On Farm Evaluation of a Novel Mechanical Cervical Dislocation Device for Poultry

A decade on: where is the UK poultry industry for emergency on-farm killing?

Millions of poultry are farmed intensively every year across the United Kingdom (UK) to produce both meat and eggs. There are inevitable situations that require birds to be emergency killed on farm to alleviate pain and suffering. In Europe and the UK, emergency methods are regulated by the European Council Regulation (EC) No. 1099/2009 and The Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing Regulations (England 2015; Scotland 2012; Wales and Northern Ireland 2014). Cervical dislocation has been reported to be the most widely used method prior to these legislative changes which took place from 1 January 2013. Based on limited scientific evidence and concern for bird welfare, these legislative changes incorporated restrictions based on bird weight for both manual (≤3 kg) and mechanical (≤5 kg) cervical dislocation, and introduced an upper limit in the number of applications for manual cervical dislocation (up to 70 birds per person per day). Furthermore, it removed methods which showed evidence of crushing injury to the neck. However, since legal reform new scientific evidence surrounding the welfare consequences of cervical dislocation and the development of novel methods for killing poultry in small numbers on farm have become available. Whether the UK poultry industry have adopted these novel methods, and whether legislative reform resulted in a change in the use of cervical dislocation in the UK remains unknown. Responses from 215 respondents working across the UK poultry industry were obtained. Despite legal reform, manual cervical dislocation remains the most prevalent method used across the UK for killing poultry on farm (used by 100% of farms) and remains the preferred method amongst respondents (81.9%). The use of alternative methods such as Livetec Nex® and captive bolt guns were available to less than half of individuals and were not frequently employed for broilers and laying hens. Our data suggests there is a lack of a clear alternative to manual cervical dislocation for individuals working with larger species and a lack of gold standard methodology. This risks bird welfare at killing and contributes to inconsistency across the industry. We suggest providing stakeholders with practical alternatives prior to imposing legislative changes and effective knowledge transfer between the scientific community and stakeholders to promote positive change and protect bird welfare.

Assessing animal welfare impact of fourteen control and dispatch methods for house mouse (Mus musculus), Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus) and black rat (Rattus rattus)

Population control of the house mouse (Mus musculus), Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus) and black rat (Rattus rattus) is common practice worldwide. Our objective was to assess the impact on animal welfare of lethal and non-lethal control methods, including three dispatch methods. We used the Sharp and Saunders welfare assessment model with eight experts scoring eleven control methods and three dispatch methods used on the three species. We presumed the methods were performed as prescribed, only taking into account the effect on the target animal (and not, for example, on non-target catches). We did not assess population control efficacy of the methods. Methods considered to induce the least suffering to the target animal were captive-bolt traps, electrocution traps and cervical dislocation, while those with the greatest impact were anticoagulants, cholecalciferol and deprivation. Experts indicated considerable uncertainty regarding their evaluation of certain methods, which emphasises the need for further scientific research. In particular, the impact of hydrogen cyanide, chloralose and aluminium phosphide on animal welfare ought to be investigated. The experts also stressed the need to improve Standard Operating Procedures and to incorporate animal welfare assessments in Integrated Pest Management (IPM). The results of our study can help laypeople, professionals, regulatory agencies and legislators making well-informed decisions as to which methods to use when controlling commensal rodents.

A review of methods used to kill laboratory rodents: issues and opportunities

Rodents are the most widely used species for scientific purposes. A critical pre-requisite of their use, based on utilitarian ethical reasoning, is the provision of a humane death when necessary for scientific or welfare grounds. Focussing on the welfare challenges presented by current methods, we critically evaluate the literature, consider emerging methodologies that may have potential for refinement and highlight knowledge gaps for future research. The evidence supports the conclusion that scientists and laboratory personnel should seek to avoid killing laboratory rodents by exposing them to carbon dioxide (CO₂), unless exploiting its high-throughput advantage. We suggest that stakeholders and policymakers should advocate for the removal of CO₂ from existing guidelines, instead making its use conditionally acceptable with justification for additional rationale for its application. With regards to physical methods such as cervical dislocation, decapitation and concussion, major welfare concerns are based on potential inaccuracy in application and their susceptibility to high failure rates. There is a need for independent quality-controlled training programmes to facilitate optimal success rates and the development of specialist tools to improve outcomes and reliability. Furthermore, we highlight questions surrounding the inconsistent inclusion criteria and acceptability of physical methods in international regulation and/or guidance, demonstrating a lack of cohesion across countries and lack of a comprehensive 'gold standard' methodology. We encourage better review of new data and championing of open access scientific resources to advocate for best practice and enable significant changes to policy and legislation to improve the welfare of laboratory rodents at killing.

