Electric Prod Research Articles

Human animal relationships in Bos indicus cattle breeds addressed from a Five Domains welfare framework.

The present review has two objectives, the first is to investigate the differences in temperament between Bos indicus and Bos taurus breeds and determining the effects on production due to positive treatment and to compare this with negative HAR, by using the Five Domain Model as framework. The second objective is to discuss potential strategies to achieve better HAR when working with Bos indicus cattle. Bos indicus are more reactive and temperamental than Bos taurus cattle. When human animal relationships (HAR) are evaluated, Bos indicus cattle may react with greater intensity. They may be more likely to develop a negative emotional state, especially in extensively raised Bos indicus cattle that are handled only a few times each year. Bos indicus cattle can have positive emotional states when they have frequent positive interactions with people. Interactions with people, both positive and negative, would be in the fourth Domain of the Five Domains model. Cattle that are more reactive during handling may also have lower weight gain, even when they have abundant feed. This would be in the first Domain of Nutrition. When cattle are handled in races and corrals, injuries may be more likely to occur. Injuries and bruises would be in the third Domain of Health. Injuries could be caused by either poor handling practices by people or poor handling facilities. Yelling or electric prod use would be examples of poor HAR. Second Environmental Domain issues may be broken facilities or slick, slippery floors that are associated with falls.

Cattle and Pigs Are Easy to Move and Handle Will Have Less Preslaughter Stress.

Previous research has clearly shown that short-term stresses during the last few minutes before stunning can result in Pale Soft Exudative (PSE) pork in pigs or increased toughness in beef. Electric prods and other aversive handling methods during the last five minutes are associated with poorer meat quality. Handlers are more likely to use aversive methods if livestock constantly stop and are difficult to move into the stun box. Factors both inside and outside the slaughter plant contribute to handling problems. Some in-plant factors are lighting, shadows, seeing motion up ahead, or air movement. Non-slip flooring is also very important for low-stress handling. During the last ten years, there have been increasing problems with on-farm factors that may make animals more difficult to move at the abattoir. Cattle or pigs that are lame or stiff will be more difficult to move and handle. Some of the factors associated with lame cattle are either poor design or lack of adequate bedding in dairy cubicles (free stalls) and housing beef cattle for long periods on concrete floors. Poor leg conformation in both cattle and pigs may also be associated with animals that are reluctant to move. Indiscriminate breeding selection for meat production traits may be related to some of the leg conformation problems. Other on-farm factors that may contribute to handling problems at the abattoir are high doses of beta-agonists or cattle and pigs that have had little contact with people.

The Visual, Auditory, and Physical Environment of Livestock Handling Facilities and Its Effect on Ease of Movement of Cattle, Pigs, and Sheep

The visual, auditory, and physical environment livestock are handled in will have an effect on the ease of movement through races and corrals that are used for veterinary treatment, loading trucks or at slaughter houses. When livestock refuse to move easily through a handling facility, people are more likely to use electric goads (prods) or other aversive methods to move them forward. This is a major animal welfare concern. Modification of the environment can improve livestock movement and reduce aversive handling methods. In existing facilities used for handling cattle, pigs or sheep, simple changes such as, adding a light to a dark race entrance or reducing loud intermittent noise may improve livestock movement. Eliminating distractions such as, a noisy truck near a lairage can also facilitate cattle movement and reduce stopping or turning back. In an outdoor facility, sharp shadows on the floor were more likely to be associated with cattle stopping compared to no shadows or soft faint shadows. The installation of small solid walls to prevent approaching animals from seeing either moving equipment, vehicles or people in front of them may also improve forward livestock movement. Non-slip flooring is essential to prevent slipping and falling during handling. Rebuilding or completely redesigning an existing facility is often not required. Outcome based indicators should be used to assess continuous improvements in handling. Some of the commonly used measurable of handling are slipping and falling, stopping, turning back, vocalization during handling and electric prod use. Collecting data both before and after an environmental modification can be used to determine its effectiveness.

