On Jan. 22, at the Vermont Packinghouse, one of 11 federally licensed slaughterhouses in the state, a a sheep set for slaughter was improperly stunned, which caused the animal to suffer briefly before a second stun was administered.
www.timesargus.com
Video
State, federal inspectors work to assure slaughterhouses are humane Business Vermont | March 03, 2018 By PETER COBB CORRESPONDENT An interior view of the Vermont Packinghouse facility in North Springfield. (Photo courtesy of Vermont Packinghouse) NORTH SPRINGFIELD — On Jan. 22, at the Vermont Packinghouse, one of 11 federally licensed slaughterhouses in the state, a a sheep set for slaughter was improperly stunned, which caused the animal to suffer briefly before a second stun was administered. The United States Department of Agriculture agent, who works on site, suspended slaughter operations and issued a notice of suspension. The next day, convinced that the problem had been resolved, the USDA gave the North Springfield facility the green light to restart slaughter operations. “Although this type of accident is a risk of the trade, it’s one we diligently strive to avoid,” said Arion Thiboumery, managing partner at Vermont Packinghouse. “We have reviewed our practices and we are taking immediate corrective actions to strengthen our process.” The job to assure that all farm animals processed in Vermont for human consumption are treated humanely is divided between the Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Foods and Markets and the USDA’s Food Safety Inspection Service. When monitoring Vermont slaughterhouses, state and federal inspectors follow the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, which requires animals be rendered unconscious and unable to feel pain, using just one stun. “The Agency does not tolerate inhumane handling of animals and it is the expectation that licensed slaughter facilities in Vermont operate in a humane manner in accordance with federal and state laws,” said Katherine McNamara, assistant director for the Food Safety Consumer Protection Division. Agriculture, Foods and Markets licenses federal commercial slaughterhouses, state commercial slaughterhouses and custom slaughterers. Since 2007, the state meat inspection program has closed two slaughterhouses: Bushway’s Packing, of Grand Isle, for failure to handle animals humanely; and Westminster Meats, for failure to meet license conditions. There are 11 federally licensed slaughter plants in Vermont, two state licensed facilities that process livestock, three that handle poultry and two custom slaughterhouses. Meat from Vermont slaughterhouses that falls under the daily, in-plant inspection of the state inspectors can only be sold in state. Vermont slaughterhouses that sell nationally and internationally are under the jurisdiction of FSIS, with federal inspectors providing in-plant daily inspection. The Vermont Packinghouse facility in North Springfield. (Photo courtesy of Vermont Packinghouse) According to Veronika Medina, public affairs specialist from the USDA’s Washington office, the Food Safety Inspection Service assigns inspectors to every federally licensed slaughterhouse. The inspectors observe the daily handling and slaughter of all cattle, sheep, swine, goats or other livestock that the federal service regulates and take corrective action when needed. If food safety inspectors are not present, slaughter operations cannot take place. The Food Safety Inspection Service inspectors conduct carcass-by-carcass inspections to verify that the establishment follows all food safety and humane handling regulations, maintains proper sanitation procedures, follows its Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point plan, and complies with all Food Safety Inspection Service regulations pertaining to slaughter and processing operations. Food Safety inspectors monitor the handling of livestock from the time the animals arrive at the facility through the completion of slaughter. “If the establishment fails to maintain sanitation, does not follow its HACCP plan or violates other regulations including those for humane handling, FSIS will issue a citation to the establishment in the form of a noncompliance record to document the noncompliance,” Medina said. “If the noncompliance is severe enough, FSIS may take additional action, including suspending a slaughter facility’s operation until the noncompliance has been corrected to the satisfaction of FSIS.” In facilities with a track record of repeat violations of a serious nature, the agency may close them permanently, she said. The January suspension at Vermont Packinghouse was the fifth since October 2016. Each event was different, according to Thiboumery, and each time the facility worked with the USDA to fix the problem. “Each animal has a completely different handling and stunning process,” Thiboumery said. “Beef are not pigs, are not sheep. Each is a very different shape and size, and each is stunned using different techniques and