Comparing various euthanasia devices and methods on 8 and 12-week-old turkey hens

On-farm euthanasia of poultry is a necessity for minimizing disease spread and removing sick or injured birds to maintain optimum animal welfare. There are numerous methods that are approved for euthanasia of poultry by organizations like the American Veterinary Medical Association; however, all approved methods are not easily carried out on-farm or as effective as one another. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare several captive bolt devices (Turkey Euthanasia Device, Zephyr-EXL, Jarvis Stunner, Experimental Crossbow), mechanical cervical dislocation (Broomstick method [BRM] and Koechner Euthanasia Device [KED]), and manual cervical dislocation (MAN) methods on 8 and 12-week-old turkey hens. Each method was assessed for impact on loss of brain stem reflexes, euthanasia success, and torn skin. The cervical dislocation techniques were also analyzed via radiograph for proper dislocation. Furthermore, each device was assessed for physical parameters. Turkeys (n = 1,400) were euthanized on 20 sampling days, 10 sampling days for each age period. All methods resulted in euthanasia of all turkeys in this study. The captive bolt devices all resulted in immediate loss of nictitating membrane and pupillary reflex at both the ages tested. The cervical dislocation methods differed in both nictitating membrane and pupillary reflex cessation at both ages (P < 0.05). The pattern was the same at both ages with the KED device have longer latencies to cessation of both reflexes when compared to the BRM and MAN methods (P < 0.05). Cessation of movement was also generally longer in dislocation methods compared to captive bolt at both ages. However, captive bolt devices resulted in more lacerations of the skin in general. MAN was also found to result in less damage to the vertebrae and proper location of separation than the mechanical methods of dislocation. All methods resulted in effective euthanasia; however, captive bolt methods resulted in immediate loss of brain stem reflexes indicating that they maybe more humane than cervical dislocation methods.

Animal welfare assessment of on-farm euthanasia methods for individual, heavy turkeys

On-farm euthanasia of poultry, including turkeys, may not be possible for most people as birds gain weight; thus alternative mechanical methods have been developed. Our objective was to compare mechanical cervical dislocation with the Koechner Euthanizing Device (KED), captive bolt euthanasia with the Turkey Euthanasia Device (TED), head-only CO₂ euthanasia (CO₂), and electric euthanasia as potential humane methods for euthanizing individual, heavy turkeys. We assessed their impact on loss of brain stem reflexes, acute distress (corticosterone, CORT), kill success, torn skin, and blood loss. Turkeys (n = 174) were euthanized on 3 sampling days, while birds were restrained using a mobile bird euthanasia apparatus. Brain stem reflexes recorded were the cessation and return of induced nictitating membrane reflex (loss of consciousness and brain stem dysfunction), mouth gaping reflex (brain stem dysfunction), and musculoskeletal movements (spinal cord dysfunction). Overall, KED resulted in more frequent (at 4 min: KED 7 of 14; electric 0 of 13; TED 0 of 11; CO₂ 2 of 14 birds on day 1) and longer durations of the induced nictitating reflex compared to the other methods (means of day 2 and 3: KED 233; electric 15; TED 15; CO₂ 15 s). The mouth gaping reflex endured the longest after KED euthanasia (means of day 2 and 3: KED 197; electric 15; TED 51; CO₂ 15 s). Musculoskeletal movements endured longest after KED euthanasia (means of day 2 and 3: KED 235; electric 15; TED 219; CO₂ 15 s). Returning reflexes were more frequent after KED and TED compared to CO₂ and electric euthanasia, where it was absent. CO₂, electric, and TED euthanasia showed comparable kill success (success: CO₂ 42 out of 43; electric 44 of 45; TED 42 of 44), with KED resulting in most unsuccessful kills (unsuccessful: 8 out of 42). CORT responses were inconsistent. Torn skin and blood loss occurred more frequently after KED and TED compared to CO₂ and electric applications. Therefore, we conclude that, based on a comparison of these 4 methods, the most discernibly humane was electric euthanasia, which consistently resulted in quick loss of consciousness within 15 s, no returning reflexes, and no torn skin or blood loss.