An observational field study on the effects of changes in shadow contrasts and noise on cattle movement in a small abattoir

This observational field study examined the effect of changes in shadow contrasts on the floor and noise on balking behavior during handling. Seventy-four Bos taurus beef cattle were observed during handling at a small abattoir. Shadow contrast type (none, soft, sharp) was recorded during three stages of handling (unloading, lairage to single-file alley and into stun box). Cattle balking behavior (stop, put head down, back up) and aversive handling (electric prod, tail twist) were recorded for each shadow contrast type and the presence or absence of a noisy rendering truck. Sharp contrast shadows increased balking behavior compared to soft contrast shadows or none during unloading (X2 = 12.4, P < 0.001). The noisy truck increased balking behavior during handling from the lairage holding pens to the single-file alley (P < 0.001) and during movement into the stun box (P = 0.001). Sharp contrast shadows on the floor from lighting changes and noise from the truck increased balking behavior in cattle.

The Stockman's Scorecard: quantitative evaluation of beef cattle stockmanship.

An animal’s action, or inaction, is the direct result of a stockman’s action or inaction. The Stockman’s Scorecard is a novel observation instrument that has been proven to be a valid and reliable tool to measure the quality of beef cattle stockmanship. Specific handler actions have been weighted based on their perceived negative relationship to cattle stress from handling. The purpose of this article is to 1) document the initial use of the scorecard in a beef cattle feedlot setting and 2) provide further support to its validity by establishing an association with other quantitative and qualitative means of evaluating stockmanship. The Scorecard was used at 39 beef feedlots in Texas between March 2018 and April 2019. Eighty-four stockman were observed, and the average score received was 84.5 (SD = 14.73, range = 20 to 100). The most frequent mistakes observed were as follows: fills crowd pen/tub over half full (n = 39), slow to remove pressure (n = 29), uses unnecessary noise (n = 25), stands in front and taps rear (n = 24), and fails to regulate animal flow through a pinch point (n = 22). A strong negative association (ρ = −0.51) was found between the points deducted from the Noise and Physical Contact theme of the Scorecard and the number of animals touched with an electric prod from the BQA Feedyard Assessment. Moderate negative associations were found between the Scorecard final score and the number of animals that vocalize in the chute prior to procedures (ρ = −0.31). Those stockmen that scored above average on the Scorecard were qualitatively observed to be calm and quiet while working with the cattle (Kappa = 0.44). The qualitative disposition of cattle had little effect on the final score of stockmen using the Scorecard (Kappa = 0.17). The use of the Scorecard in a feedlot setting has demonstrated that as stockman scores decrease, there is an increase in the number of negative actions toward cattle and a negative behavioral response of the cattle themselves. Establishment of an association between a stockman’s score using the Stockman’s Scorecard and the animal-based observations from the BQA Feedyard Assessment further strengthens the validity of the Stockman’s Scorecard as a tool to measure the quality of beef cattle stockmanship. The Scorecard has application as a tool to identify specific stockmanship deficiencies in order to target stockmanship training.

Livestock Handling at the Abattoir: Effects on Welfare and Meat Quality

Low-stress handling that uses behavioral principles can help reduce bruises and improve meat quality in cattle, pigs, and sheep. Short-term stressors before stunning, such as electric prod use or jamming in the race, may increase Pale, Soft, Exudative meat in pork and reduce tenderness in beef. Longer term stresses may increase Dark, Firm and Dry meat. Continuous assessment of livestock handling practices is recommended. Handlers should be trained to move small groups of livestock. They also need to understand behavioral principles. The most important ones are flight zone and the point of balance at the shoulder. Calm animals will be easier to handle. Simple economical improvements in races and lairages can help facilitate animal movement through the facility. The movement of livestock can often be improved by (1) installation of a light at a dark stun box entrance, (2) moving lamps to reduce reflections on shiny metal, (3) installation of solid shields to prevent incoming animals from seeing people on moving conveyors, (4) redirection of air flow at the stun box entrance, or (5) in elevated conveyor restrainers, use of a false floor to prevent entering animals from seeing the “visual cliff ” effect. Continuous assessment and supervision are required to maintain low-stress handling methods.

