Ganaderos Borges: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2025 (USDA)

313.2

9 CFR 313.2 (a) and 313.2 (b) - Handling of livestock. On Monday, June 16, 2025, at approximately 1238 hours, while I was walking through the holding pens area to perform the Ante-Mortem inspection, I observed the unloading of cattle from the truck via the unloading ramp at establishment M32170. I noticed that the animals were walking without resistance from the unloading ramp toward the pen area. I observed that the employee in charge of the pens was holding the electric prod in his hand from the moment the cattle were coming off the truck. Although the animals were not resisting movement, I observed that the employee used the electric prod on one animal specifically, and did so twice, immediately one after the other. I also heard the buzzing sound of the electric prod as it was being used. Once the employee noticed that both the slaughter supervisor and I were present in the area, he subtly placed the electric prod on the edge of pen #21 and continued walking. When I reviewed the Assessment Journal Usage of Electric Prod, the employee had documented that the electric prod was used at 1240 hours because the animal was resisting movement (The text reads as follows: “Bajando camion animales no querian bajar a las 12:40 pm). However, I observed that this was not the case, the animals were walking without resistance. According to the Ganaderos Borges Standard Operating Procedures Humane Handling Protocol, Part II. Use of Electric Prod: Point 1. Electric prods must only be used: To assist movement of livestock when animal or human safety is at risk. Point 2. Proper use of electric prod: Animal should be allowed time to response before another shock is administered. Point 3. Unacceptable Use: Do not use electric prod repeatedly on the same animal. Do not use electric prod on an animal that is already moving or cannot see a location to move into. In addition, according to the establishment’s corrective actions added to the Humane Handling protocols in response to the Notice of Suspension Held in Abeyance (NOSHA) issued on March 18, 2024, employees no longer have easy access to electric prods and the electric prods shall be kept in three designated areas (labeled wall stations) at the holding pens area, the entrance to the scale, and the entrance to the knocking box. The Quality Control Manager was verbally informed about this noncompliance (NR) and impending written notification.

313.2(f),313.15 (b)(1)(ii)

Today at approximately 1300 hours, while performing postmortem inspection at the cattle head station, I identified a cattle head with two holes on the skull, of about quarter coin size in diameter. I proceed to notify the Floor Supervisors, and the Quality Control personnel assigned to the slaughter operations. After gathering information from the plant employee assigned to the knocking box stunning activities, the Quality Control employee informed me that the plant employee performed twice, on two different animals, the double compressed air shots. But the plant employee did not notify the floor supervisors neither the Quality Control personnel, as per written protocols state. As per establishments records, the plant employee performing stunning has been trained/retrained in proper shot placement and procedures to follow when the stunning is not effective. The employee did not notify immediately the incident to Quality Control personnel and did not document the incident on the Stunning Log. As per Ganaderos Borges E32170 Standard Operating Procedures Humane Handling Protocol and the Employees training log for Handling animals inside the knocking box, implemented after the 2024 Verification Plan, the following is written: "REDACTED". The corrective actions and preventive measures proposed in the last Humane Handling Protocol for 2024 Verification Plan were not effective in ensuring regulatory compliance. FSIS considers failures in humane handling to be serious in nature. As a federally inspected establishment, FSIS expects you to comply with the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA), 9 CFR Part 313, and all other requirements concerning the preparation, sale, and transportation of meat products. Failure to comply with these requirements in the future could lead to the withholding or suspension of inspection, or other appropriate action.

313.2

9 CFR 313.2 (e)(3) - Handling of livestock. On Wednesday, January 29, 2025, at approximately 0751 hours, while performing the Ante-Mortem inspection, I observed three animals (two cows and one calve) located at the ramp area of the holding pens scale. These animas were presented for the Ante-Mortem inspection. This ramp is not a pen, and the area has a size of approximately 7 feet X 3 feet. I observed the animals were trying to walk, but there was not sufficient space. In addition, there was not sufficient room in the holding pen for animals held overnight to lie down. According to the information provided by the plant management, the animals arrived at the establishment on Tuesday, January 28, 2025. T The Quality Control Supervisor and the Plant Supervisor were verbally informed about this noncompliance (NR) and impending written notification.

313.15(a)(1)

HATS Category VIII Humane Handling; 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1). On Monday, December 9, 2024, at approximately 1400 hours, while performing Humane Handling verification activities in the swine stunning area, I observed one employee and one supervisor in this area. The employee was performing the stunning procedure, and the supervisor was opening and closing the door for the pigs to enter to the knocking box. This observation does not align with the corrective actions and preventive measures provided by the establishment in response to the NR FNL541112925N related to the establishment’s stunning procedures. These corrective and preventive actions states: “For the task of stunning swine’s, an employee will be assigned to be in charge of entering the swine to the knocking box. The other employee will be in charge of performing stunning and checking reflexes. The Standard Operating Procedure Humane Handling Protocol was updated to include this preventive action.”; and “The stunning process of the swine’s will be monitored throughout the operation by manager or supervisor of the slaughterhouse for the next 3 months starting on November 27, 2024, to February 27, 2024. This will be documented in the Swines Stunning Monitoring form.” The Quality Control Manager was verbally informed about this noncompliance (NR) and impending written notification.

313.2(f),313.15(a)(1),313.15(a)(2),313.2,313.15(a)(3)

On November 25, 2024, at approximately 5:00pm while conducting HATS Category VII Stunning Effectiveness of a swine lot, the following noncompliance’s were observed: While walking from swine evisceration/inspection station to the stunning area, approximately 40 feet from one point to another, a strong, loud swine vocalization was heard. When I arrived at the stunning area a roaster swine was upright, stressed, excited, and running around the area. More than four plant employees failed to catch the swine. At that moment a plant employee, standing in front of the pig, placed his hands on both pig ears, he holds and pulled strongly both pig ears, but the pig get loose, more excite and continue vocalizing. At this point, another plant employee stepped in with a captive bolt, the roaster swine was placed to corner and stunned. While the roaster swine on floor and legs beginning to shake and paddling, the plant employee firmly and rapidly hold and pulled one hind leg in such a way that swine get closer to the hoist chain. After the roaster swine was shackled and hung, I observed two holes on the swine forehead. At the postmortem inspection station, two distinct points of entry were identified on the roaster swine head, one hole off-site of midline and one hole at the zone of effectiveness. I proceed to let Mr. REDACTED, QC Supervisor and Mr. REDACTED, Slaughter Supervisor know that a regulatory control action would be taken by stopping stunning. The US Rejected Tag #B-45642752 was placed on the knocking box/stunning area to prevent any additional animal from being slaughtered. The establishment failed to meet regulatory requirements of 9CFR 313.15 Although your establishment previously developed and implements a Systemic Approach to Humane Handling that was considered robust, you have failed to effectively implement your program accordingly.

313.15(a)(1)

HATS Category VIII Humane Handling; 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1). On Tuesday, October 29, 2024, at approximately 1102 hours, while performing a record review, I observed that the last entry in the Stunning Monitoring Report of this day was documented at 0932 hours. This monitoring occurs once every hour, and I noticed that by 1102 hours, the monitoring that should have occurred around 1032 hours +/- 15 minutes, had still not been documented. Next day, Wednesday, October 30, 2024, while reviewing the completed Stunning Monitoring Report for the operational day 10/29/24, I observed that there was an entry documented at 1032 hours on that day. According to the establishment’s procedures, documentation and records data must be recorded at the time it is obtained. The Quality Control Supervisor was verbally informed about this noncompliance (NR) and impending written notification.