Perceptions of on-farm emergency slaughter for dairy cows in British Columbia.

Some jurisdictions permit on-farm emergency slaughter (OFES) as one end-of-life option for dairy cows and other animals that cannot be transported humanely but are deemed fit for human consumption. Anecdotal reports suggest that OFES is controversial among dairy industry professionals, but to date their perceptions of OFES have not been studied systematically. Twenty-five individual interviews and 3 focus groups with 40 dairy producers, veterinarians, and other professionals in British Columbia, Canada, revealed positive and negative perceptions of OFES influenced by (1) individual values, (2) the perceived operational legitimacy of OFES, and (3) concern over social responsibility and public perception of the dairy industry. Study participants valued cow welfare but were divided on whether OFES quickened or delayed death for injured animals. Views on the operational legitimacy of OFES varied because of different perceptions and concerns regarding regulatory, veterinary, and meat inspector oversight, a possible conflict of interest for veterinarians, and concerns over carcass hygiene and transport. Whereas many appreciated that OFES prevented transport of compromised cows, others saw OFES as merely a stopgap measure. Seven recommended actions could address concerns while retaining the benefits of OFES: (1) specifying precise timing parameters for OFES, (2) clarification of allowable cow conditions for OFES, (3) consultation with dairy industry professionals if OFES is to be expanded, (4) more proactive culling and the development of euthanasia protocols on farms, (5) the designation of veterinarians as the first point of contact in the OFES process, (6) veterinarian training on animal inspection and allowable conditions for OFES, and (7) the use of proper procedures and equipment during the OFES process to ensure food safety.

Use of on-farm emergency slaughter for dairy cows in British Columbia.

On-farm emergency slaughter (OFES), whereby inspection, stunning, and bleeding occur on the farm before the carcass is transported to a slaughterhouse, is permitted in some jurisdictions as a means to avoid inhumane transportation while salvaging meat from injured animals. However, OFES is controversial and its use for dairy cows has been little studied. Inspection documents for 812 dairy cows were examined to identify how OFES was used for dairy cows in British Columbia, Canada, over 16.5 mo. Producers used OFES for dairy cows aged 1 to 13 yr (median of 4 yr). Leg, hip, nerve, spinal, foot, and hind-end injuries or conditions (in that order) were the most common reasons for OFES, and some cases may have been a consequence of calving. Foot conditions were disproportionately common among cows 5 yr and older, and hind-end conditions were disproportionately common among cows 6 yr and older. Producers used OFES promptly after traumatic injury (within 1 d) for some cows, but OFES was delayed for others, sometimes until cows had been nonambulatory for 2 to 6 d. In some cases, OFES was used for nontraumatic chronic conditions, such as lameness and hind-end weakness, rather than traumatic injuries such as fractures and dislocated hips. Use of OFES appears to conform to the purpose of the program when used promptly after traumatic injuries, but clear guidelines are needed to avoid inappropriate use and delays that may prolong animal suffering.

Challenges facing the veterinary profession in Ireland: 3. emergency and casualty slaughter certification.