319 Effects of repeated exposure to either energized or non-energized prods on the behavioral responses of beef cattle to handling

Abstract The cattle industry has adopted the use of low stress handling aids however, the continuous-pulse electric prod is still used on hard-to-move cattle. This study aimed to assess behavioral responses of beef cattle after five consecutive exposures to either energized or non-energized prods for 1 s while enclosed in a squeeze chute. A total of 208 7–8 mo old crossbred Angus steers (487.6 ± 41.68 kg BW) were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 treatments: non-energized prod (CT), continuous-pulse electric prod (CP), broken-pulse electric prod (BP) and a vibration prod (VP) that did not produce a shock. Prior to (d -3, -2 and -1; baseline), during (d 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4) and after (d 5, 6 and 7) the application of treatments, behavior of each steer was assessed including: using voice and touch (VAT; score), race transit time (RTT; s), squeeze chute score (SC; score) and flight speed (FS; m/s). Data was analyzed using GLIMMIX procedure of SAS including treatment, day and interaction as fixed effects. No treatment effect (P &amp;gt; 0.05) was found for VAT. The VP steers had greater (P &amp;lt; 0.05) RTT on d 4 and 5 compared to CT and CP, respectively. The CP steers had greater (P &amp;lt; 0.05) SC than CT, BP and VP. The CP had greater (P &amp;lt; 0.05) FS from d 0 to 7 compared to all other treatments with the exception that no differences (P &amp;gt; 0.05) were observed on d 1 between CP and BP. Based on SC and FS, the CP prod was more aversive to cattle than all other prods. However, due to the lack of differences in VAT and RTT measures between control and electric prods, further studies are required to determine the aversiveness of prods balanced with their ability to move hard-to-move cattle.

Transporters knowledge toward preslaughter logistic chain and occupational risks in Mexico: An integrative view with implications on sheep welfare

Using a survey, we aimed to investigate Mexican transporter knowledge toward preslaughter logistic chain and occupational risks and secondly, to quantify how transport can affect sheep welfare. We used univariate and multivariate statistics based on cluster analysis. According to a cluster analysis, the incidence of risks varied with the association between transport, preslaughter logistic operations and journey distance. Cluster 1 included long-distance journeys (LDJ), cluster 2 medium-distance journeys (MDJ) and cluster 3 short-distance journeys (SDJ). In MDJ, the collection points were quite varied compared with the LDJ and SDJ groups, which were always in the north or central regions, respectively. The LDJ group used pot-belly trailers or 10 ton (t) to 16 t lorries, the MDJ group preferably used 10 t to 16 t lorries, and group SDJ used 3.5 lorries or pickups. Most of the accidents were grouped in SDJ, which also included transporters who smoked most and drank coffee as a countermeasure for sleepiness. The MDJ group loaded more animals at the farm, whereas the other two groups mostly collected animals at assembly centers or auction markets. In addition, night journeys, aversive and violent handling (shouting and the use of electric prod), loading times greater than 2.5 hours can also increase live weight losses and mortality rates. Journeys greater than 8 hours imply a greater probability of suffering an accident on the road. It is critical for everyone engaged in welfare promotion along the preslaughter logistic chain to recognize the links between workers well-being, animal welfare, and the environment, and to know that the way sheep are transported can have broader One-Welfare implications.

Swine welfare at slaughterhouses in Valle de Aburrá (Colombia)

The World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) makes recommendations related to the slaughter of animals for human consumption. Colombia has some regulations on animal welfare in slaughterhouses. This study assessed welfare of pigs in slaughterhouses in Valle de Aburrá, Colombia using measures from existing welfare protocols (Welfare Quality: Assessment protocol for pigs; Recommended Animal Handling Guidelines and Audit Guide for Cattle, Pig and Sheep).The objective was to determine the degree of compliance with some welfare protocols recommendation (Welfare Quality. Assessment protocol for pigs and Recommended Animal Handling Guidelines and Audit Guide for Cattle, Pig and Sheep) in regards to welfare of pigs in slaughterhouses in Valle de Aburrá, Colombia.A cross-sectional study was conducted using data from four slaughterhouses during 2017. Univariable analysis was performed, depending on the type of variable. Frequency distribution was assessed for descriptive variables, while quantity variables were assessed by central tendency and dispersion measures.It was found that electric prods are often used for moving pigs to lairage pens and to stunning area, the animals remain in lairage pens in too high stocking densities and also some signs related to inadequate loss of consciousness during stunning were shown. Some pigs were kept more than 10 h in lairage pens and some did not have access to water. Skin lesions occurred in 93.6% of the observed animals.It is concluded that the assessed slaughterhouses do not manage to keep animal welfare on a required level.