equipment. While these events were unfortunate, we must be reasonable and recognize that a perfect process is never possible. Still, we must be vigilant in constantly improving all processes.” Both Mercy for Animals, a California-base animal rights group dedicated to humane treatment of farm animals and which supports a vegan lifestyle, and PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) have concerns about the USDA’s inspection process. “The USDA is failing to adequately enforce the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act,” said Stefanie Wilson, Mercy for Animals staff attorney. In 2015, Mercy for Animals and PETA joined other animal protection groups in submitting a petition to the USDA asking the agency to implement changes to improve enforcement of the act. They sought more uniform enforcement and asked that instances of intentional and egregious cruelty be referred for criminal prosecution. They also sought for escalating enforcement to address chronic and repeat violators. According to Wilson, the USDA has not yet acted on the petition. Dan Paden, director of evidence analysis from PETA, said onsite USDA inspectors, “definitely serve a very important purpose. Their presence does help deter abuse.” The problem with the current system, he said, is the USDA has a dual role, both to protect the animals and to promote the meat industry, which PETA believes is an inherent conflict. PETA also is concerned that the USDA doesn’t have enough in-plant staff and, as a result, the slaughter of many animals goes undetected by the inspectors. In response, Medina said: “USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) makes no exceptions when it comes to the safety of our food supply and protecting the health of American families. Our inspectors take appropriate regulatory actions to ensure that the nation’s commercial supply of meat, poultry and egg products is safe and wholesome.” Vermont Packinghouse, which has operated since 2014, is part of the movement toward locally grown food. “Our service supports the farmers in their livelihood to raise and sell these natural meats locally and regionally, shifting the market away from big factory farms and corporate control of the meat industry,” Thiboumery said. Compared with the large slaughterhouses in the Midwest, Vermont operations are tiny. “We’re the biggest in Vermont,” Thiboumery said, “but that’s like being the tallest kid in kindergarten, it’s still kindergarten.” Vermont Packinghouse processes 15,000 animals a year, compared with 20,000 a day for some of the big operations, he said. According to Medina, most federally regulated slaughterhouses (90 percent) are either small (499 employees or fewer) or very small (10 or fewer). Vermont Packinghouse has about 60 employees.
This is old news, with no new news about them, they must be doing just fine there.
ReplyDeleteJust to be clear this was not directed at the Springfield VT News Blogger, this was someone that revives an old story to keep this local Slaughter house in the news... someone in VT does not like this place, it's very evident.
ReplyDeleteEveryone is up in arms about stunning a sheep however turn a deaf ear when an abortion doctor rips apart a child's body to kill it.
ReplyDeleteOkay, 12:14-- there are a lot of people in springfield who believe that you are suffering from "aborticentrism," a fixation on abortion so great as to prevent you from caring for real human life. As a reality check, answer these questions:
Delete1. How many unwanted pregnancies have you carried to term?
2. How many unwanted children have you adopted?
3. How many hours a year do you serve as an unpaid volunteer:
a. In a public school?
b. As a Big Brother or Big Sister?
c. As a Family Court Guardian ad Litem?
d. As a Springfield Family Center aide?
4. What percentage of your gross annual income do you spend directly on the needs of a child whose parents won't or can't provide adequate care?
5. How many unpaid hours a year do you spend working one-on-one with such a child?
6. It costs about $284,000 to raise a child from birth to age of high school graduate. How much money will you contribute personally to a family not related to you, your church or your social circle to ensure that successful outcome?
If you're curious about the negative side of the so-called "pro-life" movement, I'll be happy to supply more information.
Chuck, you seem to equate caring for human life with a person's ability to pay. That's a pretty shallow assessment. I think 12:14 makes a valid point: it DOES seem that many on the Left care more about animals than humans, or seem to think that animals are somehow equal to us. I was adopted myself; I'm sure glad that abortion was illegal in 1963! I'll make a deal with you; if you stop advocating the killing of unborn children, I'll volunteer at the Springfield Family Center, OK?
DeleteChuck is just trolling. Last year at this time he was trying to be the first Chester resident on Springfield's select board…
Delete