BACKGROUND: Veterinarians are faced with significant conflicts of interest when issuing certificates for the transport and slaughter of acutely injured and casualty livestock. In a recent Policy Delphi study, emergency and casualty slaughter certification was a key concern identified by veterinary professionals in Ireland. In this case study (the third in a series of three resulting from a research workshop exploring challenges facing the veterinary profession in Ireland; the other two case studies investigate clinical veterinary services and the on-farm use of veterinary antimicrobials), we aim to provide a value-based reflection on the constraints and opportunities for best practice in emergency and casualty slaughter certification in Ireland. RESULTS: Using a qualitative focus group approach, this study gathered evidence from relevant stakeholders, namely a representative from the regulatory body, local authority veterinarians with research experience in emergency slaughter, an animal welfare research scientist, official veterinarians from the competent authority, a private veterinary practitioner, and a member of a farming organisation. Results revealed a conflict between the responsibility of private veterinary practitioners (PVPs) to safeguard the welfare of acutely injured bovines on-farm and the client's commercial concerns. As a consequence, some PVPs may feel under pressure to certify, for example, an acutely injured animal for casualty slaughter instead of recommending either on-farm emergency slaughter or disposal by the knackery service. Among Official Veterinarians, there are concerns about the pressure within processing plants to accept acutely injured livestock as casualty animals. Confusion pertaining to legislation and definition of fitness to travel also contribute to these dilemmas. CONCLUSIONS: Conflicts of interest arise due to the gap between governance and provision to facilitate on-farm emergency slaughter of livestock. Increased availability and acceptance of on-farm emergency slaughter by Food Business Operators (FBOs) would mitigate the need to certify acutely injured animals fit for transport and slaughter and thereby safeguard animal welfare. In the absence of nationwide availability and acceptance of on-farm emergency slaughter by FBOs, consideration should be given to methods to encourage all those involved in the food chain to prioritise animal welfare when in conflict with the commercial value of the animal. Training and guidelines for PVPs on the regulatory landscape and ethical decision-making should become available. The reintroduction of the fallen animal scheme should be considered to support farm animal welfare.

Analysis of the operation of on farm emergency slaughter of bovine animals in the Republic of Ireland.

BACKGROUND: On Farm Emergency Slaughter (OFES) is the slaughter outside the slaughterhouse, of an otherwise healthy animal, which has suffered an accident that, for welfare reasons, prevented its transport to a slaughterhouse. The procedure is designed to prevent the transport of welfare compromised animals, which may have veterinary certification to slaughterhouses for Casualty Slaughter (CS), and provides an alternative to the euthanasia and disposal of injured animals that are otherwise fit for human consumption. The aim of this study was to analyse the operation of OFES in the Republic of Ireland between 1st January 2011 and 31st December 2013. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Animal Identification and Movement electronic database of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. Two structured surveys were designed, one for Official Veterinarians (OVs) who work in slaughterhouses and the second for Private Veterinary Practitioners (PVPs) who work in food animal practice in the Republic of Ireland. Surveys were administered through SurveyMonkey. The total number of bovines slaughtered and the number that underwent OFES in Northern Ireland and the Netherlands were obtained from the Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Netherlands Food and Consumer Safety Authority. RESULTS: OFES is neither widely available nor used in the Republic of Ireland. Results from the OV survey showed that Food Business Operators consider that facilitation of OFES would be detrimental to business. Data from the 5 slaughterhouses which offer OFES showed that acceptance criteria are not standardised. Results from the PVP survey showed that 77 % (n = 79) of PVPs were willing to certify animals for OFES. Fifty four percent (n = 49) were aware of slaughterhouses in their area that provided the service of OFES and 64 % (n = 57) stated a willingness to certify the transport of acutely injured animals to slaughterhouses for CS. Data from the Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Netherlands Food and Consumer Safety Authority indicated a low level of uptake of OFES in the Republic of Ireland compared to Northern Ireland and the Netherlands. CONCLUSION: Based on results reported here, criteria for assessment of risk associated with accepting animals for OFES should be reconsidered. A review of the systems pertaining to OFES and its implementation should be undertaken, including the level and quality of training of all stakeholders, with a view to making OFES more widely available in the Republic of Ireland.

Farmers Views on the Implementation of On-Farm Emergency Slaughter for the Management of Acutely Injured Cattle in Ireland.

Four management options for acutely injured cattle in Ireland exist: treatment, unless cattle are severely injured; on-farm emergency slaughter (OFES); casualty slaughter (CS) if the animal is certified fit for transport; or euthanasia. OFES is designed to prevent transport of welfare-compromised cattle. An online survey of farmers in Ireland was carried out between April and July 2021 and focused on events during 2020. A theoretical framework of capacity, willingness, and opportunity was used to explore farmers' perceptions. Responses from 94 farmers (49 dairy and 45 beef) were analysed; not all respondents answered all questions. Respondents indicated that the incidence of acutely injured cattle in Ireland is low. A majority reported not having an acutely injured animal for greater than 36 months. Most respondents had a positive attitude towards OFES for animal welfare reasons and were aware of relevant regulations and guidelines. Barriers to OFES included a lack of availability of OFES, and dairy farmers indicated that it had a similar financial impact as euthanasia. A parallel study with veterinarians indicated a higher incidence of acutely injured cattle in Ireland; the current results may be due to the demographic or the sensitivity of the topic. Nationwide electronic data capture on the cause of mortality could support improvements in the management of acutely injured cattle and enable surveillance of the proportion of these cattle undergoing OFES, euthanasia, or CS.

