Review on the Effect of Handling, Slaughtering Process and Transport on Welfare of Animals and Meat Quality in Ethiopia

Geleta Gobena; Diribe Kumsa

doi:doi:10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14

| Peer-Reviewed

Review on the Effect of Handling, Slaughtering Process and Transport on Welfare of Animals and Meat Quality in Ethiopia

Geleta Gobena, Diribe Kumsa

Published in Animal and Veterinary Sciences (Volume 8, Issue 4)

Received: 28 June 2020 Accepted: 24 July 2020 Published: 13 August 2020

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

The current review was initiated to encourage the government of Ethiopia, stakeholders, and policymakers about the substantial effects of handling, slaughtering process, and transportation on welfare and meat quality of farm animals of animals. In Ethiopia, until this review was made, there is no comprehensive legislation, rules, or regulations articulated for farm animals’ welfare during rearing, transport, and slaughter. Hence, the welfare of animals was not taken into consideration and often constrained by high levels of poverty, cultural perceptions and beliefs, lack of training and knowledge of animal handling, inadequate transport, and slaughter facilities. The most common farm animal transport system was on the foot from a rural area to a nearby market and then by vehicle to the urban area. During transport, farm animals were exposed to several potential stressors like trip distance, design of vehicle, animal standing orientation, loading and unloading facilities, and temperature fluctuations that affect the welfare, quality, and shelf life of meat and meat products. Aversive ways of handling farm animals, including improper use of sticks, pushing, pulling, and beating them on their head and body frequently by handlers and slaughtering them without stunning, were common practices. This aversive way of handling also causes carcass damage such as bruising, hemorrhages, skin blemishes, blood splash, and broken bones. Therefore, from this review, it has been recommended that, in order to improve animal welfare and thereby meat quality that has been affected by improper handling, transport, and slaughter, the government of Ethiopia is strongly encouraged to endorse inclusive animal welfare jurisdictive acts that would protect animal sentience, define animal welfare in line with OIE standards, and prohibit animal brutality. Creating awareness for stakeholders, particularly for handlers about behavioral principles, proper handling of farm animals, basic concept and role of good animal welfare, and its significant impact on the quality of meat is also imperative.

Published in	Animal and Veterinary Sciences (Volume 8, Issue 4)
DOI	10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14
Page(s)	84-92
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Animal Welfare, Ethiopia, Transport, Slaughter Process, Handling

