Slaughterhouse
This article needs additional citations for verification. (May 2014) |
In livestock agriculture and the meat industry, a slaughterhouse, also called an abattoir (/ˈæbətwɑːr/ ⓘ), is a facility where livestock animals are slaughtered to provide food. Slaughterhouses supply meat, which then becomes the responsibility of a meat-packing facility.
Slaughterhouses that produce meat that is not intended for human consumption are sometimes referred to as knacker's yards or knackeries. This is where animals are slaughtered that are not fit for human consumption or that can no longer work on a farm, such as retired work horses.
Slaughtering animals on a large scale poses significant issues in terms of logistics, animal welfare, and the environment, and the process must meet public health requirements. Due to public aversion in different cultures, determining where to build slaughterhouses is also a matter of some consideration.
Frequently, animal rights groups raise concerns about the methods of transport to and from slaughterhouses, preparation prior to slaughter, animal herding, stunning methods, and the killing itself.[1]
History
Until modern times, the slaughter of animals generally took place in a haphazard and unregulated manner in diverse places. Early maps of London show numerous
Reform movement
The slaughterhouse emerged as a coherent institution in the 19th century.
As a result of this tension, meat markets within the city were closed and abattoirs built outside city limits. An early framework for the establishment of public slaughterhouses was put in place in Paris in 1810, under the reign of the
As the meat requirements of the growing number of residents in London steadily expanded, the meat markets both within the city and beyond attracted increasing levels of public disapproval. Meat had been traded at Smithfield Market as early as the 10th century. By 1726, it was regarded as "without question, the greatest in the world", by Daniel Defoe.[6] By the middle of the 19th century, in the course of a single year 220,000 head of cattle and 1,500,000 sheep would be "violently forced into an area of five acres, in the very heart of London, through its narrowest and most crowded thoroughfares".[7]
By the early 19th century, pamphlets were being circulated arguing in favor of the removal of the livestock market and its relocation outside of the city due to the extremely low hygienic conditions[8] as well as the brutal treatment of the cattle.[9] In 1843, the Farmer's Magazine published a petition signed by bankers, salesmen, aldermen, butchers and local residents against the expansion of the livestock market.[7] The Town Police Clauses Act 1847 created a licensing and registration system, though few slaughter houses were closed.[10]
An
A
At the same time, the first large and centralized slaughterhouse in Paris was constructed in 1867 under the orders of Napoleon III at the Parc de la Villette and heavily influenced the subsequent development of the institution throughout Europe.
Regulation and expansion
These slaughterhouses were regulated by law to ensure good standards of hygiene, the prevention of the spread of disease and the minimization of needless animal cruelty. The slaughterhouse had to be equipped with a specialized water supply system to effectively clean the operating area of blood and offal. Veterinary scientists, notably
Attempts were also made throughout the British Empire to reform the practice of slaughter itself, as the methods used came under increasing criticism for causing undue pain to the animals. The eminent physician,
The invention of
The Edinburgh abattoir, which was built in 1910, had well lit laboratories, hot and cold water, gas, microscopes and equipment for cultivating organisms. The English 1924 Public Health (Meat) Regulations required notification of slaughter to enable inspection of carcasses and enabled inspected carcasses to be marked.[18]
The development of slaughterhouses was linked with industrial expansion of by-products. By 1932 the British by-product industry was worth about £97 million a year, employing 310,000 people. The Aberdeen slaughterhouse sent hooves to Lancashire to make glue, intestines to Glasgow for sausages and hides to the Midland tanneries. In January 1940 the British government took over the 16,000 slaughterhouses and by 1942 there were only 779.[19]
Design
In the latter part of the 20th century, the layout and design of most U.S. slaughterhouses was influenced by the work of
Mobile design
Beginning in 2008 the Local Infrastructure for Local Agriculture, a non-profit committed to revitalizing opportunities for "small farmers and strengthening the connection between local supply and demand",
International variations
The standards and regulations governing slaughterhouses vary considerably around the world. In many countries the slaughter of animals is regulated by custom and tradition rather than by law. In the non-Western world, including the
In some communities animal slaughter and permitted species may be controlled by
In some societies, traditional cultural and religious aversion to slaughter led to prejudice against the people involved. In Japan, where the ban on slaughter of livestock for food[specify] was lifted in the late 19th century, the newly found slaughter industry drew workers primarily from villages of burakumin, who traditionally worked in occupations relating to death (such as executioners and undertakers). In some parts of western Japan, prejudice faced by current and former residents of such areas (burakumin "hamlet people") is still a sensitive issue. Because of this, even the Japanese word for "slaughter" (屠殺 tosatsu) is deemed politically incorrect by some pressure groups as its inclusion of the kanji for "kill" (殺) supposedly portrays those who practise it in a negative manner.