Euthanasia of laying hens: an overview

Euthanasia of an animal requires that its death occurs in as humane a manner as possible. There are three key scenarios for euthanasia in the egg industry: the humane destruction of day-old male chicks, euthanasia of individual birds, and the depopulation of flocks for disease control or because conventional transport and slaughter is uneconomic. For day-old chicks, instant mechanical maceration, although conditionally humane, presents a public perception problem. Submerging in CO2 gas is less confronting but is thought to be aversive to animals unless more expensive and harder to manage inert gases are incorporated. Future technologies involving pre-hatching sex determination or sex selection may largely solve the problem when fully developed. For the euthanasia of individual birds within the flock, manual cervical dislocation has been shown to be humane when performed by trained personnel who are willing to perform the procedure. Penetrating and non-penetrating mechanical devices that cause irreversible brain trauma are becoming more available and represent a humane alternative to cervical dislocation when properly placed and maintained. These devices may be less confronting for some staff to use than is cervical dislocation. For whole-flock euthanasia, the overwhelming requirements of disease control and public safety may override considerations of euthanasia. Whole-shed CO2 (or other gas combinations) and foam-based alternatives can be used, but have challenges in commercial settings. Modified atmosphere killing units or low atmospheric stunning systems are alternatives that overcome some of these practical problems, but do require birds to be handled.

Killing for purposes other than slaughter: poultry

Poultry of different ages may have to be killed on‐farm for purposes other than slaughter (in which slaughtering is defined as being for human consumption) either individually or on a large scale (e.g. because unproductive, for disease control, etc.). The processes of on‐farm killing that were assessed are handling and stunning and/or killing methods (including restraint). The latter were grouped into four categories: electrical methods, modified atmosphere, mechanical methods and lethal injection. In total, 29 hazards were identified and characterised, most of these regard stunning and/or killing. Staff were identified as origin for 26 hazards and 24 hazards were attributed to lack of appropriate skill sets needed to perform tasks or due to fatigue. Specific hazards were identified for day‐old chicks killed via maceration. Corrective and preventive measures were assessed: measures to correct hazards were identified for 13 hazards, and management showed to have a crucial role in prevention. Eight welfare consequences, the birds can be exposed to during on‐farm killing, were identified: not dead, consciousness, heat stress, cold stress, pain, fear, distress and respiratory distress. Welfare consequences and relevant animal‐based measures were described. Outcome tables linking hazards, welfare consequences, animal‐based measures, origins, preventive and corrective measures were developed for each process. Mitigation measures to minimise welfare consequences were also proposed.

Slaughter of animals: poultry

The killing of poultry for human consumption (slaughtering) can take place in a slaughterhouse or during on-farm slaughter. The processes of slaughtering that were assessed, from the arrival of birds in containers until their death, were grouped into three main phases: pre-stunning (including arrival, unloading of containers from the truck, lairage, handling/removing of birds from containers); stunning (including restraint); and bleeding (including bleeding following stunning and bleeding during slaughter without stunning). Stunning methods were grouped into three categories: electrical, controlled modified atmosphere and mechanical. In total, 35 hazards were identified and characterised, most of them related to stunning and bleeding. Staff were identified as the origin of 29 hazards, and 28 hazards were attributed to the lack of appropriate skill sets needed to perform tasks or to fatigue. Corrective and preventive measures were assessed: measures to correct hazards were identified for 11 hazards, with management shown to have a crucial role in prevention. Ten welfare consequences, the birds can be exposed to during slaughter, were identified: consciousness, heat stress, cold stress, prolonged thirst, prolonged hunger, restriction of movements, pain, fear, distress and respiratory distress. Welfare consequences and relevant animal-based measures were described. Outcome tables linking hazards, welfare consequences, animal-based measures, origins, and preventive and corrective measures were developed for each process. Mitigation measures to minimise welfare consequences were also proposed.

