Language selection

Search

Operational guideline: Humane slaughter guidelines for avian food animals including ratites

On this page

1.0 Purpose

The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) Inspection Staff on humane slaughter of avian food animals including ratites.

This document is intended to be used in conjunction with other guidance documents as referenced in section 3.0 since it is limited to information not included in these documents.

The guidance outlined below should be used when verifying compliance with regulatory requirements related to humane slaughter activities of avian food animals including ratites.

2.0 Authorities

The inspection powers, control actions and enforcement actions authorized by the above legislation are identified and explained in the Food regulatory response guidelines.

3.0 Reference documents

4.0 Definitions

Unless specified below, definitions are located in either the:

Additional technical definitions are located in the Mechanical, electrical, gas stunning, slaughter methods and monitoring signs of unconsciousness or consciousness.

5.0 Acronyms

Acronyms are spelled out the first time they are used in this document and are consolidated in the food business line acronyms list (under development).

6.0 Operational guideline

The legal framework for humane stunning and slaughter of food animals is sections 141, 142, 143(1) and 143(2) of the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (SFCR). Other applicable SFCR regulatory provisions include sections 128, 135(1) and 135(2), which protect all live animals at the establishment from the time of arrival until death.

The information presented in this document is intended to help CFIA staff undertake their inspections and to be used in conjunction with the following documents:

CFIA must understand Industry requirements to be able to verify compliance to SFCR. Additionally, this document provides guidance intended specifically for inspectors to enable them to conduct compliance verification activities and to take enforcement action.

6.1 Compliance verification

6.2 General principles of compliance action applicable to humane slaughter

Please refer to the Food regulatory response guidelines as each situation is unique and different compliance and/or enforcement actions could be taken depending on the context. In the following sub-sections, general examples are given but judgment needs to be applied as well as consultation with the appropriate resources in your Area.

6.2.1 Compliance actions for issues which directly contravene SFCR provisions

6.2.1.1 Compliance actions for zero tolerance issues
6.2.1.2 Compliance actions for deliberate acts of cruelty

6.2.2 Compliance actions for issues which do not directly contravene SFCR provisions

6.3 Guidelines for verifying compliance to humane slaughter regulatory requirements

6.4 Shackling

6.5 Stunning

6.5.1 Testing stunning equipment

Note

There are exceptional circumstances where the use of an equipment to test electrical parameters has already been done but there is still an absolute need to confirm that the stunning is effective and lasting long enough (> 30 seconds) to ensure it induces unconsciousness and is not in fact causing electro-immobilization. In these cases, it is permissible to allow a very small number of stunned birds to bypass the cutting equipment in order to measure the time it takes for return to sensibility after stunner exit if it is under 30 seconds. However, the birds must remain shackled at all times (they are not to be removed from the line) and they must be immediately killed by rapid decapitation as soon as the very first signs of return to sensibility appear. A bird must not be allowed to fully regain sensibility. Each bird must be observed closely from the point of stunner exit until decapitation has been completed. A situation leading to this demonstration could include a case where the slaughter is performed by water-bath stunning and rapid continuous decapitation with CFIA or the licence holder still having concerns about the stunning efficiency and length while other methods have already been used to evaluate it.

6.5.2 Pre-stun shocks

6.5.3 Electric water-bath stunning

6.5.4 Electric grid/plate stunning

6.5.5 Head-only electrical stunning

6.5.6 Controlled Atmosphere Stunning (CAS)

6.5.7 Captive bolt stunning

6.5.8 Ritual slaughter with prior stunning

6.6 Monitoring sensibility, insensibility and return to sensibility

6.7 Corrective actions for improper stun

6.7.1 Understanding what an objective performance criteria of 98% efficiency means

6.8 Bleeding

6.8.1 Automatic neck cutting

6.8.2 Decapitation as an alternative to automatic neck cutting

6.8.3 Application of second shocks to promote rapid bleeding

6.9 Inadequate bleeding

6.9.1 Corrective action for inadequate bleeding

6.10 Uncut birds

6.10.1 Compliance actions for uncut birds

6.11 Quail and other similar small birds (Rock Cornish Hens)

6.12 Waterfowl

6.13 Ratites

7.0 Annex

Annex 1: Clinical signs (indicators) associated with inversion stress and risk of avoidable suffering in birds when inverted while conscious during shackling