Some countries have laws that exclude specific animal species or grades of animal from being slaughtered for human consumption, especially those that are
Freezing works
Refrigeration technology allowed meat from the slaughterhouse to be preserved for longer periods. This led to the concept as the slaughterhouse as a freezing works. Prior to this, canning was an option.[28] Freezing works are common in New Zealand, Australia and South Africa. In countries where meat is exported for a substantial profit the freezing works were built near docks, or near transport infrastructure.[29]
Mobile poultry processing units (MPPUs) follow the same principles, but typically require only one trailer and, in much of the United States, may legally operate under USDA exemptions not available to red meat processors.[30] Several MPPUs have been in operation since before 2010, under various models of operation and ownership.[31]
Law
This section has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
|
Most countries have laws in regard to the treatment of animals in slaughterhouses. In the United States, there is the Humane Slaughter Act of 1958, a law requiring that all swine, sheep, cattle, and horses be stunned unconscious with application of a stunning device by a trained person before being hoisted up on the line. There is some debate over the enforcement of this act. This act, like those in many countries, exempts slaughter in accordance to religious law, such as kosher shechita[citation needed] and dhabiha halal.[citation needed] Most strict interpretations of kashrut require that the animal be fully sensible when its carotid artery is cut.[citation needed]
The novel
Animal welfare concerns
In 1997, Gail Eisnitz, chief investigator for the Humane Farming Association (HFA),[32] released the book Slaughterhouse. Within, she unveils the interviews of slaughterhouse workers in the U.S. who say that, because of the speed with which they are required to work, animals are routinely skinned while apparently alive and still blinking, kicking and shrieking. Eisnitz argues that this is not only cruel to the animals but also dangerous for the human workers, as cows weighing several thousands of pounds thrashing around in pain are likely to kick out and debilitate anyone working near them.[33]
This would imply that certain slaughterhouses throughout the country are not following the guidelines and regulations spelled out by the Humane Slaughter Act, requiring all animals to be put down and thus insusceptible to pain by some form, typically electronarcosis, before undergoing any form of violent action.
According to the HFA, Eiznitz interviewed slaughterhouse workers representing over two million hours of experience, who, without exception, told her that they have beaten, strangled, boiled and dismembered animals alive or have failed to report those who do. The workers described the effects the violence has had on their personal lives, with several admitting to being physically abusive or taking to alcohol and other drugs.[34]
The HFA alleges that workers are required to kill up to 1,100 hogs an hour and end up taking their frustration out on the animals.[34] Eisnitz interviewed one worker, who had worked in ten slaughterhouses, about pig production. He told her:
Hogs get stressed out pretty easy. If you prod them too much, they have heart attacks. If you get a hog in the chute that's had the shit prodded out of him and has a heart attack or refuses to move, you take a
hipbone. Then you drag him backwards. You're dragging these hogs alive, and a lot of times the meat hook rips out of the bunghole. I've seen hams – thighs – completely ripped open. I've also seen intestines come out. If the hog collapses near the front of the chute, you shove the meat hook into his cheek and drag him forward.[35]
Worker exploitation concerns
American slaughterhouse workers are three times more likely to suffer serious injury than the average American worker.
The worst thing, worse than the physical danger, is the emotional toll. If you work in the stick pit [where hogs are killed] for any period of time – that lets you kill things but doesn't let you care. You may look a hog in the eye that's walking around in the blood pit with you and think, "God, that really isn't a bad looking animal." You may want to pet it. Pigs down on the kill floor have come up to nuzzle me like a puppy. Two minutes later I had to kill them – beat them to death with a pipe. I can't care.
— Gail A. Eisnitz, [44]
Working at slaughterhouses often leads to a high amount of psychological trauma.[45][46] A 2016 study in Organization indicates, "Regression analyses of data from 10,605 Danish workers across 44 occupations suggest that slaughterhouse workers consistently experience lower physical and psychological well-being along with increased incidences of negative coping behavior."[47] A 2009 study by criminologist Amy Fitzgerald indicates, "slaughterhouse employment increases total arrest rates, arrests for violent crimes, arrests for rape, and arrests for other sex offenses in comparison with other industries."[48] As authors from the PTSD Journal explain, "These employees are hired to kill animals, such as pigs and cows that are largely gentle creatures. Carrying out this action requires workers to disconnect from what they are doing and from the creature standing before them. This emotional dissonance can lead to consequences such as domestic violence, social withdrawal, anxiety, drug and alcohol abuse, and PTSD."[49]
Starting in the 1980s,
See also
- Animal–industrial complex
- Continuous inspection
- Controlled-atmosphere killing(CAK)
- Cultured meat
- Dog meat
- Mad cow crisis
- Meat cutter
- Meat processing
- Pig slaughter
- Pig scalder
- Weasand clip
References
- S2CID 32683750.
