Day 114 - 04 Apr 95 - Page 60
1 Q. It is not look like a sock on the jaw, is it, Dr. Long? If
2 I shot your head with a captive bolt pistol it would be
3 something rather more serious than a sock on the head?
4 A. I would certainly not like it. I think the fact that
5 one in the past has used a pithing rod to emphasise the
6 stun makes me feel that the doubt is still there, unless
7 the animal is pithed for cattle.
8
9 Q. I think you said earlier, and I am not going to disagree
10 with you, the purpose of the pithing rod, surely, is to
11 produce a sudden reduction or, indeed, cessation of motor
12 activity for the sake of the stockman, is it not?
13 A. It goes deeper than that. It causes more damage in the
14 brain and I think deeper lasting damage. So I would not be
15 satisfied that where you get an effective stun you knock
16 the animal out, the penetration might not be great enough
17 to prevent its recovering. I think that with that evidence
18 I would suggest that one would have very quickly to proceed
19 with the sticking.
20
21 Q. How long do you think it might take, if it does at all and
22 it would appear that you do not share your views with
23 Dr. Gregory but leaving that on one side, how long do you
24 think it might take for a cattle (I will call it that for
25 simplicity) to recover consciousness after being
26 effectively stunned with a captive bolt pistol with
27 three-grade cartridge in it?
28 A. This would imply that the stun might be effective with
29 a captive bolt pistol that is not working at its best, and
30 it might be that if the animal were not taken away for
31 sticking it would recover within, perhaps, two to five
32 minutes.
33
34 Q. Yes, but that is not an effective stun if the captive bolt
35 pistol is not working well, either because the cartridge is
36 not discharging its full power or because the bolt is blunt
37 or whatever, that is not an effective stun, is it?
38 A. I think he are using words of differently. I am using
39 two processes: stunning and sticking. The word
40 "effectively" in my opinion is immediately before the word
41 "stun" and it means effective to stun it; that is to make
42 the animal insensible, as it suggests in the regulations
43 that are put forth, and that the animal is felled. It is
44 stunning an felling.
45
46 Q. This much, Dr. Long, is common ground between us, I think.
47 What I want to know is, supposing everything happens as it
48 should, there is an effective stun, the animal is rendered
49 insensible and falls with a chronic spasm in front and back
50 legs, as it should, what then do you say is the chance of
51 its recovering consciousness, is my question?
52 A. Your question is that I cannot give you an odds ratio.
53 All I can say is that the possibility does exist. One has
54 to test this stun by whether the animal is showing signs of
55 regular breathing and so on. The fact that it is still
56 showing signs of regular breathing means that it could be
57 recovering. It would be insensible at that point. It
58 would be unable to recognise things but, as I say, it would
59 be rather like your socking me on the jaw, for that period
60 I would still be breathing but I would not know what is