Overview of the practices of on-farm emergency slaughter of cattle in the Nordic countries.

On farm mortality is an increasing problem in cattle production systems in the Nordic countries. It represents an economic loss to the farmer and raises questions of sustainability, food waste and animal welfare. On-farm emergency slaughter (OFES) represents, in some situations, an opportunity for a farmer to salvage some of the economic value from an animal that cannot be transported to a slaughterhouse. The basis of the regulation of OFES in the Nordic countries originates largely from legislation from the European Union. However, this review has found that the availability and practice of OFES in the Nordic countries differs considerably. For example, in Norway 4.2% of all cattle slaughter is OFES, whilst in Iceland OFES has never been recorded. National food safety authorities have issued differing regulations and guidelines regarding the suitability of sick and injured animals for OFES. This review shows there is a paucity of data regarding the incidence and reasons for the use of OFES of cattle in the Nordic countries and points out the need for more investigation into this area to improve veterinary education, consumer protection and animal welfare.

Management of acutely injured cattle by on farm emergency slaughter: Survey of veterinarian views.

Background: Fitness to transport is a key provision in animal welfare regulations in the European Union, and for the management of acutely injured cattle. Whilst treatment may be appropriate for some injuries, three common production outcomes for acutely injured cattle are; on farm emergency slaughter (OFES), casualty slaughter (CS) or euthanasia. The aims of this study were to evaluate the perceptions of veterinarians, working in Ireland, on the use of OFES for the management of acutely injured cattle and to evaluate the influence of capacity, willingness and opportunity on their ability to operate OFES. Methodology: Two online surveys of veterinarians working in Ireland, Private Veterinary Practitioners (PVPs) and Official Veterinarians (OVs), were conducted through QualtricsXM over a 7-week period between April and June of 2021. Quantitative and qualitative questions were developed and analyzed using the tripartite framework of capacity, willingness, and opportunity to collect relevant data about the management of acutely injured cattle and the provision of OFES in Ireland by veterinarians. Results: 43 OVs and 85 PVPs participated in the survey. OVs regulated on average 4.2 abattoirs, of which 21.6% accepted OFES. Participants reported 343 and 377 OFES and CS, respectively, in 2020. 62.4% PVPs had not certified cattle for OFES, or CS. Limb fracture accounted for 79% OFES, 34.5% CS and 47.9% euthanized acutely injured cattle. 63.3% OVs and 44% PVPs were not aware of abattoirs providing OFES within 100 km of their workplace. Lack of availability of OFES negatively associated with PVP knowledge of the procedure. Regulations and guidelines were the most common source of information on OFES for PVPs. Conclusion: Increasing the availability of OFES may help to improve the management of acutely injured cattle, especially those with limb fractures that are unfit for transport.

On Farm Emergency Slaughter and Emergency Killing of Acutely Injured Cattle: Analysis of Guidelines From Five Jurisdictions.