- ISBN 978-0-226-69710-9.
- ^ a b "A Social History of the Slaughterhouse" (PDF). Human Ecology Review.
- JSTOR 24707515.
- ISBN 978-1584656982.
- ISBN 978-0-300-04980-0.
- ^ a b The Farmer's Magazine. London: Rogerson and Tuxford, 1849. 1849. p. 142.
- Dodd, George (1856). The Food of London: A Sketch of the Chief Varieties, Sources of Supply, Probable Quantities, Modes of Arrival, Processes of Manufacture, Suspected Adulteration, and Machinery of Distribution, of the Food for a Community of Two Millions and a Half. Longman, Brown, Green and Longmans. p. 228.
- ISBN 978-1-86189-014-6.
- ISBN 978-0-226-69710-9.
- ^ Thornbury, Walter (1878). "The Metropolitan Meat-Market". Old and New London: Volume 2. pp. 491–96. Retrieved 1 February 2008.
- ^ Snowhill Archived 2013-06-05 at the Wayback Machine (London Railways) accessed 13 April 2009
- ^ Chris Otter (2006). "The vital city: public analysis, dairies and slaughterhouses in nineteenth-century" (PDF). Cultural Geographies.
- ISBN 978-0-226-69710-9.
- S2CID 142813253.
- ISBN 978-0-226-69710-9.
- ^ This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Power, D'Arcy (1901). "Richardson, Benjamin Ward". In Lee, Sidney (ed.). Dictionary of National Biography (1st supplement). London: Smith, Elder & Co.
- ISBN 978-0-226-69710-9.
- ISBN 978-0-226-69710-9.
- ^ "Best practices for Cattle and Pig handling and stunning". www.grandin.com.
- ^ Grandin, T. and Deesing, M. "Humane Livestock Handling" 2008. Storey Publishing, North Adams, MA, US.
- ^ Grandin, Temple (September 2011). "Directions for laying out curved cattle handling facilities for ranches, feedlots, and properties". Dr. Temple Grandin's Web Page. Dr. Temple Grandin. Retrieved 10 December 2012.
Round crowd pens and curved single file chutes work better than straight ones, but they must be laid out correctly. A curved chute works more efficiently than a straight one because it prevents cattle from seeing people and other activities at the end of the chute." "A round crowd pen will work better than a straight crowd pen because, as cattle go around a 180° turn, they think they are going back to where they came from
- ^ Grandin, Temple (July 2011). "Sample Designs of Cattle Races and Corrals". Dr. Temple Grandin's Web Page. Dr. Temple Grandin. Retrieved 10 December 2012. Why does a curved chute and round crowd pen work better than a straight one? As the animals go around the curve, they think they are going back to where they came from. The animals can not see people and other moving objects at the end of the chute. It takes advantage of the natural circling behaviour of cattle and sheep.
- PMID 8478279. Retrieved 10 December 2012. Some of the design principles that are taught are the use of solid sides on chutes and crowd pens to prevent animals from seeing out with their wide-angle vision and layout of curved chutes and round crowd pens. Some people believe the animals can smell or hear death, however, and these may be area that need improvement, such as the use of scent masking agents or acoustical barriers. As well, some animals in some situations may grow to learn that after their fellows are corralled in that area, their fellows never return. An improvement could be made by detouring off some of the animals so that they return to the pack (after the odors and sounds are masked so they will return untraumatized). A circular crowd pen and a curved chute reduced the time spent moving cattle by up to 50% (Vowles and Hollier, 1982 [Vowles, W. J., and T. J. Hollier. 1982. The influence of yard design on the movement of animals. Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. 14:597]).
