CAPITULO III Fin de siglo Fin de siglo
CONTROL DEL AUSENTISMO LABORAL
Of the 1800 consignments recorded on the certificates provided, there were 52,837 horses transported in total from the USA to Canada. Quarter horses accounted for 74%, thoroughbreds 6%, draught horses 5%, ponies <1% and miscellaneous category
accounted for 15% of the total horses. The miscellaneous category mostly comprised of standard bred horses. Fifty-nine percent of the horses transported were mares and 40%
were geldings. Only 1% of the horses were stallions.
The median number of horses in each consignment was 29 (range of 13 to 41 horses).
Some owners entered detailed comments regarding fitness of the horses in the shipper certificate, such as blind in one eye or lame in one leg. However, the terms used by the owner/shipper to denote health issues were vague (e.g. dead left eye), which might have been used to describe a blind left eye. These comments were available in only a few forms and hence they were not summarized. In total, there were only two forms with identifiable CFIA official comments regarding dead-on-arrival horses along with some other comments regarding health issues. One of the dead-on-arrival recordings was to St.
André Avellin slaughter plant, for which the journey duration details were blanked out. In the only other shipper certificate form which indicated a dead-on-arrival case, all details regarding source of journey, destination and journey duration were blocked.
2.4. DISCUSSION
This study provided information on journey characteristics and animal characteristics of horses transported for slaughter in 2009 from the USA to Canada. The data obtained from the USDA by FOAIQ request, accounted for about 84% of the total horses
115
transported for slaughter from the USA to Canada (52,837out of 62, 700) in 2009 (as reported by Equine Welfare Alliance). This demonstrates that the sample population included in this study accounted for most of the horses transported that year. However, the reliability of the data on some aspects, particularly the journey duration and origin of journey was less reliable as it was influenced by the USDA-blocked data for privacy issues and other factors such as incomplete information. While generalizing the results of this study, it is essential to realise that, as of today, the number of federally approved slaughter plants for horse slaughter has been reduced to four because of the closure of the Saskatchewan and Ontario slaughter plants. Further, shipper certificates do not capture horses that are transported from the USA to Canadian feedlots and may be slaughtered after a period of time.
The declared journey duration data obtained from the shipper certificates indicated that there was a significant percentage (14%) of horses that may have exceeded the 36 hour journey duration limit set by the Health of Animals Regulations (Canada
Department of Justice, 2012). There have been recorded instances in which CFIA officials had imposed monetary penalties on shippers who violated this limit. For example, in 2008 there was a case between “A60351 1301479 Ontario Inc. v. Canadian Food Inspection Agency” (obtained by RTA #60351) where the drivers who transported 27 horses from Brownton, Minnesota, to Viande Richelieu Meat Inc., in Massueville, Québec, which took 47 hours, were penalised 2000 Canadian dollars. Journey duration estimates from this study indicate that journey duration could be a potential welfare issue in horses transported from the USA to Canada for slaughter. Previous studies by Stull (1999) and Friend (2000) have identified journey duration as a potential welfare issue in
116
horses intended for slaughter. These studies indicated that there was an increased risk of injury, dehydration and fatigue with increased journey duration. Chapter 6 also deals with the issue of journey duration and their associations with specific welfare problems. A critical aspect which needs to be considered while dealing with journey duration in slaughter horses is that the shipper certificate data and Chapter 6 data both capture only the last leg of the journey. In most cases a horse would have undergone transportation in order to reach the auction market, feed lots or horse collection centres mentioned in the shipper certificate.
Interpretation of the journey duration data in this study needs to be cautious as data pertaining to journey duration could be obtained from only 21% of the shipper
certificates. In most certificates; this information was blocked for privacy reasons. Even from certificates where information regarding journey duration was available, it was difficult to determine accurate journey duration due to two issues. First, for the end-of-journey time and date, it was difficult to know whether the recordings made by the CFIA official were performed immediately after unloading of horses from the truck or during ante-mortem examinations (there could be a time lapse between the end of journey and ante-mortem inspection). Second, some consignments could have been unloaded during transit e.g. at the Michigan border (a major transit point for livestock between the USA and Canada). It was difficult to determine from the shipper certificate, if there were any rest periods during the journey.
Horses transported for slaughter from the USA to Canada have to comply with the USA federal regulation as stated in “Commercial Transportation of Equines to Slaughter”
117
(GPO Federal register, 2011) and also the Canadian “Health of Animals Regulations”
pertaining to journey duration. There are two aspects of the Canadian “Health of Animals Regulation” which deals with journey duration, and with which transporters need to comply. Article 148 deals with “Food and Water for Animals in Transit” and Article 138 deals with “Sick, Pregnant and Unfit Animals”. More specifically
Article 148 (1) (a) states that:
“No person shall confine in a railway car, motor vehicle, aircraft or vessel; equines, swine or other monogastric animals for longer than 36 hours without feed and water during transit”.
Article 138(1) (b) states that
“No person shall load or cause to be loaded on any railway car, motor vehicle, aircraft or vessel and no one shall transport animals that has not been fed and watered within five hours before being loaded, if the expected duration of the animal‟s
confinement is longer than 24 hours from the time of loading”
Regarding article 138 (1) (b) the owner or transporter who is shipping has to declare that the horses have had access to food, water and rest for a minimum of 5 consecutive hours immediately before loading into the conveyance. Both these Canadian regulations are complimented by the “Commercial Transportation of Equines to Slaughter” of the USA regulation which require that “the equines have access to food, water and the opportunity to rest for at least 6 hours prior to transit and following 28 consecutive hours or more of transit” (GPO Federal Register, 2011).
118
Comparing the journey duration recorded on the owner/shipper certificates and journey duration as estimated by Google Maps provides insight on two salient aspects.