References

[1]	CSA (Central Statistical Agency). 2017/18. Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Agricultural Sample Survey: Report on Livestock and Livestock Characteristics (Private Peasant Holdings). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2: 9-23.
[2]	Shapiro, B. I., Gebru, G., Desta, S., Negassa, A., Nigussie, K., Aboset G., Mechale. H. 2017. Ethiopia livestock sector analysis. ILRI Project Report. Nairobi, Kenya: International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI).
[3]	USDA. 1997. United States Standards for Grades of Carcass Beef. United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Washington DC, USA.
[4]	Addis Fikrie Birhanu. 2019a. A Review on Ethiopian Meat production trends, consumption and meat quality parameters. International Journal of Food Science and Agriculture, 3 (4): 267-274.
[5]	Beriain, M. J., Bas, P., Purroy, A. and Treacher, T. 2001. Effect of animal and nutritional factors and nutrition on lamb meat quality. ETSIA, Universidad Pública de Navarra, crta. El Sadar, s/n, 31005 Pamplona, Spain. Laboratoire de Nutrition et Alimentation, INA-INRA, 16, rue Claude, 75231 Paris, France, 75-81.
[6]	Gustavson, J., Cederberg, C., Sonesson, U., van Otterdijk, R., Meybeck, A. 2011. Global Food Losses and Food Waste. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/userupload/ags/publications/GFLweb.pdf. Accessed on 13 May 2020.
[7]	AWIN. 2015. AWIN welfare assessment protocol for goats. Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
[8]	Tizeta Bekele, Barbara Szonyi, Aklilu Feleke and Delia Grace. 2019. Assessment of Small Ruminant Welfare in Ethiopia – An Abattoir-Based Study, Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, DOI: 10.1080/10888705.2019.1663736, http://doi:10.13130/AWIN_goats_2015.
[9]	Farm Animal Welfare, 2014. Farm Animal Welfare, Past Present and Future. Commissioned by The RSPCA’s Freedom Food Scheme to Mark Its 20th Anniversary: A Review of Farm Animal Welfare in the UK. The Food Ethics Council and Heather Pickett.
[10]	Ndou, S. P., Muchenje, V., Chimonyo, M., 2011. Animal welfare in multipurpose cattle production systems and its implications on beef quality. African Journal of Biotechnology, 10: 1049–1064.
[11]	Rich, K. M., Perry, B., Kaitibie, S. 2009. Commodity-based Trade and Market Access for Developing Country Livestock Products: The Case of Beef Exports from Ethiopia. International Food and Agribusiness Management Association. 12 (3).
[12]	MoARD. 2010. Country Position on Regional Policy Framework on Animal Health, For Trade and Poverty Reduction. Federal democratic republic of Ethiopia, Addis Ababa.
[13]	FAO. 2014. The role, impact and welfare of working (traction and transport) animals. Animal Production and Health, Rome.
[14]	Animal protection index. 2020. Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/et/et011en.pdf Accessed on May 4, 2020.
[15]	Fufa Sorri Bulitta, 2015. Effects of Handling on Animals Welfare during Transport and Marketing. Doctoral Thesis Faculty of Natural Resources and Agricultural Sciences Department of Energy and Technology, Uppsala.
[16]	Adzitey F, Teye GA, Dinko MM. 2011. Pre- and post-slaughter animal handling by butchers in the Bawku Municipality of the Upper East Region of Ghana. LRRD, 23: 39.
[17]	Karol Fike, and Mark F., Spire. 2006. Transportation of Cattle. Vet Clin Food Anim. 305–320.
[18]	Josefine Jerlström. 2013. Animal welfare in Ethiopia: Transport to and handling of cattle at markets in Addis Abeba and Ambo. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science.
[19]	Fufa, S., Bulitta, Girma Gebresenbet, and Techane Bosona. 2012. Animal Handling during Supply for Marketing and Operations at an Abattoir in Developing Country: The Case of Gudar Market and Ambo Abattoir, Ethiopia. Journal of Service Science and Management. 5, 59-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jssm.2012.51008. Accessed on May, 2020.
[20]	Gebresenbet, G., Wikner, I., Bobobee, E. Y. H., Maria, G., Villarroel, M. 2012. Effect of Transport Time and Handling on Physiological Responses of Cattle. J. Agric. Sci. Technol. A, 2: 800–814.
[21]	Samuel Frimpong, Girma Gebresenbet, Emmanuel Bobobee, Elias, D., Aklaku and Ibrahim Hamdu. 2014. Effect of Transportation and Pre-Slaughter Handling on Welfare and Meat Quality of Cattle: Case Study of Kumasi Abattoir, Ghana. Vet. Sci. 1: 174-191.
[22]	De La Fuente, J., M. Sanchez, C. Perez, S. Lauzurica, C. Vieira, E. Gonza´lez de Chavarri and M. T. Dı´az. 2010. Physiological response and carcass and meat quality of suckling lambs in relation to transport time and stocking density during transport by road." Animal, 4 (2): 250-258.
[23]	Wickham, S. L., Collins, T., Barnes, A. L., Miller, D. W., Beatty, D. T., Stockman, C., Fleming, P. A. 2012. Qualitative behavioural assessment of transport-naive and transport-habituated sheep. Journal of Animal Science, 90: 4523–4535.
[24]	Addis, F., Birhanu, Yesihak Y., Mummed, Mohammed, Y., Kurtu, Travis, O’Quinn and Yosef, T., Jiru, 2019. Level of Pre-slaughter stress and quality of beef from Arsi, Boran and Harar cattle breeds in Ethiopia, Cogent Food & Agriculture. 5 (1), 1694233 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2019.1694233 Accessed on 12 May 2020.
[25]	Chulayo, A., and Muchenje, V. 2013. Activities of creatine kinase and lactate dehydrogenase as welfare indica- tors in slaughter cattle. 59th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, 18-23rd August, 2013, Izmir, Turkey.
[26]	O’Neill, H., A., Webb, E. C., Frylinck, L., Strydom, P. E. 2006. The stress responsiveness of three different beef breed types and the effect on ultimate pH and meat colour. In Proceedings 52nd international Congress of Meat Science and Technology. Dublin, Ireland. 13–18.
[27]	Broom, D. M. 2000. Welfare assessment and welfare problem areas during handling and transport. In: T. Grandin (ed.) Livestock Handling and Transport. 2nd ed. CAB International Wallingford, U.K. 43-61.
[28]	Warris, P. D., Brown, S. N. 1994. A survey of mortality in slaughter pigs during transport and lairage. Veterinary Record. 134: 513-515.
[29]	Davis, M. S., Mader, T. L. 2001. Effects of water application to slaughter factors feedlot mounds during the summer. In: Proceedings of the ASAE Sixth International Livestock Environment Symposium. Louiville, KY, USA. 165–173.
[30]	Swanson, JC., Morrow-Tesch J., 2001. Cattle transport: historical, research, and future perspectives. J Anim Sci, 79:102–9.
[31]	Grandin T. 1997. Assessment of stress during handling and transport. J Anim Sci. 75: 249–57.
[32]	Grandin, T. 2001. Progress in livestock handling and slaughter techniques in the United States, 1970-2000. In D. J. Salem & A. N. Rowan (Eds.), The state of the animals. Washington, DC: Humane Society Press. 101-110.
[33]	Price, E. O. 2008. Animal Handling and Movement In: Principles and Applications of Domestic Animal Behavior. Cambridge: CAB International. 247-271.
[34]	Grandin, T. 1998. Review: Reducing handling stress improves both productivity and welfare. The Professional Animal Scientist, 14:1–10.
[35]	Warriss, P. D. 1990. The handling of cattle pre-slaughter and its effects on carcass and meat quality. Appl. Anim. Behav. Science. 28: 171–186.
[36]	Grönvall, Antonia. 2013. Animal welfare in Ethiopia: handling of cattle during transport and operations at Kera Abattoir, Addis Abeba. First cycle, G2E. Uppsala: SLU, Dept. of Animal Nutrition and Management.
[37]	Hartung, J., Marahrens, M., Parvizi, N., et al. 2000. Investigation on stress response of heifers during long distance road transport. In: Proceedings of the Congress Bundesverband der beamteten Tierarzte, Staffelstein. 33–41.
[38]	Tarrant V, Grandin T. 1993. Cattle transport. In: Grandin T, editor. Livestock handling and transport. Wallingford (CT): CAB International. 109–26.
[39]	Hemsworth, P. 2007. Behavioural principles of pig handling. Livestock Handling and Transport. 3rd ed. CAB International, Wallingford, U.K, 214-227.
[40]	Thomson, G., Tambi, E., Hargreaves, S., Leyland, T., Catley, A., van't Klooster, G. 2004. International trade in livestock and livestock products: the need for a commodity- based approach. 155: 429-433.