The effect of stress immediately prior to stunning on proglycogen, macroglycogen, lactate and meat quality traits in different pig breeds

The aim of the study was to evaluate the levels of lactate, pro-, macro-, and total glycogen in two different muscles, and meat quality traits (pH, colour, drip loss, cooking loss and shear force) across three different pig breeds, in the presence and absence of physical short-term pre-slaughter stress. Twenty-eight halothane-free pigs of the Italian Large White, Duroc and Pietrain breeds were subjected to different kinds of pre-slaughter handling: rough (RPH) or gentle (GPH). Before stunning, RPH group of pigs were subjected to a fast driving supported by the use of electric prods, whereas GPH group pigs were driven slowly without electric prods. Handling procedure influenced the contents of macroglycogen, lactate and pH at 45-min post-mortem with no effect on meat quality traits at 24 and 72 h post-mortem. Irrespective of the handling procedure, breed significantly affected L* and b* colour coordinates, Pietrain pigs showing slightly paler meat.

Effect of handling intensity at the time of transport for slaughter on physiological response and carcass characteristics in beef cattle fed ractopamine hydrochloride.

The effects of handling intensity on the physiological response and carcass characteristics of feedlot cattle fed ractopamine hydrochloride were evaluated at the time of transport to slaughter. Eighty steers (BW = 668 ± 36 kg) representing 10 lots of similar breed, frame size, and degree of finish were blocked by lot, stratified by weight, and randomly assigned to 1 of 2 handling intensities (HI) over a 1,600 m dirt alley course: 1) low-stress handling (LSH) or 2) high-stress handling (HSH). For the LSH treatment, 4 penmates were kept at a walk with the use of a lead rider. For the HSH treatment, 4 penmates were kept at a minimum of a trot and received 2 applications of an electric prod (approximately 1 s per impulse) at 2 separate instances: first in the alley before post-handling sampling, and again during loading for transportation to the abattoir. Behavioral observations and physical indicators of stress were recorded a minimum of 1 h before handling (baseline), immediately after handling (POSTHAND), and while in lairage after a 200 km transport to the abattoir. Vital parameters were recorded at baseline and POSTHAND. Venous blood samples were collected via jugular venipuncture at baseline and POSTHAND, and mixed arterial and venous blood samples were collected during exsanguination at slaughter. Muscle tremors tended to be more prevalent in HSH cattle at POSTHAND ( = 0.10). The HSH cattle tended to have greater POSTHAND heart rate ( = 0.08); however, there was no effect of HI on POSTHAND respiration rate or rectal temperature ( 0.34). The HSH cattle had greater lactate, epinephrine, norepinephrine, cortisol, and glucose concentrations at POSTHAND ( ≤ 0.02). Additionally, HSH cattle had lower POSTHAND blood pH, bicarbonate, base excess, and partial pressure carbon dioxide ( < 0.0001). Bicarbonate concentrations were greater in HSH cattle at slaughter ( = 0.05); however, there were no differences between HI treatments for the remaining blood variables ( 0.11). Concentrations of stress hormones and CK were significantly greater at slaughter relative to baseline and POSTHAND for both LSH and HSH cattle ( < 0.001). These findings suggest cattle trotted without a lead rider develop metabolic acidosis, and illustrate the importance of low-stress handling at the time of transport for slaughter. Further research is warranted to develop strategies to mitigate stress at the time of transport and ensure the welfare of beef cattle presented to abattoirs.

Compliance of large feedyards in the northern high plains with the Beef Quality Assurance Feedyard Assessment

ABSTRACT Despite increasing public scrutiny of practices used in raising animals for food, there is little readily available information about how cattle handling is managed in feedyards. The purpose of this study was to score cattle handling in commercial feedyards using the most widely adopted program for managing cattle handling, and to make these scores available as evidence of producer commitment to proper care and handling of cattle. Our objectives were to estimate compliance with the Beef Quality Assurance Feedyard Assessment (BQA FA) for cattle handling, to validate 6 cattle handling categories of the BQA FA, and to document management practices and elements of facility design. Categories scored were electric prod use; chute operation; rates of cattle vocalizing, stumbling, and falling; and rate of cattle jumping and running. This study compiles findings for cattle handling scores in commercial feedlots using the BQA FA. Of 28 sites, average scores were in compliance with BQA FA for the following 4 categories: electric prod use, vocalization, stumbling, and falling. For the following 2 categories, average scores were not in compliance: a score of 4.2% versus the target of 0% was recorded for cattle caught improperly in the squeeze chute; and a score of 52% versus the target of 25% was recorded for cattle that jumped or ran from the squeeze chute exit. All but one site exceeded this target. Curved crowd systems were recorded for 89% of feedyards, 11% used Bud Box systems, and 78.5% had rubber mats at the squeeze chute exit.