1. When the distances were shorter (e.g. from the Pennsylvania to the Québec slaughter plant), the declared journey duration was shorter than Google Maps estimated journey duration indicating that the journey was completed faster than the default travel speed settings in the Google estimation.
2. Contrary to the short distances, when distances were longer, then the declared journey durations were much longer than the Google Maps estimation. This could be either due to a rest taken during transit, delay at the border or CFIA officials not recording the actual arrival time of the consignment at the slaughter plant. It is possible that the CFIA officials at the slaughter plant recorded the unloading time much later than when the consignment reached the slaughter plant (perhaps during ante mortem examination).
The owner/shipper certificate records obtained from the USDA provided very limited information on the origin of transport when compared to the destination details, which was always one of the six slaughter plants. This was partly due to the owner or shipper providing incomplete information regarding origin of journey in the shipper‟s certificate and also due to the USDA privacy rules. In many shipper certificate forms, the origin of journey was blocked due to privacy issues. Incomplete information on shipper certificates had been reported in an earlier review by the USA Congress in 2007 (United States Government Accountability Office, 2010). Table 2.3 illustrated the different states of the USA from which horses originated, obtained from available data. As information
regarding the precise origin of journey (auction market, feedlot or horse collection centre)
119
is not known, the states from which the consignment originated was given importance.
An attempt was made using an internet search to locate the exact origin of each journey which are tabulated in Table 2.3 and 2.5. From each of these places of origin (states), many companies could have been involved in procurement and collection of horses for slaughter to put together a consignment. These procurement or collecting companies could be a horse collection centre, an auction market or a feed lot.
A majority of the consignments originated from the following three states of the USA; Montana, Ohio, and Iowa, which accounted for >50% of the shipments (Table 2.3).
Much of the horses (60%) were shipped to the two slaughter plants in the Québec region of Canada, one of which was selected for our detailed study (Chapter 6). Transport occurred throughout the year and hence horses may need protection during extreme winter months and summer months while in-transit in terms of increased ventilation in summer and protection from cold wind drafts in the winter.
The animal characteristics determined from this study point out some interesting statistics. Only one percent of horses intended for slaughter were stallions. This is an important difference when compared to a study of slaughter horses in Europe where up to 15% of horses transported for slaughter were stallions (Marlin et al., 2011). The
percentage of stallions in the consignment could have a big impact on the way these horses are segregated and in turn affect the stocking density of the load. Stallions generally need to be segregated to reduce aggression related injuries.
Assuming that all of the data on dead-on-arrivals during 2009 were included within the information supplied by the USDA, the number of dead-on-arrival horses during
120
2009, was low (2 horses) in comparison to the 2001 to 2006 data presented by the Alberta Equine Welfare Group (Alberta Farm Animal Care, 2008).
In conclusion, this study provided information to understand the journey
characteristics and animal characteristics of slaughter horses from the USA to Canadian slaughter plants. More detailed observations regarding origin of journey, time of
unloading, rest periods if any, and standardized terminologies for the owners to self-declare fitness issues before transport are some of the improvements needed in the owner/shipper certificate forms. It also provided useful information to place the results from subsequent detailed studies of specific journeys to one Canadian slaughter plant (chapter 6) into context.
2.5. REFERENCES
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2009. Red meat market information: Horses slaughtered in federally and provincially inspected establishments. Retrieved January 21, 2013, http://www.agr.gc.ca/redmeat-vianderouge/rpt/09tbl39_eng.htm
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2013. Red meat market information: Annual Horse Meat exports. Retrieved March 21, 2013, http://www.agr.gc.ca/redmeat-vianderouge/rpt/12tbl39_eng.htm
Alberta Farm Animal Care, 2008. A report on horse as food producing animals aimed at addressing horse welfare and improving communication with the livestock industry and public. Alberta Equine Welfare Group. Retrieved January 23, 2013, from
http://www.afac.ab.ca/producers/pdfs/08horsereport.pdf
Canada Department of Justice, 2012. Health of Animals Regulation, C.R.C., c. 296.
Last amended on July 26, 2012. Retrieved January 20, 2013, from http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/C.R.C.,_c._296.pdf
Equine Welfare Alliance, 2013. US horses slaughtered (Yearly 1989-2013). Retrieved March 21, 2013, from
http://equinewelfarealliance.org/uploads/00-Slaughter_Statistics.pdf
121
FAO Statistical database 2009. Livestock Primary; Horse meat. Retrieved December 26, 2012, from http://faostat.fao.org/site/569/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=569#ancor
Friend TH 2000. Dehydration, stress and water consumption of horses during long-distance commercial transport. Journal of Animal Science 78, 2568-2580.
GPO Federal register, 2011. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service:
Commercial Transportation of Equines to Slaughter. Vol. 76, No. 173. Retrieved 20 January, 2013, from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-09-07/pdf/2011-22762.pdf
Marlin D, Kettlewell P, Parkin T, Kennedy M, Broom D and Wood J 2011. Welfare and health of horses transported for slaughter within the European Union Part 1:
Methodology and descriptive data. Equine Veterinary Journal 43, 78-87.
Stull CL1999. Response of horses to trailer design, duration, and floor area during commercial transportation to slaughter. Journal of Animal Science 77, 2925-2933.
Stull CL 2012. The journey to slaughter for North American horses. Animal Frontiers 2, 68-71.
United States Government Accountability Office 2010. Report to Congressional Committees Horse Welfare: Action Needed to Address Unintended Consequences from Cessation of Domestic Slaughter. GAO Reports Retrieved June 5, 2012 from
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11228.pdf.
USDA 2011. Animal Health: Slaughter Horse Transport Program. Retrieved December 30, 2012, from
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/animal_dis_spec/horses/horse_transport.shtml
122