[41]	FAO., 2013. FAO. Retrieved from Manual for the slaughter of small ruminants in developing countries: http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/x6552e/X6552E08.htm Accessed on May, 2020.
[42]	C. R. Helps a, P. Hindell, T. J. Hillman, A. V. Fisher, H. Anil, A. C. Knight, R. T. Whyte, D. H. O’Niell, T. G. Knowles, D. A. Harbour. 2002. Contamination of beef carcasses by spinal cord tissue during splitting. Food Control. 13: 417–423.
[43]	Blackmore, D. K. (1984). Differences in behavior between sheep and cattle during slaughter. Research in Veterinary Science. 37 (2): 223–226.
[44]	Holleben, M. V. 2007. Animal welfare during anesthetic slaughter for religious reasons. From the advice of the advisory and training institute for careful handling of breeding and slaughter animals. 37: 1374-1388.
[45]	Gregory, N. G. 2010. How climatic changes could affect meat quality. Food Research International. 43:1866-1873.
[46]	World Organization for Animal Health (OIE). 2013. Animal Welfare at a Glance. Web page: www.oie.int/en/animal-welfare/. Accessed on 14 May 2020.
[47]	World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), 2013a. One Health at a Glance. Web page: www.oie.int/en/for-the-media/onehealth. Accessed on 14 May 2020.
[48]	Bench, C. 2007. Welfare implications of pig transport. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.
[49]	Temple Grandin. 2010. Recommended Animal Handling Guidelines and Audit Guide for Cattle, Pigs, and Sheep (2005 Edition, with 2007 and 2010 Updates). Washington, DC. American Meat Institute.
[50]	European Commission. 2002. The Welfare of Animals During Transport (details for Horses, Pigs, Sheep and Cattle): Report of the Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare; Adopted on 11 March 2002. European Commission Health and Consumer Protection Directorate General, Directorate C-Scientific Opinions C2-Management of Scientific Committees, Scientific Co-operation and Networks.
[51]	APHRD. 2009. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Animal and Plant Health Regulatory Directorate. Ethiopia Freed from the most dangerous Cattle disease, Addis Ababa.
[52]	Lawrie, RA. 2005. Ciência dacarne. 6thed. Artimed Editora: São Paulo, 2005.
[53]	McAfee AJ, McSorley, EM., Cuskelly, G. J., Moss, BW., Wallace, JMW., Bonham, MP., Fearon AM. 2010. Red meat consumption: an overview of the risks and benefits.
[54]	Z. T. Rani, A. Hugo, C. J. Hugo, P. Vimiso and V. Muchenje. 2017. Effect of post-slaughter handling during distribution on microbiological quality and safety of meat in the formal and informal sectors of South Africa: A review. South African Journal of Animal Science. 47 (3).
[55]	Warriss, P. D. 2000. Meat science: An introductory text. CAB-International: England: Wallingford. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274550834_Meat_science_an. Accessed on May 14, 2020.
[56]	Robles, R., Vannin, L. and Alvarez, R. 2009. Quality beef schemes and consumer perception. In Proceedings of the 113th EAAE Seminar, 3-6 September 2009, Chania, Crete, Greece.
[57]	Bredahl, L., Grunert, K. G., Fertin, C. 1998. Relating consumer perceptions of pork quality to physical product.
[58]	Malena M., E. Vosláﬁová, P., Tomanová, R., Lepková, I., BedáÀová, V., Veãerek. 2006. Influence of Travel Distance and the Season upon Transport-Induced Mortality in Fattened Cattle. Acta Vet Brno. 75, 619-624.
[59]	Hall, S. J. G; Broom, D. M. and Kiddy. 1998. Effect of transportation on plasma cortisol and packed cell volume in different genotypes of sheep. Small Ruminant Research, 29; 233-237.
[60]	Blokhuis H. 1998. Studies of Stress in Farm Animals. Comparative Haematology International, 8: 94-101.
[61]	OIE. 2012. Terrestrial Animal Health Code Chapter 7.5 Slaughter of Animals. World Organisation of Health.
[62]	Tarrant, P. V., Kenny, F. J., Harrington, D. and Murphy, M. 1992. Long distance transportation of steers to slaughter, effect of stocking density on physiology, behavior and carcass quality. Livestock Production Science. 30: 223-238.
[63]	Costa, L. N., Lo, Fiego, D. P., Tassone, F., Russo, V. 2006. The relationship between carcass bruising in bulls and behaviour observed during pre-slaughter phases. Vet. Res. Commun. 30 (1): 379–381.
