Ralphs Ranches, Inc.: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2025 (USDA)

313.2(f)

Prather’s Ranch HH NR HATS Category VIII: Stunning Effectiveness At approximately 1050 hours, IPP was inside on the slaughter floor and observed the establishment stun operator come onto the slaughter floor to find help. The stun operator told the other establishment stun operator that he thinks this steer is breathing and that he should stun the steer again. IPP proceeded out to the stunning area and checked the steer for reflexes. The steer had been released from the head catch but was still in the chute at this point. The steer was blinking and looking around with controlled eye movements. The animal then tried to stand but could not and rolled onto the slaughter floor. At that point, IPP went to find the SPHV in the USDA office. Both the CSI and SPHV came out onto the slaughter floor. SPHV and CSI observed the steer lying on his dorsal side with his head slightly inclined over his shoulder. Both eyes were looking rostrally with the scleras making up the majority of the visible globes bilaterally. The steers lips were pursed, and ears were tense. The steer was tachypneic. The establishment experienced stun operator already had the new penetrating hand-held captive bot (HHCB) device loaded, and grabbed the steer by his ear, and applied an effective stun. The stun box was tagged with USDA Reject tag #A7627510, and IPP verbally notified establishment owner and manager of the forthcoming noncompliance. The Denver District Management Team was notified through supervisory channels. There have been no noncompliance records issued for the same root cause in the past 90 days. This establishment is currently operating within the deferral period for a humane handling Notice of Intended Enforcement.

313.15(a)(1)

HATS VIII: Stunning Effectiveness On Tuesday, September 2, 2025, at approximately 0812 hours, I, the CSI observed the following noncompliance. A steer had laid down in the stun box and refused to rise despite the establishment’s best efforts. The new stunning employee asked for help from an experienced stun operator. The experienced stun operator was positioned in the usual location, on the catwalk alongside the stun box, and reached over the top into the stun box with the Cash non-penetrating stunning device on a long handle and applied the first stun attempt, which was ineffective. I heard the steer vocalize and looked into the stun box through the head catch opening and observed the steer to be alert and conscious with eyes tracking and blinking. The steer did not attempt to rise but was moving its head from side to side in a controlled manner. The stun operator immediately reloaded the primary stunning device and applied a second stun attempt, which was ineffective. I heard the steer vocalize again and observed the steer blinking with eyes tracking. The stun operator immediately reloaded the primary stunning device and applied a third stun attempt, which was ineffective. I heard the steer vocalize again and observed the steer blinking with eyes tracking. The stun operator immediately reloaded the primary stunning device and applied a fourth stun attempt, which was ineffective. I heard the steer vocalize again and observed the steer blinking with eyes tracking and still moving its head from side to side in a controlled manner. The stun operator got down from the catwalk and retrieved the backup firearm (9mm pistol) and applied a fifth stun attempt, which effectively rendered the steer unconscious. I placed USDA Reject tag #A7627509 on the handles of the hydraulic equipment on the stunning box and verbally notified the plant manager and plant owner of the forthcoming noncompliance. The Denver District Management Team was notified through supervisory channels. There have been no noncompliance records issued for the same root cause in the past 90 days. This establishment operates under a robust systematic approach to the humane handling of livestock.