Systematic approach

by Dr. Temple Grandin
Share This:

To improve animal handling and maintain the improvements, a step-by-step, systematic approach is recommended. It will also provide a framework for quality assurance staff and plant employees to monitor improvements that have been implemented. Below are guidelines for implementing a systematic approach.

The first step is to make observations in the part of the facility that is most likely to have problems. The principle of the approach is to: 1) observe; 2) implement an intervention to improve; 3) re-observe to determine if the implementation was effective, and; 4) if it is effective, have a program to maintain it. Below are examples of systematic approaches based on typical problems I have seen in many plants.

1. Observations in the crowd pen – Crowd pen is packed full of cattle.

A. Intervention implemented – Put 12 cattle in the crowd pen instead of 20.

B. Re-observe – Fewer cattle improved cattle movement into the single-file chute.

C. Maintain – Since moving smaller groups of cattle requires more walking, handling must be monitored a minimum of once daily.

2. Observations at chute entrance – Some examples of things that make animals balk and refuse to enter the chute are: dangling chains, jiggling or moving gates, entrance is too dark, seeing people, or guillotine gates that have low back clearance.

A. Interventions implemented – Often more than one intervention needs to be tried. A typical example is the installation of a shield to prevent approaching animals from seeing people and stopping a gate from jiggling.

B. Re-observe – The two interventions reduce balking and improved animal entry.

C. Maintain – Check monthly to insure that the interventions are still in place.

3. Observations at the stun box/restrainer entrance – Some examples of items that cause animals to refuse to enter are: entrance is too dark, seeing people, reflections on shiny metal, slick floors, animal’s back touches and bumps into metal, air blowing in the animal’s face, or a slick entrance ramp on a restrainer.

A. Intervention implemented – Installed a light on the restrainer entrance, raised the hold down so the animal’s back does not touch while entering and replaced cleats on center track restrainer entrance ramp to provide non-slip footing.

B. Re-observe – These three interventions improved animal entry and improved the electric prod use score.

C. Maintain – Inspect weekly for a broken light, hold down rack height and non-slips cleats on the entrance ramps.

4. Observations of stunning – Examples of things that cause poor stunning are: agitated animals, lack of stunner maintenance, damp cartridges, low air pressure on a pneumatic stunner, inexperienced operator, malfunctioning balancer or stunner stand is too high or low.

A. Intervention implemented – Repaired the balancer for the pneumatic stunner and provided a short operator with a raised platform to stand on.

B. Re-observe – Repairing the balancer improved the stunning score, but the platform had no effect and the operator hated it.

C. Maintain – Inspect balancer weekly and removed platform.

In the above scenarios, I could not give every example of possible problems, but I wanted to provide an easy-to-understand example of a systematic approach. This will facilitate applying these concepts in a variety of plants, in a step-by-step systematic manner.

Comment on this Article
We welcome your thoughtful comments. Please comply with our Community rules.

The views expressed in the comments section of Meat and Poultry News do not reflect those of Meat and Poultry News or its parent company, Sosland Publishing Co., Kansas City, Mo. Concern regarding a specific comment may be registered with the Editor by clicking the Report Abuse link.