Evaluation of Brain Death in Laying Hens During On-Farm Killing by Cervical Dislocation Methods or Pentobarbital Sodium Injection

This study investigated changes in the electroencephalograph (EEG) power spectrum as well as physiological and behavioral responses to on-farm killing via mechanical cervical dislocation (MCD), manual cervical dislocation (CD) or intravenous pentobarbital sodium administration in lightly anesthetized laying hens, to evaluate the welfare impact of each method. A mixed group of 44 white Leghorn and Smoky Joe laying hens (60 weeks-old) were anesthetized with isoflurane in oxygen and maintained at 1.5–2% isoflurane/O₂ until the killing method was applied. Birds were randomly assigned to one of three experimental groups on each trial day. The EEG was recorded bilaterally in a four-electrode montage. After recording a 5-min baseline, the killing method was applied and EEGs and other behavioral and physiological responses, including convulsions, gasping, cessation of body movements and feather erection were recorded for 5 min. Changes in EEG frequency bands (alpha, beta, delta, theta), median frequency (F50), 95% spectral edge frequency (F95), and total power (Ptot) were used to assess the quality of the on-farm killing event. Within 15 s after administration of pentobarbital sodium, there were significant decreases in mean frequency bands, increases in mean F50 and F95, and decreases in Ptot, suggesting brain death. In addition, birds presented a shorter latency to cessation of movement after pentobarbital sodium injection compared to MCD and CD (22 vs. 115 s and 136 s, respectively). There were significant increases in F95 and decreases in Ptot at 120 s after application of CD; and a concomitant decrease in the frequency bands at 135 s and isoelectric EEG at 171 ± 15 s. Changes consistent with brain death after MCD included isoelectric EEG at 207 ± 23 s and a significant decreases in some frequency bands at 300 s post-application. No other significant spectrum frequency changes were observed in the MCD group, suggesting brain death likely occurred near the 5-min endpoint. There was no clear association between behavioral, physiological, and EEG responses within CD and MCD treatments. The data demonstrate that pentobarbital sodium induced a rapid death with minimal behavioral and physiological responses regardless of strain of hens. In comparison, use of CD and MCD resulted in a slow onset of brain death in hens.

Electroencephalographic, physiologic and behavioural responses during cervical dislocation euthanasia in turkeys

Background

There is a critical need to develop appropriate on-farm euthanasia methods for poultry species. Euthanasia methods should affect the brain first causing insensibility, followed by cardiorespiratory arrest. Neck or cervical dislocation methods, either manual (CD) or mechanical (MCD), are reported to cause a prolonged time to loss of sensibility and death with inconsistent results upon application, especially MCD methods. However, there is limited information on cervical dislocation in turkeys. The overall objective of this study was to assess the welfare implications of CD and a newly developed MCD device for euthanasia of cull turkeys in comparison with intravenous (IV) pentobarbital sodium (1 mL/4.5 kg), the gold standard euthanasia method. Time to death using electroencephalographic (EEG) and behavioural responses were monitored in eight and eighteen week-old turkeys for five minutes after each euthanasia method application. Spectral analyses of EEG responses and onset of isoelectric EEGs were compared to baseline EEG recordings of birds under anesthesia and behavioural responses were studied among euthanasia treatments. A significant decrease in brain activity frequencies analysis and isoelectric EEG were recorded as time of brain death.

Results

All turkeys euthanized with IV pentobarbital sodium presented a rapid and irreversible decrease in the EEG activity at approximately 30s post-injection with minimal behavioural responses. CD and MCD methods caused EEG responses consistent with brain death at approximately 120 s and 300 s, respectively. Additionally, isoelectric EEGs resulted in all pentobarbital sodium and CD groups, but only in 54 and 88% of the eight and eighteen week-old turkeys in the MCD groups, respectively. There were few clear patterns of behavioural responses after CD and MCD application. However, cessation of body movement and time to isoelectric EEG after CD application were positively correlated.

Conclusions

Use of CD and MCD resulted in a prolonged time to death in both age groups of turkeys. MCD application presents a number of welfare risks based on electroencephalographic and behavioural findings. Intravenous pentobarbital sodium induced rapid brain death, but possesses several on-farm limitations. To develop improvements in cervical dislocation methods, further investigations into combined or alternative methods are required to reduce the prolonged time to insensibility and death.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12917-019-1885-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Euthanasia: Manual versus Mechanical Cervical Dislocation for Broilers

Simple Summary

Poultry are euthanized for several reasons, most commonly because a bird is sick or injured and unable to eat or drink. Euthanasia can be a challenge to perform, especially when birds are heavy, like broiler chickens (produced for meat). Manual cervical dislocation (CD), or “breaking the neck”, is the most commonly applied method, but can be challenging. Therefore, using a tool (the mechanical method) such as the Koechner Euthanizing Device (KED) could be an alternative. Here, we aimed to compare CD with KED application for their impact on duration of induced reflexes and time to brain death. We assessed loss of brain stem reflexes, which indicate deep unconsciousness and/or brain stem death, and cessation of musculoskeletal movements. We applied both methods (CD and KED) to 200 broilers of 36, 42, or 43 days old on 3 experimental days. On days 2 and 3 an additional method was added, in which the bird’s head was extended at a ~90° angle after the application of the KED (KED+). Our study indicated brain stem death occurred sooner when birds were euthanized with CD compared to KED or KED+; all reflex durations were sustained for longer in the KED and KED+ birds.

