Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T19:41:59.213Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparison of handling methods relevant to the religious slaughter of sheep

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

LSW Bates ,
EA Ford ,
SN Brown ,
GJ Richards ,
PJ Hadley ,
SB Wotton  and
TG Knowles
LSW Bates
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
EA Ford
Affiliation:
EBLEX AHDB, The Baron Suite, Creech Castle, Bathpool, Taunton TA1 2DX, UK
SN Brown
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
GJ Richards
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
PJ Hadley
Affiliation:
EBLEX AHDB, The Baron Suite, Creech Castle, Bathpool, Taunton TA1 2DX, UK
SB Wotton
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
TG Knowles*
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Legislation governing non-stun slaughter of sheep in England requires that they are individually and mechanically restrained for slaughter and not moved for at least 20 s post neck cut, until unconsciousness or insensibility occurs. Complying with the need for individual handling, in what is a flock animal, has the potential to adversely affect welfare, in turn contravening the general legislative requirement to reduce any avoidable distress at slaughter. This study investigated the effects of individually loading and restraining lambs compared with the normal practice of group loading and restraint of lambs prior to slaughter when using a V-shaped restrainer. Rotating and static design loading pens were also compared to represent the range of conditions and facilities found across English abattoirs. Plasma cortisol and lactate concentrations were significantly lower in group-loaded animals and significant reductions were observed in the time duration of a range of components of handling as well as the average total time to load each lamb. Loading pen type had a less marked impact upon results, however, individual loading and restraint of lambs within a V-shaped restrainer appears particularly stressful for sheep in comparison with group loading. The loading pen type had a mixed effect although the rotating crowding pen is likely to have minimised physical exertion in lambs during loading and restraint. Based on these findings, group loading in a V-shaped restrainer, whilst complying with the 20-s standstill, is likely to be preferable in religious, non-stun slaughter of sheep.