Assessing cow-calf welfare. Part 2: Risk factors for beef cow health and behavior and stockperson handling.

Epidemiological studies can be used to identify risk factors for livestock welfare concerns but have not been conducted in the cow-calf sector for this purpose. The objectives of this study were to investigate the relationships of 1) herd-level management, facilities, and producer perspectives with cattle health and behavior and stockperson handling and 2) stockperson handling on cattle behavior at the individual cow level. Cow ( = 3,065) health and behavior and stockperson handling during a routine procedure (e.g., pregnancy checks) were observed on 30 California ranches. Management and producer perspectives were evaluated using an interview, and handling facility features were recorded at the chute. After predictors were screened for univariable associations, multivariable models were built for cattle health (i.e., thin body condition, lameness, abrasions, hairless patches, swelling, blind eyes, and dirtiness) and behavior (i.e., balking, vocalizing, stumbling and falling in the chute and while exiting the restraint, and running out of the restraint) and stockperson handling (i.e., electric prod use, moving aid use, tail twisting, and mis-catching cattle). When producers empathized more toward an animal's pain experience, there was a lower risk of swelling (odds ratio [OR] = 0.7) but a higher risk of lameness (OR = 1.3), which may indicate a lack of awareness of the latter. Training stockpersons using the Beef Quality Assurance program had a protective effect on cow cleanliness and mis-catching in the restraint (OR = 0.2 and OR = 0.5, respectively). Hydraulic chutes increased the risk of vocalizations (OR = 2.7), possibly because these systems can apply greater pressure to the sides of the animal than manual restraints. When a moving aid was used to move an individual cow, it increased the risk of her balking, but when hands, in particular, were used, the risk of balking decreased across the herd (OR = 34.1 and OR = 0.3, respectively). Likewise, individual cows were at a greater risk of balking, vocalizing, stumbling and falling in the chute, and stumbling and running at exit when they were touched with an electric prod (OR = 11.0, OR = 3.3, OR = 1.9, OR = 2.3, OR = 1.8, and OR = 1.7, respectively). Although the implications of using moving aids are unclear, reducing the use of electric prods could improve cattle handling. In conclusion, cattle handling was influenced by a number of facility and stockperson factors: personnel training, facility design, and electric prod use are key areas for future improvements.

Assessing cow-calf welfare. Part 1: Benchmarking beef cow health and behavior, handling; and management, facilities, and producer perspectives.

Assessment programs are one way beef producers communicate information about animal welfare to retailers and the public. Programs that monitor cattle through the production cycle (e.g., the Global Animal Partnership) or at individual stages (e.g., slaughter; the North American Meat Institute) exist, but to date, there is no assessment program addressing welfare specifically in the cow-calf sector. The objectives of this study were to measure cow-calf health and handling welfare outcomes and gather management, facility, and producer perspective information to 1) describe current practices and 2) inform assessment design. A welfare assessment, designed using features of similar beef and dairy programs, was conducted on 30 California ranches that varied in size (mean 1,051 cows [SD 1,849], range 28 to 10,000 cows) and location within the state. Cattle health and behavior and stockperson handling were measured during a routine procedure (e.g., pregnancy checks) on breeding females ( = 3,065). Management and producer perspectives were evaluated through an interview, and facility features were recorded at the chute and water access points. Cattle health problems were rare and seen only on specific ranches (e.g., prevalence of lame cattle: mean 1.3% [SD 1.5], range 0 to 7.1%). Cattle behavior and stockperson handling varied between ranches (e.g., cattle balking: mean 22.0% [SD 21.9], range 1.6 to 78.3%; electric prod use: mean 23.5 [SD 21.5], range 0 to 73.0%). Although some management and facility characteristics were shared by most (e.g., all ranches castrated bull calves; 86% used alleyways with an anti-back gate), other aspects varied (e.g., weaning age: mean 8.2 mo [SD 1.4], range 6 to 11 mo; 43% used shade cover over chute). Most producers shared similar perspectives toward their herd health management plan, but their responses varied when asked to evaluate an animal's pain experience. In terms of assessment design, there were challenges with feasibility (e.g., scheduling a ranch visit on a day cattle were processed was difficult), validity (e.g., cattle may back up calmly to adjust posture or quickly in response to an aggressive handler; without this context, the welfare implications of this behavior are unclear), and comparability (e.g., an explicit animal observation period needed to be defined to make comparisons across ranches). Future assessment programs should consider these qualities when selecting measures to evaluate welfare.

