the outdoor covered metal holding pens. I immediately took a verbal regulatory control action and told the employee to stop, in which the employee complied. The employee was using a fiberglass sorting stick with a flag on the end. The employee was taking full arm swings from above their head and striking the swine. I observed the employee striking the rump, back and front of the swine in an attempt to drive the animals to the stub box. I immediately verbally informed the Establishment Owner of the observed noncompliance and that a noncompliance record (NR) will be issued. This is non-compliant with Title 9 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 313.2(b) stating that Electric prods, canvas slappers, or other implements employed to drive animals shall be used as little as possible to minimize excitement and injury. Any use of such implements which, in the opinion of the inspector, is excessive, is prohibited. The District Veterinary Medical Specialist was notified. There have been no NR’s issued within the past 90 days for the same root cause.

313.16(b)(1)(iii),313.16(a)(1),313.16(a)(3)

On 07/11/2024 at approximately 0835 hours, I, the CSI, while performing HATS verification of stunning effectiveness Category VIII, directly observed the establishment employee attempt to stun a pig in the stun box. Prior to the stun attempt I observed the pig freely moving around in the stun box. After the stun operator instructed me to move to safe zone I heard her telling the pig to put its head down. The operator then took the 1st shot. The initial stun, applied with a .22 magnum caliber handgun, was ineffective at rendering the animal unconscious. Without any prompting, the establishment operator provided me with the typical verbal warning of another shot to be placed. Relaying to me that that the animal did not fully collapse or was rendered insensible, the establishment stun operator immediately applied a second stun attempt using the same .22 magnum caliber handgun. The second stun attempt was also ineffective. After the 1st two stunning attempts had been applied, I began to move up to better observe the animal, but without warning, the establishment stun operator hurriedly applied a third stun attempt which was immediately effective at rendering the animal unconscious, and the animal remained unconscious throughout the shackling, hoisting, and bleeding process. While completing inspection of the head after the third stun and noticed there were two holes. One small hole, one larger hole that encompassed both the second and third shots. A USDA Reject tag #B45316715 was applied to the stun box and the Denver District Office was notified through supervisory channels. The establishment owner was verbally notified of the noncompliance. This noncompliance is being associated with noncompliance record # KVD4813075710N issued earlier this week, on July 9, 2024 where a market hog was also subjected to up to 3 stunning attempts before being rendered insensible.

313.16(a)(1)

On 07/09/2024 at approximately 1435 hours, I, the CSI, while performing HATS verification of stunning effectiveness Category VIII, directly observed the establishment attempt to stun a pig in the stun box. The initial stun, applied with a .22 (long) caliber handgun, was ineffective at rendering the animal unconscious. After the 1st stun attempt, the animal remained standing and vocalized with a loud squeal. Without any prompting, the establishment stun operator immediately applied a second stun attempt using the same .22 caliber handgun. The second stun attempt was also ineffective as the animal remained standing, blinking, eyes tracking, and the animal exhibited rhythmic breathing. There was no vocalization. Without prompting, the establishment stun operator changed guns and used a .22 magnum caliber handgun and hurriedly applied a third stun attempt successfully. The third stun was immediately effective at rendering the animal unconscious, and the animal remained unconscious throughout the shackling, hoisting, and bleeding process. A USDA Reject tag #B45316728 was applied to the stun box and the Denver District Office was notified through supervisory channels. The establishment owner was verbally notified of the noncompliance. Upon inspection of the dressed head, I observed three stun holes that had penetrated the skull. There have been no noncompliances for the same root cause within the past 6 months. The establishment is operating under a robust systematic approach to humane handling and stunning of livestock.

313.2

On January 19, 2024 at approximately 1:20 PM, the SPHV acting as IPP, observed the following noncompliance. There was no water available to the beef heifer held in the west holding pen and no water was available to the beef heifer held in the trailer in the parking lot. The trailer was being used as a temporary holding pen and the heifer had been contained in the trailer for approximately 3 hours. I verbally informed the slaughter floor supervisor of the noncompliance. A regulatory control action was not taken as the heifer in the holding pen was immediately slaughtered and the owner of the plant immediately unloaded the heifer in the trailer and supplied water. There have been no noncompliance reports for the same root cause within the past 6 months.