Keywords

animal welfarelambnon-stun religious slaughterpre-slaughter handlingsheepV-shaped restrainer
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , August 2014 , pp. 251 - 258
Copyright
© 2014 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Anil, MH 2012 Effects of slaughter method on carcass and meat characteristics in the meat of cattle and sheep. http://www.eblex.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/slaugh-ter_and_meat_quality_feb_2012-final-report.pdfGoogle Scholar
Apple, JK, Dikeman, ME, Minton, JE, McMurphy, RM, Fedde, MR, Leith, DE and Unruh, JA 1995 Effects of restraint and isolation stress and epidural blockade on endocrine and blood metabolite status, muscle glycogen metabolism, and incidence of dark-cutting longissimus muscle of sheep. Journal of Animal Science 73: 2295–2307CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Apple, JK, Minton, JE, Parsons, KM, Dikeman, ME and Leith, DE 1994 Influence of treadmill exercise on pituitary-adrenal secretions, other blood constituents, and meat quality of sheep. Journal of Animal Science 72: 1306–1314CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chambers, PG and Grandin, T 2001 Effects of stress and injury on meat and by-product quality. In: Heinz, G and Srisuvan, T (ed) Guidelines for Humane Handling, Transport and Slaughter of Livestock pp 3–10. RAP Publication: ThailandGoogle Scholar
Cockram, MS, Ranson, M, Goddard, PJ, Burrels, C and Harkiss, GD 1994 The behavioural, endocrine and immune responses of sheep to isolation. Animal Production 58(3): 389–399. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003356100007339Google Scholar
Colditz, I and Dart, C 2009 The Sheep. ANZCCART Fact Sheet A9. Revised and republished July 2009. http://www.adelaide.edu./ANZC-CART/publications/A(_SheepFactSheet.pdfGoogle Scholar
Defra 2013 UK slaughterings and dressed carcase weights: statistics notice. http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/files/defra-stats-food-farm-food-slaughter-statsnotice-130321.pdfGoogle Scholar
Dwyer, CM 2004 How has the risk of predation shaped the behavioural responses of sheep to fear and distress? Animal Welfare 13: 269–281Google Scholar
Dwyer, CM 2009 The behaviour of sheep and goats. In: Jenson, P (ed) The Ethology of Domestic Animals, Second Edition: An Introductory Text pp 161–176. CAB International: Wallingford, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAWC 2003 Report on the Welfare of Farmed Animals at Slaughter or Killing. Farm Animal Welfare Council. Part 1: Red Meat Animals. June 2003. http://www.fawc.org.uk/reports/pb8347.pdfGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, DM and Warner, RD 2008 Have we underestimat-ed the impact of pre-slaughter stress on meat quality in rumi-nants? Meat Science 80: 12–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meats ci.2008.05.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FSA 2012 Food Standards Agency, Open Board 22 May 2012. Results of the 2011 FSA Animal Welfare Survey in Great Britain. FSA 12/05/08. http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/board/fsa120508.pdfGoogle Scholar
Gericke, MD and Belonje, PC 1975 Aspects of forced exercise and the therapy thereof in sheep. Journal of the South African Veterinary Association 46: 353–357Google ScholarPubMed
Grandin, T 1995 Animal behaviour and the design of livestock and poultry systems. The Animal Behaviour and the Design of Livestock and Poultry Systems International Conference. 19-21 April,1995, Indianapolis, Indiana, USAGoogle Scholar
Grandin, T 1997 Assessment of stress during handling and trans-port. Journal of Animal Science 75: 249–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grandin, T 1998 Review: reducing handling stress improves both productivity and welfare. The Professional Animal Scientist 14(1): 1–10Google Scholar
Lever, J, de la Bellacasa, MP, Miele, M and Higgin, M 2010 From the slaughterhouse to the consumer. Transparency and information in the distribution of halal and kosher Meat. Dialrel Reports WP4.3. http://www.dialrel.eu/dialrel-resultsGoogle Scholar
Linares, MB, Bórnez, R and Vergara, H 2008 Cortisol and cate-cholamine levels in lambs: effect of slaughter weight and type of stunning. Livestock Science 115: 53–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2007.06.010Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA) 2013 A producer's guide to sheep husbandry practices. http://www.mla.com.au/CustomControls/PaymentGateway/ViewFile.aspx?tednd5fr9NoZ 6u/e4besUl0h11vNF7HU9dy8UtXGSAA4Ak08AQX66iyr3RNeq oiV3EYMKKAfsht7d1Tnt3BqiAGoogle Scholar
Moolchandani, A, Sareen, M and Vaishnav, J 2008 Influence of restraint and isolation stress on plasma cortisol in male karakul sheep. Veterinarski Arhives 78(4): 357–362Google Scholar
PATK 2009 Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 on 24 September 2009 on the Protection of Animals at the Time of Killing. http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/welfare/slaughter/regulation_1099_2009_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
Porter, RH, Nowak, R and Orgeur, P 1995 Influence of a conspe-cific agemate on distress bleating by lambs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 45: 239–244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(95)00630-BCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Probst, JK, Hillmann, E, Leiber, F, Kreuzer, M and Neff, AS 2013 Influence of gentle touching applied few weeks before slaughter on avoidance distance and slaughter stress in finishing cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 144: 14–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2012.12.007Google Scholar
Rasbash, J, Charlton, C, Browne, WJ, Healy, M and Cameron, B 2009 MLwiN Version 2.1. Centre for Multilevel Modelling: University of Bristol, UKGoogle Scholar
Warriss, PD, Brown, SN, Adams, SJM and Corlett, IK 1994 Relationships between subjective and objective assessments of stress at slaughter and meat quality in pigs. Meat Science 38(2): 329–340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0309-1740(94)90121-XCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
WASK 1995 The Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations 1995. Statutory Instrument 1995. No 731. http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/farmanimal/welfare/slaughter/Google Scholar
WATOK 2013 The Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing Regulations 2013. Draft copy. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/182353/watok-info-note-reg-1099-20121219.pdfGoogle Scholar
Yates, DT, Otis, AR, Warner, CA, Yates, LJ, Halalsheh, RA, Horvath, MB, Hallford, DM and Ross, TT 2010 Effects of phys-ical isolation on serum and salivary cortisol components of com-plete blood counts in yearling ewes. Sheep and Goat Research Journal 25: 39–44Google Scholar
Zimerman, M, Domingo, E, Grigioni, G, Taddeo, H and Willems, P 2013 The effect of pre-slaughter stressor on physio-logical indicators and meat quality traits on Merino lambs. Small Ruminant Research 11: 6–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrum-res.2012.12.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar