Meat + Poultry - December 2008 - 105

FROM THE CORRAL

Spelling out 'egregious' activity
Defining what is wrong can help make it right
By Dr. Temple Grandin
meatpoultry@sosland.com

any plants have had inspection suspended or their facility shut down for Humane
Slaughter Act violations inspectors
deemed egregious. There is much controversy within the industry as to what
egregious animal abuse is. Webster defines egregious as: "conspicuously bad
or flagrant." The definition says it "applies usually to offenses or errors so bad
that they can neither escape notice nor
be condoned." Some of the synonyms
for egregious are: flagrant, deplorable,
outrageous, heinous, shocking and atrocious. Flagrant is defined as "extraordinary in some bad way." It is obvious
from these definitions that egregious
refers to really bad things.
I was recently asked by several people in the industry to defi ne
egregious violations of the Humane
Slaughter Regulations without using
specific examples. This is a difficult
thing to do. One possible defi nition
is: Egregious animal abuse is obvious,
intense animal suffering caused by:
willful actions of a person that are
not accidental; improperly adjusted
mechanical equipment; equipment
that is run beyond its capacity that
cause injuries or total neglect of stunner maintenance.

scalding of an animal showing
signs of returning to sensibility.
The AMI guideline has a zero tolerance for this. Any animal showing any sign of returning to sensibility must be restunned.
3. Breaking a bone, causing bruises
or causing falls in sensible animals
with powered equipment such as
animal restraint devices, head holders, stun box doors or mechanical gates. This can be caused by
either willful intent by a person,

"I recommend that
dragging an animal
more than one body
length should be
considered egregious.
This is a standard that
would be easy for
inspectors to interpret"
improper adjustment of the equipment or exceeding the capacity of
the equipment.
4. Multiple uses of an obviously broken or malfuncioning stunner on
an animal.
5. Numerical scores on the American
Meat Institute guideline for stunning, falling, vocalization or electric prod use that are over the serious-problem level. Slipping scores
are not included for determining
egregious abuse.
6. Any intentional acts of abuse in
the AMI guidelines.
There are some areas where interpretation of what constitutes egre-

Egregious examples
This defi nition is very cumbersome.
For easier training of both inspectors
and commercial auditors, examples
are needed to provide better guidance for what constitutes "egregious."
I will provide specific examples. It is
my opinion that the following events
are egregious:
1. Intentionally poking an animal in
the eye, rectum, mouth or other
sensitive area.
2. Cutting off limbs, skinning or
108

MEAT&POULTRY

December 2008

www.MEATPOULTRY.com

gious is more difficult. Dragging a
conscious, non-ambulatory animal is
an egregious violation of both AMI
guidelines and the Humane Slaughter Regulations. There have been disagreements between plant managers
and inspectors over what constitutes
dragging. For example, should rotating a downed pig on the floor to get it
into onto a sled be considered dragging? I recommend that dragging an
animal more than one body length
should be considered egregious. This
is a standard that would be easy for
inspectors to interpret. Other areas
where arguments have occurred are,
at what point does tapping an animal with a paddle become beating,
or touching an animal with a gate
become slamming it on an animal?
These gray areas will probably need
well-made training videos to demonstrate standards so inspectors can be
consistent. Another method for determining whether or not egregious
beating has occurred is to look for
bruises or injuries. There are other
distress-causing conditions that need
correcting, but these are not suffi ciently serious to be called egregious.
Some examples would be occasionally receiving a not acceptable score
on one of the numerically scored
variables on the AMI audit, yelling at
animals or getting a bruise on a sharp
edge on a gate post. All of these faults
require corrective action, but they are
not serious enough to have inspection suspended.
Dr. Temple Grandin operates Grandin Livestock
Systems Inc., Fort Collins, Colo., and is a faculty
member in the animal science department at Colorado State Univ.
We would like to hear from you - to comment
on this story or to request reprints, contact us by
e-mail at: meatpoultry@sosland.com.

http://www.MEATPOULTRY.com

Meat + Poultry - December 2008

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Meat + Poultry - December 2008