Annex 1: Clinical signs (indicators) associated with inversion stress and risk of avoidable suffering in birds when inverted while conscious during shackling

Overview

Signs or indicators of inversion stress when birds are suspended by the legs vertically in an inverted state while conscious as it is done for routine shackling prior to stunning and slaughter, can readily result in cardiopulmonary distress because of the bird's anatomy. Birds lack a diaphragm which results in compression of the heart and lungs by abdominal viscera, resulting in progressive compromised breathing and cardiac activity during inversion, or it begins immediately if the bird is particularly heavy when first shackled.

Unavoidable suffering refers to suffering which occurs after all reasonable measures and decisions to alleviate suffering and minimize additional suffering have been taken. Although there is always a risk of unavoidable suffering for birds during shackling, once clinical signs are observable for indicators of cardiopulmonary distress, then this signals the requirement to implement immediate corrective actionsFootnote 1 to address additional avoidable suffering and to implement preventive measures to address the root cause and prevent recurrence. The risk for suffering of birds during shackling increases with the weight of the bird; therefore, heavy birds (for example turkeys, geese, ducks and breeders from other species such as Gallus) can suffer more from being shackled conscious than chickens. So, the preventive measures may include committing to only receive birds that are smaller in size, pre-stun (with their back-up stunner, such as captive bolt pistols) heavier birds before hanging or breast support conveyor systems. The licence holder must incorporate the preventive measures that will demonstrate how this risk for shackling heavy birds is controlled, what immediate corrective actions will be implemented when signs of suffering are observed, list the signs of suffering and do a root cause analysis to determine why these are happening in order to prevent recurrence in the Preventive Control Plan (PCP) for Animal Welfare.

Additional sources of distress for the bird during shackling can be caused by direct compression pressure on the legs from the shackles used to suspend or stun and slaughter. Shackles can result in considerable pain from compression pressure, depending on the size of the shackle opening, the diameter of the bird's shank and the bird's weight. This will be exacerbated by any pre-existing leg conditions/deformities/injuries, such as fractures, dislocations and large leg wounds.

Clinical signs or indicators of cardiopulmonary distress (Table 1) must be assessed as a whole (while not all the indicators need to be present) and in conjunction with a complete history of production and the transport process as well as ante and post-mortem inspections. The assessment cause may include (but not be limited to) the bird's health (such as pre-existing respiratory diseases during primary production), transport conditions (for example high ambient temperature/humidity causing heat stress, fitness for transport, injuries, etc.) and time in transport prior to shackling and these can influence the onset of clinical signs of cardiopulmonary distress or indicate other causes of observed signs (when these signs are mild). It is helpful to determine whether these signs begin immediately upon shackling or become progressively worse to help differentiate the observed signs of distress from causes other than shackling (such as heat stress). The bird's weight is also a major determinant in the assessment since the heavier the bird is, the greater the risk for respiratory distress and legs injuries and subsequent suffering.

The veterinarians have to exercise their professional judgement on a case by case basis to be able to provide a rationale and observations/findings/results must be documented (notes, videos, pictures) in order to support their actions on individual bird or a group of birds that are showing signs of avoidable suffering.

