EUWelNet Coordinated European Animal Welfare Network

Transcription

1 EUWelNet Coordinated European Animal Welfare Network Antonio Velarde Spanish National Contact Point IRTA, Animal Welfare Subprogram, Veïnat de Síes, Monells, 17121, Spain Website: 1 Background: 2006 Community Action Plan on the Protection and Welfare of Animals creation of a European Centre or Laboratory for the protection and welfare of animals Support to the Commission and the MS with technical expertise. Conduct training courses. Contribute to dissemination of research findings and technical innovations Coordination of research. 1

2 WP3.1 Pigs WP3.1 Killing 7/17/2015 Background: Call (SANCO 2012/10293) for a pilot project to investigate (and make recommendations) on the feasibility and usefulness of a network of technical resources designed to assist the competent authorities and the stakeholders in improving the implementation of EU legislation on animal welfare through targeted knowledge strategies. 3 Objectives: WP2 Difficulties & Bottlenecks Coordination Team WP1 WP4 Overarching analysis and recommendations WP3 Knowledge strategies 1) Establish and coordinate a network of recognised technical, scientific and educational experts in the field 2)Identify some of the bottlenecks/ difficulties in implementing EU legislation on animal welfare 3)Develop and test knowledge transfer strategies designed to overcome selected bottlenecks 4)Make recommendations on the feasibility and the likely conditions required for an effective European animal welfare network 4 2

3 Legislations: Council Directive 2008/120/EC of 18 December 2008 laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs. Council Directive 2007/43 of 28 June 2007 laying down minimum rules for the protection of chickens kept for meat production. Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 of 24 September 2009 on the protection of animals at the time of killing. 5 Task 3.4 Setting up a technical network of experts to develop and improve standard operation procedures to implement welfare requirements at slaughter (of poultry, pigs, cattle and sheep) Antonio Velarde, Pedro Rodriguez, Joaquim Pallisera (IRTA) Steve Wotton (UoB) Lotta Berg (SLU) Marien Gerritzen, Merel Verhoeven and Hans Spoolder (WUR-LR) Luc Mirabito (Institute d Elevage) Claudia Terlouw (INRA) Xavier Manteca (UAB) 6 3

4 Objectives: 1. Development of a technical network. 2. Identification of the main causes of difficulties in: - Implementation of minimum electrical requirements for effective waterbath stunning in poultry. - Assessing unconsciousness after mechanical stunning in bovines, electrical stunning of ovine and poultry, and gas stunning in pigs. 3. Development of strategies to solve these difficulties with SOPs 4. Assessment of the effectiveness of the SOPs. 5. Evaluation of the role of the technical network in the development of the SOPs Development of the technical network Identification of the national contact points in UK: FAWC Secretariat France: Institute d Elevage/INRA Sweden: SLU The Netherlands: Wageningen UR Livestock Research Spain: IRTA 8 4

5 2. Identification of the main causes of the difficulties in implementation of requirements for waterbath stunning in poultry and the valid and reliable assessment of unconsciousness Questionnaire to Competent Authorities: Bottlenecks Actions Guidelines Revision 9 Main conclusions Waterbath stunning in poultry: Huge variation in stunning parameters. Poor understanding of the variation in current delivered to each bird. Very difficult to assess effective waterbath stunning. One solution to gain greater control is the use of SOPs. 10 5

6 Main conclusions Development of standardized assessment guidelines in response to Regulation 1099/2009 in most of cases. The industry has applied to the CA for collaboration. The CA has revised the guidelines. The industry has consulted to competent authorities the difficulties faced and CA have taken actions to improve the assessment procedure: WBS in poultry in all cases except Sweden. Electrical stunning in sheep in Spain and Sweden. Gas stunning in pigs in Netherlands and Spain Captive bolt stunning in cattle in Spain 11 Subtask Identification of the main causes of the difficulties in implementation of requirements for waterbath stunning in poultry and the valid and reliable assessment of unconsciousness Spot visit to abattoirs: (5 per specie) AWOs: difficulties, criteria, SOPs, scientific support OVs: difficulties Direct assessment of the main difficulties, risk factors. 12 6

7 Slaughterhouses questionnaires SOPs Gas stunned pigs Electrically stunned sheep Unconsciousness SOPs to assess unconsiousness assessment SOP WBS poultry Captive bolt stunned cattle No unconsciousness SOPs to assess unconsiousness assessment SOP 13 Main conclusions of direct observation The assessment of unconsciousness is carried out according to the description of the SOP Animals that recovered consciousness before brain death and are not detected by operators 14 7

8 Main conclusions Risk factors Common: Lack of training of both the operators and the AWO. Slaughterhouse facilities often do not allow a correct assessment of unconsciousness. Cattle: Questionable security for the operator. Clonic activity occurred from hoisting and made assessment of rhythmic breathing difficult in some animals. Pigs: Rhythmic breathing is difficult to assess. 15 Main conclusions Risk factors Sheep: Post-stun convulsions (clonic activity) can mask the presence of rhythmic breathing. Poultry: The high line speed difficult the assessment of unconsciousness. Access to the birds is sometimes very difficult due to slaughterhouses facilities. The criteria used to determine effective electrical stunning is compromised by the application of the stunning current to the whole bird, which can result in paralysis without stunning. 16 8