- ^ Grandin, Temple (July 2010). "Improving the Movement of Cattle, Pigs, and Sheep during handling on farms, ranches, and slaughter plants". Dr Temple Grandin. Retrieved 10 December 2012. Cattle will move more easily through a curved race. Solid sides which prevent the cattle from seeing people and other distractions outside the fence should be installed on the chutes (races) and the crowd pen which leads up to the single file chute. The use of solid sides is especially important in slaughter plants, truck loading ramps, and other places where there is much activity outside the fence. Solid sides are essential in slaughter plants to block the animal's view of people and equipment. A curved chute (race) with solid sides at a ranch facility. It works better than a straight chute because cattle think they are going back to where they came from. The outer fence is solid to prevent the cattle from seeing distractions outside the fence... The facility must be located in a pasture that has no nearby equipment, moving vehicles or extra people, or put inside a building that has solid side walls. In many facilities, adding solid fences will improve animal movement... Solid sides in these areas help prevent cattle from becoming agitated when they see activity outside the fence – such as people. Cattle tend to be calmer in a chute with solid sides. Cattle move more easily through the curved race system because they can not see people and other distractions ahead.
- ^ a b Muhlke, Christine (20 May 2010). "A Movable Beast". The New York Times. Retrieved 8 January 2019 – via NYTimes.com.
- ^ "The Opinions of the Ulema on the Permissibility of Stunning Animals". Egyptian Fatwaa Committee. 18 December 1978. Archived from the original on 2 December 2012.
- ^ "The 19th Century Heritage: the meat industry". www.techhistory.co.nz. Retrieved 8 January 2019.
- ^ Taonga, New Zealand Ministry for Culture and Heritage Te Manatu. "7. Agricultural processing industries – Te Ara Encyclopedia of New Zealand". teara.govt.nz. Retrieved 8 January 2019.
- ^ "Building an On-Farm Poultry Processing Facility". www.sare.org. Retrieved 6 June 2020.
- ^ "Mobile Poultry Processing Units: Reports From the Field". www.www.nichemeatprocessing.org. Retrieved 6 June 2020.
- ^ "HFA – The Humane Farming Association". www.hfa.org. Retrieved 8 January 2019.
- ^ Eisnitz, Gail A. Slaughterhouse. Prometheus Books, 1997, cited in Torres, Bob. Making a Killing. AK Press, 2007, p. 46.
- ^ a b "HFA Exposé Uncovers Federal Crimes" Archived 2009-05-19 at the Wayback Machine, Humane Farming Association. Retrieved March 8, 2008.
- ^ Eisnitz, p. 82, cites in Torres, Bob. Making a Killing. AK Press, 2007, p. 47.
- PMID 32380765.
- ^ "Meatpacking". Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
- ^ Lowe, Peggy (11 August 2016). "Working 'The Chain,' Slaughterhouse Workers Face Lifelong Injuries". National Public Radio. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
- ^ "Two amputations a week: the cost of working in a US meat plant". The Guardian. 5 July 2018. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
- ^ Lewis, Cora (18 February 2018). "America's Largest Meat Producer Averages One Amputation Per Month". Buzzfeed News. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
- ^ "Revealed: Shocking safety record of UK meat plants". The Bureau of Investigative Journalism. 29 July 2018. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
- PMID 30046554.
- PMID 15150395.
- ^ Eisnitz, Gail A. (1997). Slaughterhouse: : The Shocking Story of Greed, Neglect, And Inhumane Treatment Inside the U.S. Meat Industry. Prometheus Books.
- ^ Lebwohl, Michael (25 January 2016). "A Call to Action: Psychological Harm in Slaughterhouse Workers". The Yale Global Health Review. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
- ^ Nagesh, Ashitha (31 December 2017). "The harrowing psychological toll of slaughterhouse work". Metro. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
- S2CID 148368906.
- S2CID 148368906.
- ^ "The Psychological Damage of Slaughterhouse Work". PTSDJournal. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
- ISBN 978-0739136980.
- ^ Waldman, Peter (29 December 2017). "America's Worst Graveyard Shift Is Grinding Up Workers". Bloomberg Businessweek. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
- ^ Grabell, Michael (1 May 2017). "Exploitation and Abuse at the Chicken Plant". The New Yorker. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
- ^ Varia, Nisha (11 December 2010). "Rights on the Line". Human Rights Watch. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
- ^ Grabell, Michael (23 May 2018). "Live on the Live". Oxfam America. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
External links
- Quotations related to Slaughterhouse at Wikiquote
- Slaughterhouse designer Temple Grandin's official site detailing her design principles, as well as many of the regulations affecting slaughter in the United States.
- Surveys of Stunning and Handling in Slaughter Plants – Grandin's listing of various surveys, 1996–2011, US, Canada and Australia