Table 1
Clinical signs or indicators to assess the bird's risk of cardiopulmonary distress – these must be assessed as a whole (while not all the indicators need to be present) and in conjunction with the history of production and the transport process as well as ante and post-mortem inspections (not an exhaustive list)
Clinical signs or indicators Assessment of avoidable suffering Actions

Marked respiratory efforts Table Note a by bird with wide open mouth, beak and tongue movements -dyspnea

Possible presence of cyanosis of the mucous membranes or tongue

Possible presence of copious amount of mucus discharges from mouth or nares

Limp neck, absence of muscle tone

Closed eyes

Risk is very high, that bird is in final stages of cardiopulmonary distress from visceral compression

May appear to be moribund at this point

Assessment with the history of production, the transport process and ante-mortem observations, the percentage of birds in group/flock similarly affected, point at which the signs are observable (at hanging or progresses with time) and post-mortem findings can support distress and avoidable suffering

Marked respiratory efforts Table Note a by bird with wide open mouth, beak and tongue movements - dyspnea

Possible presence of cyanosis of the mucous membranes or tongue

Possible presence of moderate amount of mucus discharge from mouth or nares

Extended neck with marked respiratory efforts/neck tone mostly normal

Open eyes but closing more often than normal

Risk is high that the bird is in early stages of cardiopulmonary distress, especially if signs become progressively worse during prolonged shackling time Assessment with the history of production, the transport process and ante-mortem observations, the percentage of birds in group/flock similarly affected, point at which the signs are observable (at hanging or progresses with time) and post-mortem findings can support distress and avoidable suffering

Breathing with mouth open and mild beak and tongue movements

No cyanosis of the mucous membranes or tongue

Possible small amount of discharges (mucus) may be present

Bright, alert demeanour with normal neck tone

Open eyes

Risk is moderate to mild (inversion stress) unless signs become progressively worse during shackling Assessment with the history of production, the transport process and ante-mortem observations, the percentage of birds in group/flock similarly affected, point at which the signs are observable (at hanging or progresses with time) and post-mortem findings cannot support distress and avoidable suffering

Table Notes

Table Note a

Marked respiratory efforts (laboured breathing):

Marked respiratory efforts happen when there is decreased oxygen perfusion to tissues and there are increased respiratory efforts (for example birds do not have a diaphragm so when they hang upside down, the weight of the abdominal viscera puts pressure on the thoracic viscera and birds can die, this is obviously worse the heavier the birds are).

Conditions that result in marked respiratory efforts can lead animals to experience discomfort, fatigue, distress and panic in response to oxygen deficit and can lead to their death.

Marked respiratory efforts are different than panting (Table 2). Animals usually pant to get rid of body heat (via evaporation of water from the respiratory tract) and in some cases as the result of stress and anxiety.

Return to table note a  referrer

Table 2
Marked respiratory efforts Panting
  • animals struggle to draw air into their lungs and/or force air out of their lungs (in other words, they exhibit increased inspiratory or expiratory efforts)
  • accompanied by open mouth, beak and tongue movements
  • often accompanied by audible breath sounds which may be moist, rasping or wheezes and discharge (mucus)
  • faster inhalations and exhalations, open beak breathing but without significant additional respiratory efforts
  • louder than usual inhalations
  • associated with thermoregulation or stress and anxiety

References:

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), 2004. Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare on a request from the Commission related to welfare aspects of the main systems of stunning and killing the main commercial species of animals EFSA Journal 45: 1-29

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) AHAW Panel, (EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Animal Welfare), Nielsen SS, Alvarez J, Bicout DJ, Calistri P,[…] Michel V, 2019. Slaughter of animals: poultry. EFSA Journal 17 (11): 5849, 5891 pp.

Farm Animal Welfare Council, 2009. Report on the Welfare of Farmed Animals at Slaughter or Killing. Part 2:White Meat Animals. London, England

Humane slaughter association, Guidance Notes No7, Electrical Waterbath Stunning of Poultry, 2016

Lambooij B & Hindle V, 2018. Electrical stunning of poultry. In: Mench JA (ed.), Advances in Poultry Welfare. Duxford: Woodhead Publishing. pp. 77-98

Literature Review on shackling of poultry (CFIA internal document), Animal Health Risk Assessment, Science Branch, CFIA

The Terrestrial Animal Health Code - World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH) Chapter 7.5, 2021: https://www.woah.org/en/what-we-do/standards/codes-and-manuals/terrestrial-code-online-access/?id=169&L=1&htmfile=chapitre_aw_slaughter.htm

Date modified: