Day 103 - 14 Mar 95 - Page 53
1
2 MS. STEEL: From a welfare standpoint, lethal stunning is
3 preferable, is it not?
4 A. Lethal stunning is obviously the surest way of killing
5 the birds in the quickest way.
6
7 Q. So it is preferable from a welfare standpoint?
8 A. It might be preferable from a welfare standpoint,
9 although my own is view is that if you are making birds
10 unconscious -- are you listening?
11
12 Q. Yes.
13 A. If you are making birds unconscious -- I mean, I feel
14 very, very strongly about this. I am trained to understand
15 the system and the important thing is that the birds are
16 made unconscious, and that they are unconscious the whole
17 time through. I am absolutely determined that that will
18 always happen. If you lethally kill a bird with electric
19 shock, obviously, it will die more quickly, but if you make
20 it unconscious and it bleeds to death subsequently, I do
21 not see what difference that makes from a bird welfare
22 point of view.
23
24 Q. You have edited a book -- you have written a chapter in a
25 book called In Practice Handbook Poultry Practice, the
26 editor is Edward Beaumont. Is that right?
27 A. Yes.
28
29 Q. In that chapter you have stated that: "There is some
30 controversy concerning stunning voltages and the use of
31 lethal stunning may become more common as there seems to be
32 no effect on efficiency at bleed out. From the welfare
33 standpoint lethal stunning would be preferable." You have
34 not changed your mind since you wrote that?
35 A. That was written some time ago. I have stated my
36 view. I have stated a view there. If you lethally kill
37 birds with an electric shock you do get massive hemorrhages
38 in muscles which are undesirable from a customer-consumer
39 point of view. That knowledge I did not have when I wrote
40 that piece which was actually seven or eight years ago now.
41
42 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, may I enquire where I am to find this
43 piece?
44
45 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes, and give the date as well.
46
47 MS. STEEL: Actually it says 1993 but that is handwritten. It
48 is at document No. 5 of the Fifth Supplementary List or
49 something like that, the latest bundle anyway. Was it
50 published in 1993?
51 A. That group of articles was published in 1993 but the
52 original was written a long time ago. It was a collection
53 of articles published in the veterinary record over the
54 years. I recollect it was probably originally written
55 about six or seven years ago.
56
57 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Have we identified it in a bundle?
58
59 MR. RAMPTON: We are looking for it.
60