Impact of ractopamine hydrochloride on growth performance, carcass and pork quality characteristics, and responses to handling and transport in finishing pigs.

The effect of feeding ractopamine hydrochloride (RAC) on growth performance, carcass and pork quality, and blood acid-base and catecholamine responses to handling and transport in finishing pigs was evaluated using a randomized complete block design to compare 2 RAC levels (0 vs. 10 mg/kg). Crossbred pigs ( = 144) were housed in single-sex pens (barrow or gilt) of 3 with 24 pens/RAC level. The study was carried out for a 28-d period from 104.0 ± 5.99 to 136.7 ± 6.44 kg BW. At the end of the growth study, pigs were subjected to handling and transport procedures that involved an initial aggressive handling procedure (pigs moved 50 m with 8 shocks from an electric prod) followed by a 30-min transport on a standard livestock trailer at a floor space of 0.46 m/pig followed by a final gentle handling procedure (pigs moved 100 m using sort boards and slap paddles). A blood sample was taken and rectal temperature was measured 2 h before (baseline) and immediately after the final handling procedure (final). Barrows ( = 72) were harvested and carcass and pork quality were measured. Feeding RAC increased ( ≤ 0.05) ADG (19.6%), ADFI (4.2%), and G:F (14.8%). The increase in plasma epinephrine levels from baseline to final was greater ( ≤ 0.05) for pigs fed RAC; there was a trend ( ≤ 0.10) for pigs fed RAC to have greater final blood lactate and to show a greater change from baseline to final in blood bicarbonate, partial pressure of and total carbon dioxide, and oxygen saturation levels. However, there were no differences between treatments for changes from baseline to final in rectal temperature, blood pH and lactate, and plasma norepinephrine levels. The incidence of physical indicators of stress and of nonambulatory, noninjured pigs during the handling and transport procedures was similar for the 0 and 10 mg/kg RAC levels. Final farm BW was 4.1 kg heavier, carcass yield was 1.4 percentage units greater, and LM area was 5.18 cm greater for pigs fed RAC compared to the control ( ≤ 0.05). Minolta a* and b* values were lower ( ≤ 0.05) and ultimate pH (0.05 units) and Warner-Bratzler shear force (0.43 kg) were greater ( ≤ 0.05) for pigs fed 10 compared to 0 mg/kg RAC. These results confirm the substantial improvement from feeding 10 mg/kg RAC in growth performance and carcass yield and suggest relatively limited effects on pork quality and on responses to the handling and transport procedures used in this study.

The effects of lairage time and handling procedure prior to slaughter on stress and meat quality parameters in pigs

Lairage time (short — 8min to 2.7h, n=28 vs. long — 14 to 21.5h, n=72) and pig handling (gentle — no use of stick or electric prod, pig not slipping, falling, nor emitting high-pitched vocalizations vs. rough — where any of these occurred) effects on pig stress and meat quality were measured. Blood lactate and cortisol, plus post-mortem pH (pH60min; pH24h), temperature (T60min), drip loss, sensory and instrumental color and meat quality for the longissimus dorsi, pars lumbalis derived meat were determined. Carcass rigor mortis and skin damages were measured. Lairage time significantly affected blood lactate, carcass rigor mortis, skin damages, drip loss, color and meat quality. Handling procedure influenced blood lactate, pH60min and T60min. Long lairage was more stressful, and was detrimental to carcass quality, but caused better meat quality compared to short lairage. Rough handling was related to higher lactate and lower meat quality.

Implementation of industry-oriented animal welfare and quality assurance assessment in Kansas cattle feeding operations

Consumer interest in production agriculture has prompted the beef industry to develop tools to increase accountability of producers for animal management practices. The Beef Quality Assurance Feedyard Assessment, developed by veterinarians, animal scientists, and production specialists, was used to objectively evaluate key areas of beef cattle production such as animal handling, antimicrobial residue avoidance, and cattle comfort in 56 Kansas feedyards. During the assessment, management protocols were reviewed, facilities and pens were inspected, and cattle handling practices were observed. Of the 56 feedyards, 19 maintained complete and current documentation of Best Management Practices for all management protocols required by the assessment. During assessment of cattle handling practices, 78.6% of feedyards met requirements for an Acceptable score for all measured criteria. An electric prod was used on only 4.0% of cattle during processing. In addition, 83.0% of feedyards scored Acceptable for all stocking rate, feed bunk, water tank, and mud score standards.