BACKGROUND: In July 2009, the Farm Animal Welfare Advisory Council (FAWAC) in the Republic of Ireland published Animal Welfare Guidelines for the Management of Acutely Injured Animals on Farm in support of a new Irish regulation designed to permit on-farm emergency slaughter (OFES) of cattle. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the FAWAC guidelines, to determine if they remain fit for purpose by comparing them with five guidelines on the management of acutely injured cattle from four jurisdictions purposively selected because of their relevance to OFES, and to represent geographical and organisational diversity; The United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and British Columbia/Canada. METHODOLOGY: Content and Thematic Analysis were used to compare the incidence and frequency of themes in the six guidelines using NVIVO 12. RESULTS: Humane killing and slaughter of animals and the prevention of unnecessary suffering at time of killing were emphasised in all guidelines. Thematic Analysis identified seven primary themes ("parent nodes"): animal welfare; decision tree; certification; legislation; stakeholders; transport and; veterinary ethics. Parent nodes encompassed 26 secondary themes ("child nodes") including casualty slaughter, on-farm emergency slaughter, euthanasia, unnecessary suffering, animal owner, private veterinary practitioner, official veterinarian and fitness for transport. Guidelines outlined stakeholders' roles in relation to all aspects of managing acutely injured cattle. Results showed similarities between FAWAC, the British Cattle Veterinary Association and the British Columbian/Canadian guidelines in relation to OFES as a method to address acutely injured cattle. OFES is not allowed in Australia or New Zealand as a method of managing acutely injured cattle. CONCLUSIONS: Animal welfare guidelines play a pivotal role in informing all stakeholders involved in the management of acutely injured cattle. Guidelines vary from prescriptive standard operating procedures on actions that should be undertaken for food safety reasons, to descriptive guidance upholding practicalities in relation to equipment and methods to be used in managing acutely injured cattle not meant for human consumption. The FAWAC guidelines remain substantially relevant today and consistent with other welfare guidelines published in the jurisdictions that formed part of the study. However, they need to be reviewed to align with current regulations.

Establishing Animal Welfare Rules of Conduct for the Portuguese Veterinary Profession-Results from a Policy Delphi with Vignettes.

Promoting animal welfare is one of the basic tenets of the veterinary profession and, in doing so, veterinarians are expected to abide to the highest legal and professional standards. However, the Portuguese veterinary code of conduct, established in 1994, largely overlooks animal welfare and fails to address issues such as the euthanasia or humane killing of animals. As part of a wider research aiming to revise the Portuguese veterinary code of conduct, a Policy Delphi study was conducted in late 2018, using a pre-validated three-round structure and vignette methodology, to explore the range of opinions and the level of agreement on end-of-life dilemmas and animal welfare rules of conduct of a purposeful sample of forty-one (out of seventy) Portuguese veterinarians. When faced with ethical vignettes involving end-of-life dilemmas, veterinarians were shown to privilege personal moral agency over legal obligations in order to defend the interests of stakeholders, namely of the animals. Most participants agreed that the suggested animal welfare rules of conduct reflected their own views on the subject (88%), in addition to representing a significant improvement in terms of regulatory standards (93%). We expect that this study will support regulation and policy-making by the Portuguese Veterinary Order and by veterinary representative bodies elsewhere.

Assessment of the Farm Management of Culling Cattle: A Survey of Existing Practices and Suggestions for Drafting of Best Practices.

The aim of this study is to evaluate different aspects regarding culled cattle and to suggest operating procedures for their correct management. Information collected in Piedmont region allowed for an assessment of the number of cattle put down on the farm, a quantification of slaughters performed in urgency and emergency (SUS/SES) and a headcount of those which died during farming. The survey highlighted the limited use of euthanasia or putting down compared to the number of cases of SUS/SES which were approximately ten times higher. If cattle displays severe health problems, such as a multifactorial disease like downer cow, the farmer has to decide rapidly the treatment to avoid cattle distress. A checklist has been developed and a flow chart has been revised to assist farmers and vets to quicken the decision-taking process and to manage the cattle in a more efficient manner. During this study a number of different problems have been stressed out. Particularly, the shortcomings in the training of operators commissioned to manage the animals, the inadequacy of structures used for the sheltering and slaughter of bovines on the farm, and differences in the operating procedures for culled cattle across the territory. From the obtained results, we can conclude that it is necessary to adopt a transversal approach, so that the information regarding these animals (welfare, health status, drug treatments and destination) will be uniform and adequate during all the steps of production, to ensure animal welfare and food safety.