Day 289 - 29 Oct 96 - Page 26
1 Dr. Gregory stated that only one official veterinary
2 surgeon would be observing the slaughter line, and the OVS
3 would have a lot to keep his eye on. This is really
4 relevant to the point that the Plaintiffs keep raising that
5 this is all done under, sort of, checks from the relevant
6 authorities and therefore there cannot be anything wrong
7 with it. Dr. Gregory accepted that with a line speed of 87
8 birds a minute it would be physically impossible to keep an
9 eye on the welfare of each bird. That was on day 19, page
10 67, lines 5 to 27.
11
12 Oh yes, the other points with relevance to that is that
13 obviously when two weeks previously, the two weeks prior to
14 Dr. Gregory's visit, the line was operating at twice the
15 speed it would be even more impossible for an OVS to keep
16 any kind of check on the welfare of the birds. Yes, the
17 references to pre-stun shocks causing pain are on day 20,
18 page 3, line 29. Dr. Gregory accepted that the pre-stun
19 shocks cause pain, and that was in relation to an earlier
20 visit when it was not possible to get access to the stun
21 bar to observe properly whether or not birds were receiving
22 pre-stun shocks, which is something that was contrary to
23 the Codes of Practice.
24
25 Dr. Gregory, after his first visit in February, recommended
26 that new water bath stunners were fitted so that when the
27 new water bath stunners were fitted the entry to each
28 stunner should be fitted with an adjustable, electrically
29 isolated ramp up which the birds would be dragged in order
30 to prevent pre-stun shocks. He thought that would be
31 particularly important, given that the new lines would be
32 operating at a slower speed and therefore pre-stun shocks
33 would be more likely. But when he went back in April the
34 birds were still receiving pre-stun shocks. That was on
35 page 4 of the same day's transcript, line 9.
36
37 So, effectively, Sun Valley had a blatant disregard for the
38 welfare of the birds.
39
40 MR. JUSTICE BELL: So, in February he could not get close
41 enough access to judge whether there were pre-stun shocks
42 or a number of them?
43
44 MS. STEEL: I think he actually said at one point, when he went
45 in February he did estimate that -- his phrase in his
46 original report was that "a modest number were receiving
47 pre-stun electric shocks." When I asked him about whether
48 or not he could give the figure for that, he said, "It
49 might be in the order of ten percent but that was a
50 guess." So if that is the case it actually got worse
51 between his first and second visit.
52
53 MR JUSTICE BELL: That may be in aid of the point you have made,
54 that this is one instance where the line going slower
55 increases the risk of an adverse consequence rather than
56 the reverse, which is what one might expect?
57
58 MS. STEEL: Yes, for one stage of the process, yes.
59
60 MR JUSTICE BELL: This point of pre-stun shocks.