[64]	Jibat, T., Ejeta, G., Asfaw, Y., and Wudie, A. 2008. Causes of abattoir condemnation in apparantly healthy slaughtered sheep and goats at HELMEX abattoir, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia Revue Méd Vét, 159: 305-311.
[65]	Immonen, K., Ruusunen, M., and Puolanne, E. 2000. Some effects of residual glycogen concentration on the physical and sensory quality of normal pH beef. Meat Science, 55: 33-38.
[66]	J., Hartung, B., Nowak and A. C., Springorum. 2009. Animal welfare and meat quality: Improving the sensory and nutritional quality of fresh meat. University of Veterinary Medicine, Hanover, Germany.
[67]	Muchenje, V., K. Dzama, M., Chimonyo, J. G., Raats., P. E. Strydom. 2008. Meat quality of Nguni, Bonsmara and Aberdeen Angus steers raised on natural pasture in the Eastern Cape, South Africa. Meat Science. 79:20-28.
[68]	Yu, J., S. Tang, E. Bao, M. Zhang, Q. Hao, and Z. Yue. 2009. The effects of transportation on the expression of heat shock proteins and meat quality of M. longissimus dorsi in pigs. Meat Sci. 83:474-478.
[69]	Samuel Aradom. 2012. Animal Transport and Welfare with special emphasis on Transport Time and Vibration including Logistics Chain and Abattoir operations. Licentiate Thesis Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Uppsala.
[70]	Abril, M., M. M., Campo, A., nen, C., a udo, lbert, A. I., Negueruela. 2001. Beef colour evolution as a function of ultimate pH. Meat Sci. 58: 69-78.
[71]	Van de Water, G., F. Verjans, and R. Geers. 2003. The effect of short distance transport under commercial conditions on the physiology of slaughter calves; pH and colour profiles of veal. Livest. Prod. Sci. 82: 171-179.
[72]	Apple, J., Kegley, E., Galloway, D., Wistuba, T., and Rakes, L. 2005. Duration of restraint and isolation stress as a model to study the dark-cutting condition in cattle. Journal of Animal Science, 83: 1202-1214.
[73]	Chulayo, A. Y. and V. Muchenje. 2013. Effect of pre-slaughter conditions on physico-chemical characteristics of mutton from three sheep breeds slaughtered at a smallholder rural abattoir. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 43: 64-S98.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Geleta Gobena, Diribe Kumsa. (2020). Review on the Effect of Handling, Slaughtering Process and Transport on Welfare of Animals and Meat Quality in Ethiopia. Animal and Veterinary Sciences, 8(4), 84-92. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Geleta Gobena; Diribe Kumsa. Review on the Effect of Handling, Slaughtering Process and Transport on Welfare of Animals and Meat Quality in Ethiopia. Anim. Vet. Sci. 2020, 8(4), 84-92. doi: 10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Geleta Gobena, Diribe Kumsa. Review on the Effect of Handling, Slaughtering Process and Transport on Welfare of Animals and Meat Quality in Ethiopia. Anim Vet Sci. 2020;8(4):84-92. doi: 10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14,
  author = {Geleta Gobena and Diribe Kumsa},
  title = {Review on the Effect of Handling, Slaughtering Process and Transport on Welfare of Animals and Meat Quality in Ethiopia},
  journal = {Animal and Veterinary Sciences},
  volume = {8},
  number = {4},
  pages = {84-92},
  doi = {10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.avs.20200804.14},
  abstract = {The current review was initiated to encourage the government of Ethiopia, stakeholders, and policymakers about the substantial effects of handling, slaughtering process, and transportation on welfare and meat quality of farm animals of animals. In Ethiopia, until this review was made, there is no comprehensive legislation, rules, or regulations articulated for farm animals’ welfare during rearing, transport, and slaughter. Hence, the welfare of animals was not taken into consideration and often constrained by high levels of poverty, cultural perceptions and beliefs, lack of training and knowledge of animal handling, inadequate transport, and slaughter facilities. The most common farm animal transport system