CRIMES WITHOUT CONSEQUENCES - gpvec

•
ConClusion
Finding #9:
State animal cruelty statutes have not been successful means to punish cases of
abuse or torture of animals at slaughter. Moreover, a handful of states specifically
exempt slaughter practices from their cruelty codes.
Recommendation:
State anti-cruelty codes should be amended to specifically cover the treatment
of animals at slaughter. State humane slaughter laws also should be amended to
provide that prosecution under these laws does not preclude prosecution under
typically tougher state animal cruelty codes. The USDA should enact a policy or
regulation in which it automatically refers incidents of inhumane treatment to state
prosecutors for appropriate action under state animal cruelty statutes.
11.5 State Enforcement
•
Finding #10:
Most states operating meat inspection programs were not able to provide any
documents related to humane slaughter enforcement for a recent three-year period.
These states are responsible for overseeing animal handling and slaughter practices
at a total of 600 U.S. establishments. Two states (Georgia and Indiana) indicated
that they had relevant enforcement records, but were unable to readily produce them
due to inadequacies in their record keeping systems.
Recommendation:
The USDA should regularly review humane slaughter enforcement when evaluating
state meat inspection programs. The agency should also require that state inspectors
routinely monitor the stunning process (at least two times each shift) to assess
worker competence and proper equipment function. In addition, the USDA
should require a consistent record keeping system among all states operating meat
inspection programs.
97