Wolf Pack Meats: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2024 (USDA)

313.1

On July 22, 2024, at approximately 1350 hours, I SPHV Dr. REDACTED observed the following noncompliance with HATS Task IV Facilities while performing a Livestock Humane Handling Task at Establishment M6004. As I was walking outside near the pens holding USDA beef, I observed between 2-5 cut rusty metal wires that were approximately 3.5 inches in length laying on the wooden boards in front of pen 3. When I looked at the sides/gates of each pen in more detail, I observed multiple loose rusty wires in the following areas of pens 2 & 3 that were poking into these pens where USDA beef was being held: 1. From the location of the catwalk a rusty wire holding the chicken wire was observed protruding outwards into the pen by the uppermost left side of the waterer of pen 2. This wire was approximately 1.5 inches in length. 2. From the same location at the catwalk, a rusty wire holding the chicken wire to the centermost pole to the right of the waterer in pen 2 was also poking into pen 2. This wire was approximately 2 inches in length. 3. From the same location at the catwalk as above, a rusty wire holding the chicken wire on the lower most portion of the gate door in pen 2 by the lower pole next to the metal door closest to the catwalk leading to pen 3 was poking into pen 3. This wire was approximately 3 inches in length. 4. A rusty wire used to hold the chicken wire towards the left back-end side of the door that opens from the alley to allow beef to enter into pen 2 had become loose and was poking into pen 2. This wire was approximately 2 inches in length. 5. There were 3 loops of rusty wire on the back-end side of pen gate 3 that were also used to hold the chicken wire but were looped around and shortened by establishment supervisory team as I pointed out my findings. The length of these wires ranged between 8mm to 0.5 inches in length. 6. A small wire that was holding the chicken wire directly in front of the catwalk between pens 2 and 3 had become loose and was poking into pen 3. This was the side of the pen closest to the catwalk as it ends before you step in front of pen 4. This wire was approximately 5mm in length. Although some of the wires were long enough and accessible by the beef, they were not in areas that would immediately cause direct harm to the livestock. At Approximately 1410 hours, I informed Acting Establishment Supervisor REDACTED of my observations and of the forthcoming noncompliance. Mr. REDACTED was able to shorten some of the wires and mentioned he would reach out to the farm employees to see about repairing the remaining loose wires and performing a general inspection of the pen conditions. The above is not in compliance with 9 CFR 313.1(a). Following a review of previous noncompliance records issued within the last 90 days, this noncompliance will not be associated as there are no other noncompliance records of similar cause or circumstance. Per 9 CFR 313.1 (a); Livestock pens, driveways and ramps shall be maintained in good repair. They shall be free from sharp or protruding objects which may, in the opinion of the inspector, cause injury or pain to the animals. Loose boards splintered or broken planking, and unnecessary openings where the head, feet, or legs of an animal may be injured shall be repaired.

313.1,313.2

On May 12, 2024, at approximately 1200 hours, I SPHV Dr. REDACTED was performing an Odd Hour Inspection Task at Establishment M6004 when I observed the following noncompliance with HATS task I "Adequate Measures for Inclement Weather" in the pens holding the hogs when the temperature outside was approximately 85 degrees Fahrenheit, and sunny. Although, these pens have some shading they are not fully covered, nor do they have any misting units, or fan setups as alternatives for cooling livestock, specifically hogs during the hotter climates. Ultimately the pathway of the sun was directly hitting more than half of the pen space in the pens holding hogs. While I was inspecting 7 beef 11 lambs and 3 goats, I kept noticing 1 hog in pen 4 and 4 hogs in pen 5 continue vocalizing loud enough to startle the lambs as the hogs kept climbing over one another, biting at each other and shoving each other over the shaded area in the pens and over the automatic waterers. At approximately 1220 hours, I made my way over to the pens holding the hogs where I observed the 1 hog in pen 4 and the 4 hogs in pen 5 start to show signs of heat exhaust. First, the hogs were panting, then their panting started getting heavier and quicker until their body posture started going from dorsal recumbency to lateral recumbency. Their skin tone started going from a light pink pigment that almost blends in with their black hair to a bright and injected red skin tone. When the hog in pen 4 started drooling its drool went from a runny consistency to a thicker slimier one. After its breathing rate started going from a rapid and short pattern, to a slow and shallow one, I went for the water hose to dampen the pen space with water for the hogs in pens 3, 4, and 5. This almost immediately resolved the irregular breathing rates for the hogs in pens 4 and 5. Once the hogs in pen 3-5 observed the water the majority of them were all very interested in drinking the water coming from the hose. During this Odd Hour Inspection, between 1200 hours and 1400 hours, no one was on site. At Approximately 1410 hours, I informed Plant Manager REDACTED of the above noncompliance via email. The above is not in compliance with 9 CFR 313.1 and 313.2. Following a review of previous noncompliance records issued within the last 90 days, this noncompliance will not be associated as there is no other noncompliance record of similar cause or circumstance. Per 9 CFR 313.1; Livestock pens, driveways, and ramps. Per 9 CFR 313.2; Handling of livestock.