Abstract

The aim was to assess the onset of brain stem death for two euthanasia methods—manual cervical dislocation (CD) versus the Koechner Euthanizing Device (KED). Over three days broilers of 36 (n = 60), 42 (n = 80), or 43 days old (n = 60) were euthanized. On days 2 and 3, a treatment was added in which the bird’s head was extended at a ~90° angle after application of the KED (KED+). On those days, gap size was recorded between the skull and atlas vertebra by 1-cm increments. The onset of brain death was assessed by recording the nictitating membrane reflex, gasping reflex and musculoskeletal movements (sec). Additionally, skin damage and blood loss were recorded (y/n). On all days, CD resulted in quicker loss of reflexes and movements compared to KED or KED+. Reflexes returned in 0–15% of CD birds, 50–55% of KED birds, and 40–60% of KED+ birds, possibly regaining consciousness. Skin damage occurred in 0% of CD birds, 68–95% of KED birds, and 85–95% of KED+ birds. On day 2 (p = 0.065) and 3 (p = 0.008), KED birds had or tended to have a narrower skull-to-atlas gap compared to CD and KED+ birds. Based on our results, CD would be the recommended method for broilers.

Welfare Risks of Repeated Application of On-Farm Killing Methods for Poultry

Simple Summary

During poultry production, some birds are killed humanely on farm, usually because they are ill or injured. Recent European Union (EU) legislation has restricted the number of birds that can be killed by manual neck dislocation to 70 birds per person per day. We examined whether this limit is meaningful by investigating the effects of repeated application of two methods of killing (neck dislocation and a percussive method, the CashPoultry Killer). Twelve male stockworkers each killed 100 birds (broilers, laying hens, or turkeys) at a fixed rate with each method. Both methods were highly successful, and reflex and behaviour measures confirmed they caused rapid loss of brain function. Importantly, there was no evidence of reduced performance with time/bird number up to 100 birds with either method. The Cash Poultry Killer caused a more rapid death, but it was prone to technical difficulties with repeated use. Neck dislocation has the important advantage that it can be performed immediately with no equipment, which may make it preferable in some situations. We present the first evidence that, at the killing rates tested, there was no evidence to justify the current EU number limit for performance of neck dislocation to kill poultry on farm.

Abstract

Council Regulation (EC) no. 1099/2009 on the protection of animals at the time of killing restricts the use of manual cervical dislocation in poultry on farms in the European Union (EU) to birds weighing up to 3 kg and 70 birds per person per day. However, few studies have examined whether repeated application of manual cervical dislocation has welfare implications and whether these are dependent on individual operator skill or susceptibility to fatigue. We investigated the effects of repeated application (100 birds at a fixed killing rate of 1 bird per 2 min) and multiple operators on two methods of killing of broilers, laying hens, and turkeys in commercial settings. We compared the efficacy and welfare impact of repeated application of cervical dislocation and a percussive killer (Cash Poultry Killer, CPK), using 12 male stockworkers on three farms (one farm per bird type). Both methods achieved over 96% kill success at the first attempt. The killing methods were equally effective for each bird type and there was no evidence of reduced performance with time and/or bird number. Both methods of killing caused a rapid loss of reflexes, indicating loss of brain function. There was more variation in reflex durations and post-mortem damage in birds killed by cervical dislocation than that found using CPK. High neck dislocation was associated with improved kill success and more rapid loss of reflexes. The CPK caused damage to multiple brain areas with little variation. Overall, the CPK was associated with faster abolition of reflexes, with fewer birds exhibiting them at all, suggestive of better welfare outcomes. However, technical difficulties with the CPK highlighted the advantages of cervical dislocation, which can be performed immediately with no equipment. At the killing rates tested, we did not find evidence to justify the current EU limit on the number of birds that one operator can kill on–farm by manual cervical dislocation.