Still a Jungle Out There: The HSUS Takes USDA to Court to Ensure a Humane End for Birds

	Compassion Over Killing

In 1906, Upton Sinclair stunned the nation with his novel about a family of Lithuanian immigrants toiling in Chicago's notorious slaughterhouses in the late 19th century; on page after page, Sinclair depicted, often in graphic and gory detail, the shackling, slaughtering, and butchering of live animals, "like some horrible crime committed in a dungeon, all unseen and unheeded, buried out of sight and of memory."

Nearly 100 years after the publication of The Jungle, Americans might be surprised to learn that many of the systematic cruelties that Sinclair documented are still performed on more than 95% of all farm animals slaughtered for food in this country. In fact, although largely hidden behind the walls of massive industrial slaughter plants, more than nine billion chickens, turkeys, and other birds are slaughtered each year in the United States without the benefit of any federal law to protect them from being shackled by their legs, hung upside-down, cut with mechanical blades, and immersed in scalding water—all while they're fully conscious.

What Americans might find even more surprising is this: Congress categorically condemned such methods as inhumane almost 50 years ago and then outlawed them in the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act of 1958 (HMSA). The problem is, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which is tasked with implementing the HMSA, does not follow that law; instead, it follows a 1906 meat inspection law that was amended by something called the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act of 1978.

But here's the really strange thing: neither the 1906 law nor the 1978 law repeal or replace the HMSA of 1958. 

Confused? So are millions of animal advocates, farmers, and consumers. Today, The HSUS and others sought to simplify matters: On the same week when millions of Americans will sit down for their turkey dinner, we filed a federal lawsuit to turn back the clock and give poultry the humane protections they should have received 47 years ago.

The Humane Methods of Slaughter Act of 1958

In response to the continuing public outcry over the cruel methods recounted in The Jungle, Congress enacted the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act of 1958 (HMSA) to explicitly require that "cattle, calves, horses, mules, sheep, swine, and other livestock" be slaughtered in accordance with humane methods. The law deemed only two slaughter methods humane: ritualistic or religious slaughter (such as the Jewish Kosher method), or one in which all livestock are rendered insensible to pain before shackling and slaughtering. In the legislation, Congress explicitly recognized that certain slaughter practices—for example, hanging conscious animals by their legs from metal shackles and slaughtering animals while still fully conscious—cause "needless suffering."

Fast forward 20 years. In 1978 Congress amended the Federal Meat Inspection Act of 1906 (FMIA), a law, originally passed in response to Sinclair's novel, that mandated federal inspections and minimum sanitary standards at slaughterhouses processing certain types of animals. The 1978 amendments added a provision to the FMIA that gave the USDA the authority to refuse inspection of meat if "the Secretary finds that any cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses, mules or other equines have been slaughtered or handled...by any method not in accordance with the Act of August 27, 1958 [the HMSA of 1958]." The confusion arose because Congress called this amendment the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act of 1978.

What Congress didn't do in 1978, however, was replace the HMSA of 1958 or remove the original language requiring that "cattle, calves, horses, mules, sheep, swine, and other livestock" be slaughtered in accordance with humane methods. In other words, the all-important term, "other livestock," is still included in the definition of the animals covered under the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act of 1958.

And yet, despite the fact that the term "other livestock" clearly encompasses animals such as farmed birds and despite the fact that a 1958 edition of Webster's dictionary defines "livestock" as "domestic animals used or raised on a farm," the U.S. Department of Agriculture has chosen to exclude chickens, turkeys, and other birds entirely from the act's protection. 

It's as if the USDA thinks the original Humane Methods of Slaughter Act of 1958 doesn't exist.

"USDA's exclusion of chickens, turkeys, and other birds means that only a tiny fraction of the billions of animals raised on farms are protected under the federal humane slaughter law of 1958," said Jonathan Lovvorn, vice president of animal protection litigation for The HSUS. "By protecting cows, pigs, and sheep, but ignoring all other livestock, USDA has eviscerated more than 90% of the act."

The HSUS, together with East Bay Animal Advocates (EBAA) and five poultry consumers, filed suit to challenge the USDA's policy not only because the policy fails to provide any protection for birds from even the most abusive practices, but also because current inhumane slaughter methods put consumers at an increased risk of contracting dangerous food-borne illnesses.

A Prescription for Systematic Cruelty

Because of the USDA's policy of excluding birds, slaughterhouses continue to kill more than nine billion chickens and other birds each year using methods prohibited by the HMSA of 1958, including:

» Shackling and hanging conscious birds upside-down;

» Electrically stunning birds into paralysis, but failing to induce actual unconsciousness;

» Cutting conscious birds with mechanical blades;

» Drowning conscious birds in tanks of scalding water.

Recent abuses at poultry slaughter plants across the country have highlighted the far-reaching implications of USDA's policy of excluding poultry from the HMSA. For example, in 2004 The New York Times graphically reported about "hundreds of acts of cruelty" at a Pilgrim's Pride chicken slaughter plant in Moorefield, West Virginia, including scenes of workers "jumping up and down on live chickens, drop-kicking them like footballs, and slamming them into walls" with the acquiescence of plant supervisors.

Likewise, a 2004 investigation of a Perdue poultry slaughter plant in Maryland and a 2005 investigation of a Tyson's facility in Alabama revealed similar abuses. The workers involved in some of these cruelties were terminated, but, under USDA's interpretation of the law, neither the workers nor the facilities violated federal law because poultry are not protected by the HMSA. 

These animals can't rely on state laws to protect them, either. As noted in our federal lawsuit: "Although each state has its own animal cruelty statute, most of these codes exempt common agricultural practices, no matter how abusive, and many of these laws do not apply to farm animals at all. Indeed, none of the chicken abuse cases discussed above resulted in state cruelty charges against any of the persons or corporations involved. Moreover, because of USDA's practice of excluding poultry from the HMSA of 1958, these abhorrent actions are perfectly legal according to the USDA."

Putting the Public At Risk

According to several recent studies, current slaughter methods increase the risk that poultry carcasses will become contaminated with dangerous fecal bacteria such as Campylobacter, Salmonella, and E. coli that can sicken consumers.

When birds go through the slaughter process still fully conscious, more bacteria enter their bodies. According to poultry experts, birds inhale in reaction to pain and stunning, and can inhale feces and bacteria in the stunning bath and scalding tank. If birds are processed after they're killed, however, they have no opportunity to take in this extra bacteria.

"Studies show that current inhumane poultry slaughter methods can lead to increased fecal contamination of the carcass," explained Michael Greger, M.D., director of Public Health and Animal Agriculture for The HSUS. "By handling meat that is the product of an inhumanely slaughtered bird, consumers may well be at an increased risk for contracting a potentially life-threatening food-borne illness."

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta estimates that every year 325,000 Americans are hospitalized—and more than 5,000 die—due to food-borne diseases, although it's not known how many of those cases can be directly traced to poultry consumption.

What You Can Do

Click here to use our online form to urge Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns to follow the plain language of the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act of 1958, and ensure that the nine billion birds raised for food each year in the United States at least receive legal protection from the worst slaughter abuses.

Or you can write to Secretary Johanns at:

Mike Johanns
Secretary of Agriculture
U.S. Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Ave., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20250
Phone: 202-720-3631 

See the Video

USDA Poultry Slaughter Policy

Electric Stunning

Related Links

Help Secure Basic Protection for Billions of Birds: Sign the Petition for Poultry

An HSUS Report: Welfare Issues with Electrical Stunning of Poultry