313.15(a)(1)

On March 21, 2024, at approximately 0828 hours, while observing your establishment conduct slaughter operations, FSIS Inspection Program Personnel (IPP) observed your establishment slaughtering rams. The establishment employee held the ram’s head with their left hand placed under the chin as they fired the primary handheld captive bolt on the forehead with their right hand. Following the initial firing of the captive bolt, IPP observed that the ram remained standing and that it looked around and blinked its eyes. Your establishment employee grabbed the back-up captive bolt and administered a second stun. After the second stun, IPP observed that the ram fell to the ground and another employee opened the door to the knock box to begin shackling and hoisting the ram. IPP stepped to the side so that the ram could be railed into the bleeding area. Once IPP had moved out of the way, they observed that the ram, which had not been shackled yet, was back on its feet and was looking around. The establishment employee looked at IPP unsure of what to do. IPP indicated that the ram needed to be rendered unconscious immediately. Additionally, you, Mr. REDACTED, instructed the employee to stun the ram a third time. At this point, approximately 1 minute had passed since the second stunning attempt. The employee reloaded the handheld captive bolt stunner and administered a third stunning attempt; however, the ram remained standing. IPP then observed the same employee use another captive bolt stunner to administer a fourth stunning attempt. When the ram remained standing after the fourth stunning attempt, an employee administered a fifth stunning attempt with the captive bolt device that rendered the ram unconscious. IPP noted that the time between the third stunning attempt and the fifth attempt, which rendered the ram unconscious, was approximately 1 minute and 30 seconds. At this time, IPP informed your employees and you, Mr. REDACTED, to stop the slaughter line and not stun any additional animals. IPP took regulatory control action and applied U.S. Rejected Tag No. B9662793 to the small animal stunning area. Afterward, IPP asked an employee to remove the head of the ram and skin it for further inspection. Upon further inspection of the ram’s head, IPP and the Supervisory Public Health Veterinarian (SPHV) observed that the ram did have very small horn buds that were completely covered by wool. They observed three (3) entry holes in the head. One hole was on the median plane of the forehead, slightly above the eyes. A second hole was just cranial to the horn buds and left of the median plane; this hole was at an acute angle pointed towards the nasal cavity and did not appear to penetrate the brain. The third hole was on the median plane just caudal to the horn buds. After the head was split, IPP and the SPHV observed there was only one hole that made contact with the brain. This is an egregious act of inhumane handling of animals in connection with slaughter, as your establishment failed to effectively stun a ram so that it was immediately unconscious on the first stun attempt. This is non-compliant with Title 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1) which states, “The captive bolt stunners shall be applied to the livestock in accordance with this section so as to produce immediate unconsciousness in the animals before they are shackled, hoisted, thrown, cast, or cut. The animals shall be stunned in such a manner that they will be rendered unconscious with a minimum of excitement and discomfort.” As a result of the non-compliance, a Notice of Suspension was issued to the establishment.

313.2

Hats III: Water and Feed Availability On January 4, 2024, at 0840 hours I CSI REDACTED observed the following noncompliance. At 0840 hours the establishment employees started to leave the slaughter floor and go to break. I went and checked the knock box to verify that there were no other animals in the knock box or chute. I observed that there was a beef heifer from pen 3 in the chute leading to the knock box. I exited the floor at 0843 hours. At 0902 hours the establishment employees informed me that they were returning from break. When I returned to the floor at 0903 hours the heifer was still in the chute. At 0914 hours the establishment moved the heifer into the knocked box and effectively stunned it. The heifer was left in the chute for a minimum of 33 minutes as it is unknown how long the heifer was in the chute before break started. I informed PHV Dr. REDACTED about my observations to determine if a noncompliance should be issued. At 0918 hours, Dr. REDACTED informed Production Manager REDACTED about what happened and told him that an NR would be issued. Dr. REDACTED told Mr. REDACTED that the knock box and chute are not holding pens and that animals should not be left in them during break time or lunch time. A review of noncompliance in the last 90 days shows one similar noncompliance: QDA0817115708N. This does not meet the regulatory requirements of 9 CFR 313.2 (e) which states: Animals shall have access to water in all holding pens and, if held longer than 24 hours, access to feed. There shall be sufficient room in the holding pen for animals held overnight to lie down.

313.1,313.2

Hats III: Water and Feed Availability On November 8, 2023, at 1330 hours I CSI REDACTED observed the following noncompliance. Upon arriving at the establishment, I went to the animal holding pens to see if any animals had been dropped off for slaughter on November 9. I observed in pen 3, which usually holds beef, there were 4 small lambs approximately 2 and 1/2 feet tall at the shoulder in the pen. I observed in pen 4, which is a small animal pen, there were 4 lambs, which were approximately 3 feet tall at the shoulder. Pen 3 has an automatic waterer that is approximately 4 feet tall and designed for cattle to use. It did not appear that the lambs in pen 3 pens were tall enough to reach the water. There was also a plastic water trough in pen 3 that the lambs could reach but there was no water in it. Between 1335 hours and 1400 hours. The lambs from pen 4 were moved into pen 3 with the smaller lambs. Five pigs were unloaded from a trailer and moved into pen 4. Right after the pigs were put into pen 4. There were 4 goats that were unloaded and added to pen 3 with all the lambs. The 4 goats were a little shorter than 3 feet tall at the shoulder. At 1400 hours I went inside the establishment to conduct regular inspection. At 1500 hours during overtime, I went to the animal holding pens and observed that the plastic trough in pen 3 had not been filled with water and that the lambs and goats did not have access to water. I went and informed Plant Manager REDACTED of my observations and informed him that an NR would be issued. Mr. REDACTED immediately went to fill up the plastic water trough so that all the animals in pen 3 would have access to water. This does not meet the regulatory requirements of 9 CFR 313.2 (e) which states: Animals shall have access to water in all holding pens and, if held longer than 24 hours, access to feed. There shall be sufficient room in the holding pen for animals held overnight to lie down.