ESTUDIO DE INDICADORES CONDUCTUALES PARA EVALUAR EL DESCARGUE DE BOVINOS EN PLANTAS DE BENEFICIO

Objective: To assess behavioral indicators and human-animal interactions during the cattle download in a Colombian slaughterhouse. Methods: An index composed by the downloading time and cattle behavior was calculated during this process. Similarly, the human-animal interaction during download was recorded. The association between variables was evaluated by simple linear regression analysis. Results: A total of 180 groups were observed, made up by 1,595 bovines from eight Colombian departments. The mean downloading time was 4.52±0.8 min per group. Here, 76.7% (n = 138) of the evaluated groups presented acceptable scorings. The most common behavioral events were slips (22.8%), jumps (10.7%) and vocalizations (8.7%). The predominant human-animal interactions were whistling (1.64±0.24/animal), hitting (1.39±0.27/animal) and talking (1.19±0.19/animal). The electric prod was not used In this stage. Vocalizations were correlated with the number of hits given by the cattle drivers (p<0.05). Conclusions: The results allow concluding that the

Influence of low-stress handling on reactivity score and pregnancy rate during fixed-time artificial insemination in Nellore cows

The objective of this work was to evaluate the influence of low-stress handling (LSH) on reactivity score and pregnancy rate during fixed-time artificial insemination (FTAI) for extensively raised Nellore cows. Multiparous cows (n = 126) were randomly allocated into two groups: G1 (n = 66) and G2, the control group (n = 60). Group G1 was subjected to LSH, in which the animals were handled in a calm and quiet manner, without loud noises or physical aggression, using the point of balance, respecting the flight zone and using flags to supplement handling. Group G2 was handled following the typical procedure, with yelling, kicking and the use of electric prods and sticks. On D0, D8 and D10, FTAI was performed in both groups. Reactivity was scored on D0, D8 and D10 at the squeeze chute, based on the tension score, breathing score, and bellowing score. Using the three criteria above, the reactivity scores were defined as follows: R1 (calm); R2 (slightly reactive); R3 (moderately reactive); R4 (reactive); and R5 (highly reactive). Thirty-five days after artificial insemination, pregnancy was determined using ultrasonography. There was no significant correlation between reactivity score and pregnancy rate in each group or between the pregnancy rates in both groups. However, there was a statistically significant difference between the G1 and G2 groups with regard to reactivity score (1.62±0.05 vs. 2.12±0.07). Low-stress handling influenced reactivity but did not affect pregnancy rate in extensively raised Nellore cows subjected to FTAI.

Developing measures to audit welfare of cattle and pigs at slaughter

AbstractSince 1999, animal welfare auditing programmes that utilise five numerically scored core criteria have been used successfully by major restaurant chains to monitor animal welfare in slaughter plants. They had to achieve specific numerical scores in order to remain on the approved supplier list. The five numerically scored criteria (critical control points) are: i) Percentage of animals that fall down during handling; ii) Percentage of animals moved with an electric prod; iii) Percentage of cattle or pigs vocalising in the stunning box or restrainer; iv) Percentage of animals stunned effectively with one application of the stunner; and v) Percentage rendered insensible when hoisted to the bleed rail (has to be 100% to pass the audit). Audit data collected in 2010 by two restaurant companies in 30 beef plants, indicated that 77% of them effectively stunned 100 to 99% of the cattle with a single shot from a captive-bolt gun. All 30 plants passed the audit, which required 95% of more of the cattle stunned with one shot. In eight pork plants with electric stunning, the tongs were placed correctly on 100% of the pigs held in a V-conveyor restrainer. In 95% of the beef plants, and 86% of 25 pork plants, 0% of the animals fell during unloading, movement in the lairage and during handling in the stunning area. In 81% of the beef plants and 77% of the pork plants, 5% or less of the animals were moved with an electric prod. The percentage of cattle vocalising in the stun box and during movement into the stun box was 3% or less in all the plants except one. All scores are per animal, an animal is stunned correctly in the first shot, or not stunned correctly. It either vocalises or it is silent. A passing score is required on all five of the numerically scored core criteria. Due to financial and time constrains, the same auditor assesses both welfare and food safety. Workshops for training auditors last 1.5 days and include two plant visits.