Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:48:49.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Captive-bolt euthanasia of cattle: determination of optimal-shot placement and evaluation of the Cash Special Euthanizer Kit® for euthanasia of cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

JN Gilliam ,
JK Shearer ,
J Woods ,
J Hill ,
J Reynolds ,
JD Taylor ,
RJ Bahr ,
S Crochik  and
TA Snider
JN Gilliam*
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Oklahoma State University, 1 Farm Rd, Stillwater, OK, USA
JK Shearer
Affiliation:
Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University, USA
J Woods
Affiliation:
Innovative Livestock Solutions, Blackie, Alberta, Canada
J Hill
Affiliation:
Innovative Livestock Solutions, Blackie, Alberta, Canada
J Reynolds
Affiliation:
College of Veterinary Medicine, Western College of Health Sciences, Pomona, CA, USA
JD Taylor
Affiliation:
Veterinary Pathobiology, Oklahoma State University, USA
RJ Bahr
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Oklahoma State University, 1 Farm Rd, Stillwater, OK, USA
S Crochik
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Oklahoma State University, 1 Farm Rd, Stillwater, OK, USA
TA Snider
Affiliation:
Veterinary Pathobiology, Oklahoma State University, USA
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Humane euthanasia of cattle represents a challenge to the beef and dairy industries. Penetrating captive bolt, while traditionally considered to be only a stunning method, can be an effective single-step euthanasia method if both the cerebral cortex and brainstem are disrupted. This report describes a preliminary study investigating the likelihood of brainstem disruption for two captive-bolt shot locations. Heads were collected from 15 cattle that died or were euthanised for reason unrelated to the study and were then randomly assigned to one of two shot placement groups. Heads in the first group (n = 7) were shot at the intersection of two lines drawn from the medial canthus to the opposite horn or top of the opposite ear. Heads in the second group (n = 8) were shot at the intersection of two lines drawn for the lateral canthus to the opposite horn or top of the opposite ear. The guns were held perpendicular (as assessed visually) to the plane of the forehead. Shot placement was then assessed using computed tomography and disruption of the brainstem was determined. In the first group, the captive bolt failed to disrupt the brainstem in any of the heads. In the second group, the bolt disrupted the brainstem in 6 of 8 heads. The results suggest that selecting a higher shot location leads more readily to disruption of the brainstem which reduces the risk of regaining sensibility and should therefore improve animal welfare when cattle are euthanised with a penetrating captive bolt.

Keywords

animal welfarecaptive boltcattlecomputed tomographyeuthanasiashot placement
Type
Papers
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 21 , Issue S2: Proceedings of the HSA Centenary International Symposium ‘Recent Advances in the Welfare of Livestock at Slaughter’ Historic Dockyard, Portsmouth, UK, 2011 , June 2012 , pp. 99 - 102
Copyright
© 2012 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

AABP 1999 Practical Euthanasia of Cattle. Available at: http://www.aabp.org/resources/euth.pdfGoogle Scholar
AVMA 2007 AVMA Guidleines on Euthanasia. Available at: http://www.avma.org/issues/animal_welfare/euthanasia.pdfGoogle Scholar
Daly, CC and Whittington, PE 1989 Investigation into the principal determinants of effective captive bolt stunning of sheep. Research in Veterinary Science 46: 406–408CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gardner, DL 1999 Practical and humane methods for bovine euthanasia. Veterinary Medicine 94: 92–93Google Scholar
Gregory, N and Shaw, F 2000 Penetrating captive bolt stunning and exsanguination of cattle in abattoirs. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 3: 215–230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327604JAWS0303_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millar, GI and Mills, DS 2000 Observations on the trajectory of the bullet in 15 horses euthanased by free bullet. Veterinary Record 146: 754–757. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.146.26.754CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shearer, JK 2005 Euthanasia of cattle: indications and practical considerations. Proceedings of the North American Veterinary Conference Large Animal Volume 19 pp 28–29. 8-12 January 2005, Orlando, Florida, USAGoogle Scholar
Thurmon, JC 1986 Euthanasia of food animals. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice 2(3): 743–756Google ScholarPubMed