9 3. Development of strategies and SOP Assessment of the operation of a poultry WBS. Assessment of unconsciousness: In poultry after electrical waterbath stunning. In sheep after electrical stunning. In pigs after gas stunning In cattle after captive bolt stunning Development of strategies and SOP Objective. Responsibility. Procedure. Control measures: By the operator. By the AWO. Corrective actions: By the operator. By the AWO. Records: Operator. AWO. Operator decision tree. AWO decision tree. Focus on management recommendation, not structural 18 9

10 MONITORING PROCEDURES AT SLAUGHTERHOUSES Identification of indicators on loss of consciousness able to detect, with high level of confidence, unsatisfactory stunning / slaughtering practices Specify the criteria for selecting indicators, based on the level of sensitivity and specificity (EFSA Journal 2013;11(12): bovines) (EFSA Journal 2013;11(12): poultry) (EFSA Journal 2013;11(12): pigs) (EFSA Journal 2013;11(12): sheep and goats) 19 Ex. Operation WBS 20 10

11 Ex. Operation WBS 21 SOP cattle stunned with captive bolt OPERATOR(S) DECISION TREE Before being released from the box: - Remain standing or resume standing posture - Righting reflex - Vocalizations Re-stun Record re-stun Revise equipment and stunning procedure None of the indicators of consciousness are present case of doubt Before hoisting: - Righting reflex - Vocalizations - Eye movements Re-stun Record re-stun Revise equipment and stunning procedure None of the indicators of consciousness are present case of doubt 11

12 stunning procedure - Eye movements SOP cattle stunned with captive bolt None of the indicators of consciousness are present case of doubt Before bleeding: - Righting reflex - Vocalizations - Eye movements Re-stun Record re-stun Revise equipment and stunning procedure None of the indicators of consciousness are present case of doubt STICKING During bleeding - Righting reflex - Vocalizations - Eye movements Re-stun Re-stick Record re-stun Revise equipment and stunning procedure case of doubt SOP cattle stunned with captive bolt Before bleeding: ANIMAL WELFARE OFFICER DECISION TREE Just after stunning: - Remain standing or resume standing posture - Righting reflex - Vocalizations - Corneal reflex None of the indicators of consciousness are present Before hoisting: - Righting reflex - Vocalizations - Corneal reflex - Nose pinching response None of the indicators of consciousness are present Ask the operator to re-stun case of doubt Ask the operator to re-stun - Check stunning procedures and equipment (short-term -Retrain operator in the application of the SOP -Internal audit (longterm - Check stunning procedures and equipment (short-term -Retrain operator in the application of the SOP -Internal audit (longterm case of doubt - Check stunning procedures and equipment (short- 12

13 - Corneal reflex - Nose pinching response None of the indicators of consciousness are present Before bleeding: - Righting reflex - Vocalizations - Corneal reflex - Nose pinching response None of the indicators of consciousness are present During bleeding: - Righting reflex - Vocalizations - Corneal reflex - Nose pinching response re-stun SOP SOP cattle stunned with captive bolt -Internal audit (longterm case of doubt - Check stunning procedures and equipment (shortterm Ask the -Retrain operator in operator to the application of re-stun the SOP -Internal audit (long-term case of doubt Ask the operator to restun and to restick - Check stunning procedures and equipment (shortterm -Retrain operator in the application of the SOP -Internal audit (long-term case of doubt 4. Assessing the effectiveness of the SOPs in the pilot study 25 slaughterhouses FBOs, AWOs and OVs 1 st visit: Presentation of the SOP 2 nd visit (after 2 months): Assessment of implementation and effectiveness Interview Direct evaluation of the monitoring procedure 26 13

14 4. Assessing the effectiveness of the SOPs in the pilot study Level of implementation: 5 slgthouses: To complement their own protocols 4 slgthouses: To improve their own SOPs. 6 slgthouses: Adapted the SOPs to their own procedures and facilities 5 slgthouses: Without apparent interest to adopt the SOPs 4 slgthouses: Lack of time, but with interest to implement the SOPs in the near future Evaluation of the role of the technical network in the development of the SOPs 2 nd technical meeting to assess the effectiveness of the technical network in identifying and implementing knowledge based strategies to overcome the difficulties. Identification of experts from other EU countries for possible inclusion in a future network designed to further progress the work on welfare at slaughter

15 29 5. Evaluation of the role of the technical network in the development of the SOPs Identification of experts from other EU countries for possible inclusion in a future network designed to further progress the work on welfare at slaughter. Identification of experts in AW at slaughter in EU countries

16 Deliverables Report on the main causes of difficulties in implementation of requirements for waterbath stunning in poultry and the valid and reliable assessment of unconsciousness in all species. SPOs for the WBS of poultry and the valid and reliable assessment of unconsciousness after mechanical stunning in bovines, electrical stunning in ovines, water bath electrical stunning in poultry, and gas stunning in pigs. Report on the effectiveness of the SOPs developed here and of the role and efficiency of the pilot technical network of experts. List of candidate groups and/or individuals in each EU country for possible inclusion in a future technical network on welfare at slaughter). 31 Thank you for your attention Antonio.Velarde@irta.es Website: 16