Day 066 - 14 Dec 94 - Page 46


     
     1
     2   Q.   Yes.
     3        A.  We now have a local supplier in El Salvador.
     4
     5   Q.   What I was going to ask was, not having a map here, would
     6        that beef have been transported on its feet or would it
     7        have been ---
     8        A.  No.
     9
    10   Q.   -- killed in Guatemala?
    11        A.  No -- yes, it is processed in Guatemala.  There is no
    12         -- we do not transport any live animals.
    13
    14   Q.   If we take the next lot at a run, if we may, if you do not
    15        mind, that is Puerto Rico (which is S), Ciraco (which is
    16        T), Venezuela (which is U) and Cuba (which is V), they seem
    17        to be in all same handwriting, do you see that?
    18        A.  Yes.
    19
    20   Q.   What is that reason for that?
    21        A.  Because I wrote those.
    22
    23   Q.   On the basis of what information?
    24        A.  I based it -- I know the plants, the facilities and
    25        they are imported products which are located in the US.
    26
    27   Q.   All their raw material come from the United States?
    28        A.  That is correct.
    29
    30   Q.   So then we can turn over to W which is Finland?  One
    31        notices here (and it is the only point to which I draw your
    32        attention), apart from the fact that the raw material seem
    33        to be all Finnish, that the pigs are stunned with C02.  Do
    34        you see that?
    35        A.  Yes, I do.
    36
    37   Q.   Can I ask you, from most of these in this batch of
    38        documents, most of the pigs are stunned electrically.  Can
    39        I ask you, from the animal welfare point of view, whether
    40        you see any advantage in using carbon dioxide as a stunning
    41        method?
    42        A.  In the end it will result in the same effect of
    43        rendering the animal senseless ---
    44
    45   Q.   Yes?
    46        A.  -- unconscious.  I am a little concerned with the use
    47        of C02 in a facility ----
    48
    49   Q.   Sorry, can you speak up a bit?
    50        A.  I have some reservations about the use of C02 because 
    51        it can cause some leaks, you can have some leaks, and it is 
    52        difficult to smell it.  So, there is an added risk for 
    53        humans when you are dealing with C02 in a facility.
    54
    55   Q.   But what about from the animal's point of view?
    56        A.  From the animal's point of view, either one is fine.
    57
    58   Q.   What happens with a C02 stunning?  How does it work on the
    59        animal?
    60        A.  The animal goes through a chamber where the oxygen is

Prev Next Index