was on the foot from a rural area to a nearby market and then by vehicle to the urban area. During transport, farm animals were exposed to several potential stressors like trip distance, design of vehicle, animal standing orientation, loading and unloading facilities, and temperature fluctuations that affect the welfare, quality, and shelf life of meat and meat products. Aversive ways of handling farm animals, including improper use of sticks, pushing, pulling, and beating them on their head and body frequently by handlers and slaughtering them without stunning, were common practices. This aversive way of handling also causes carcass damage such as bruising, hemorrhages, skin blemishes, blood splash, and broken bones. Therefore, from this review, it has been recommended that, in order to improve animal welfare and thereby meat quality that has been affected by improper handling, transport, and slaughter, the government of Ethiopia is strongly encouraged to endorse inclusive animal welfare jurisdictive acts that would protect animal sentience, define animal welfare in line with OIE standards, and prohibit animal brutality. Creating awareness for stakeholders, particularly for handlers about behavioral principles, proper handling of farm animals, basic concept and role of good animal welfare, and its significant impact on the quality of meat is also imperative.},
 year = {2020}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Review on the Effect of Handling, Slaughtering Process and Transport on Welfare of Animals and Meat Quality in Ethiopia
AU  - Geleta Gobena
AU  - Diribe Kumsa
Y1  - 2020/08/13
PY  - 2020
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14
T2  - Animal and Veterinary Sciences
JF  - Animal and Veterinary Sciences
JO  - Animal and Veterinary Sciences
SP  - 84
EP  - 92
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2328-5850
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14
AB  - The current review was initiated to encourage the government of Ethiopia, stakeholders, and policymakers about the substantial effects of handling, slaughtering process, and transportation on welfare and meat quality of farm animals of animals. In Ethiopia, until this review was made, there is no comprehensive legislation, rules, or regulations articulated for farm animals’ welfare during rearing, transport, and slaughter. Hence, the welfare of animals was not taken into consideration and often constrained by high levels of poverty, cultural perceptions and beliefs, lack of training and knowledge of animal handling, inadequate transport, and slaughter facilities. The most common farm animal transport system was on the foot from a rural area to a nearby market and then by vehicle to the urban area. During transport, farm animals were exposed to several potential stressors like trip distance, design of vehicle, animal standing orientation, loading and unloading facilities, and temperature fluctuations that affect the welfare, quality, and shelf life of meat and meat products. Aversive ways of handling farm animals, including improper use of sticks, pushing, pulling, and beating them on their head and body frequently by handlers and slaughtering them without stunning, were common practices. This aversive way of handling also causes carcass damage such as bruising, hemorrhages, skin blemishes, blood splash, and broken bones. Therefore, from this review, it has been recommended that, in order to improve animal welfare and thereby meat quality that has been affected by improper handling, transport, and slaughter, the government of Ethiopia is strongly encouraged to endorse inclusive animal welfare jurisdictive acts that would protect animal sentience, define animal welfare in line with OIE standards, and prohibit animal brutality. Creating awareness for stakeholders, particularly for handlers about behavioral principles, proper handling of farm animals, basic concept and role of good animal welfare, and its significant impact on the quality of meat is also imperative.
VL  - 8
IS  - 4
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Geleta Gobena

Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Wollega University, Shambu, Ethiopia
Diribe Kumsa

Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Wollega University, Shambu, Ethiopia

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Geleta Gobena, Diribe Kumsa. (2020). Review on the Effect of Handling, Slaughtering Process and Transport on Welfare of Animals and Meat Quality in Ethiopia. Animal and Veterinary Sciences, 8(4), 84-92. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Geleta Gobena; Diribe Kumsa. Review on the Effect of Handling, Slaughtering Process and Transport on Welfare of Animals and Meat Quality in Ethiopia. Anim. Vet. Sci. 2020, 8(4), 84-92. doi: 10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Geleta Gobena, Diribe Kumsa. Review on the Effect of Handling, Slaughtering Process and Transport on Welfare of Animals and Meat Quality in Ethiopia. Anim Vet Sci. 2020;8(4):84-92. doi: 10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14,
  author = {Geleta Gobena and Diribe Kumsa},
  title = {Review on the Effect of Handling, Slaughtering Process and Transport on Welfare of Animals and Meat Quality in Ethiopia},
  journal = {Animal and Veterinary Sciences},
  volume = {8},
  number = {4},
  pages = {84-92},
  doi = {10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.avs.20200804.14},
  abstract = {The current review was initiated to encourage the government of Ethiopia, stakeholders, and policymakers about the substantial effects of handling, slaughtering process, and transportation on welfare and meat quality of farm animals of animals. In Ethiopia, until this review was made, there is no comprehensive legislation, rules, or regulations articulated for farm animals’ welfare during rearing, transport, and slaughter. Hence, the welfare of animals was not taken into consideration and often constrained by high levels of poverty, cultural perceptions and beliefs, lack of training and knowledge of animal handling, inadequate transport, and slaughter facilities. The most common farm animal transport system was on the foot from a rural area to a nearby market and then by vehicle to the urban area. During transport, farm animals were exposed to several potential stressors like trip distance, design of vehicle, animal standing orientation, loading and unloading facilities, and temperature fluctuations that affect the welfare, quality, and shelf life of meat and meat products. Aversive ways of handling farm animals, including improper use of sticks, pushing, pulling, and beating them on their head and body frequently by handlers and slaughtering them without stunning, were common practices. This aversive way of handling also causes carcass damage such as bruising, hemorrhages, skin blemishes, blood splash, and broken bones. Therefore, from this review, it has been recommended that, in order to improve animal welfare and thereby meat quality that has been affected by improper handling, transport, and slaughter, the government of Ethiopia is strongly encouraged to endorse inclusive animal welfare jurisdictive acts that would protect animal sentience, define animal welfare in line with OIE standards, and prohibit animal brutality. Creating awareness for stakeholders, particularly for handlers about behavioral principles, proper handling of farm animals, basic concept and role of good animal welfare, and its significant impact on the quality of meat is also imperative.},
 year = {2020}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Review on the Effect of Handling, Slaughtering Process and Transport on Welfare of Animals and Meat Quality in Ethiopia
AU  - Geleta Gobena
AU  - Diribe Kumsa
Y1  - 2020/08/13
PY  - 2020
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14
T2  - Animal and Veterinary Sciences
JF  - Animal and Veterinary Sciences
JO  - Animal and Veterinary Sciences
SP  - 84
EP  - 92
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2328-5850
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.avs.20200804.14
AB  - The current review was initiated to encourage the government of Ethiopia, stakeholders, and policymakers about the substantial effects of handling, slaughtering process, and transportation on welfare and meat quality of farm animals of animals. In Ethiopia, until this review was made, there is no comprehensive legislation, rules, or regulations articulated for farm animals’ welfare during rearing, transport, and slaughter. Hence, the welfare of animals was not taken into consideration and often constrained by high levels of poverty, cultural perceptions and beliefs, lack of training and knowledge of animal handling, inadequate transport, and slaughter facilities. The most common farm animal transport system was on the foot from a rural area to a nearby market and then by vehicle to the urban area. During transport, farm animals were exposed to several potential stressors like trip distance, design of vehicle, animal standing orientation, loading and unloading facilities, and temperature fluctuations that affect the welfare, quality, and shelf life of meat and meat products. Aversive ways of handling farm animals, including improper use of sticks, pushing, pulling, and beating them on their head and body frequently by handlers and slaughtering them without stunning, were common practices. This aversive way of handling also causes carcass damage such as bruising, hemorrhages, skin blemishes, blood splash, and broken bones. Therefore, from this review, it has been recommended that, in order to improve animal welfare and thereby meat quality that has been affected by improper handling, transport, and slaughter, the government of Ethiopia is strongly encouraged to endorse inclusive animal welfare jurisdictive acts that would protect animal sentience, define animal welfare in line with OIE standards, and prohibit animal brutality. Creating awareness for stakeholders, particularly for handlers about behavioral principles, proper handling of farm animals, basic concept and role of good animal welfare, and its significant impact on the quality of meat is also imperative.
VL  - 8
IS  - 4
ER  -

Copy | Download