|
|
At the end of the trailBy Kylene Scott Life is messy. It’s even messier if you own livestock. One task livestock owners often dread is having to make the decision to euthanize an animal. As a responsible animal owner or one who cares for livestock, it is important to have the proper equipment on hand and to know how to humanely euthanize an animal when it is deemed necessary. The term euthanasia is derived from the Greek terms “en” and “thanatos.” Together they mean “good death.” An American Veteri-nary Medical Association paper on the subject of euthanasia states, “If an animal’s life is to be taken, it is done with the highest degree of respect and distress-free as possible.” Scientists accept and have documented ani-mals experience pain, distress, breathlessness, thirst, hunger, nausea, sickness, anxiety and fear. J.K. Shearer, professor and dairy Exten-sion veterinarian, explains further. “The status of an animal’s welfare is deter-mined by what it experiences, and for an animal to experience anything it must be both sentient and conscious,” Shearer said. “Sentience is defined as the ‘state of awareness.’ It is the ability of a living being to feel or perceive stimuli such as pain or experi-ence some form of emotion whether it be plea-sure or irritation. ”Since animals do experience pain—those that are conscious—great care should be taken to end the animal’s life in the best way possible. “These concepts are fundamental to under-standing our approach to euthanasia,” Shearer said. “We accept that animals are sentient and therefore when they are conscious able to experience both negative and positive affective states.” Facing the task “Part of responsible animal care is making the decision that an animal has to be eutha-nized and doing so in a timely manner,” Jen-nifer Woods, livestock handling specialist based in Canada, said. “I personally believe that all caregivers should be trained in it before they are allowed to care for animals. ”There are several considerations that the caregiver must evaluate including the amount of pain and distress the animal is in, their welfare during treatment, timeli-ness of recovery and eco-nomics, Woods said.“The most common conditions that require euthanasia are disease, illness and/or injury,” Woods said. Shearer indicated the following as times to consider euthanasia when dealing with cattle: —Fractures of the legs, hips, or spine that are not repairable and result in immobility or inability to stand. —Paralysis from traumatic or calving-related injuries that result in immobility.—Diseases that result in a significant loss of production (e.g., severe mastitis in dairy cattle). —Advanced eye disease (e.g., cancer eye in cattle). —Disease conditions where cost of treatment is prohibitive. —Disease conditions where prognosis is poor or time to expected recovery is unusually pro-longed. —Rabies suspected in animals; these animals should be attended to or seen by a veterinarian.Woods says owners should be cognizant of the type of animal facing euthanasia.“Some methods are acceptable on some ani-mals while not acceptable on others,” she said. Woods says owners should be cognizant of the type of animal facing euthanasia. “Some methods are acceptable on some ani-mals while not acceptable on others,” she said. Slaughter can be considered for both beef and dairy cattle and other livestock species when there is a loss of productive function. Generally, the animals should not be in severe pain, freely able to stand and walk, capable of being transported, and without disease or treatment that might constitute a public health risk. Woods said that handlers need to ensure the animal is fit enough to withstand the rigors and stress of transport. “The question that needs to be asked is not can the animal walk onto the trailer, but will the animal be able to walk off the trailer,” Woods said. All considered, there are a number of deciding factors that will lead to the decision of euthanasia, and responsible owners must decide what is the most important in their case and at the point in time. “Euthanasia is the appropriate choice whenever these conditions cannot be met,” Shearer said. “When conditions warrant euthanasia, the next consideration is method.” Proper training When a veterinarian is unavailable to perform euthanasia, a properly trained individual is the next best thing. Some veterinarians will train producers on how to properly conduct certain procedures Woods emphasizes the importance of training, but also leading by example. “Yes, I have (had to euthanize)—as a producer with my own livestock, with animals involved in accidents and with research projects specific to euthanasia,” Woods said. “Through example is the best way, but also by establishing a company policy on euthanasia and what is expected of the employees and why the policy is what it is.” Both Woods and Shearer think employers should consider their employees’ mental health when faced with performing the task of euthanasia, as with owners and their personal stock. A person’s background, gender and age play a role in it as well. “It is important to recognize that this is not a procedure that all persons are mentally or emotionally able to perform repetitively,” Shearer said. “In fact, observation has shown that constant exposure to, or participation in, euthanasia procedures may result in psychological damage leading to work-related dissatisfaction and a tendency toward careless or callous handling of animals.” Shearer suggests a strategy for managing this problem includes providing adequate training so that euthanasia procedures may be competently applied. Another might be to change work duties as needed to provide relief when it becomes apparent that such duties are causing excessive stress. Woods agrees. “Employees should be monitored for issues and euthanasia tasks should be rotated also,” Woods said. Regardless of the situation, euthanasia will impact a person’s emotions. Sensitivity to this issue should not be overlooked. Actual options In the beef and dairy cattle industries, two of the most common types of euthanasia are by gunshot or penetrating captive bolt. These methods cause less fear, anxiety and result in a more rapid, painless and humane death, according to Shearer. “Both methods involve human risk, and therefore, require skill and experience,” Shearer said. “Neither method should be attempted by untrained or experienced people.” On the farm or ranch, the gunshot is often the most practical method of euthanasia. “Most people have some type of firearm and are familiar with its use,” Shearer said. “The key is selection of an appropriate firearm and bullet with sufficient energy and size to traverse the skull, enter the brain, and cause massive brain destruction.” Woods suggests using a powerful enough firearm to get the job done. “People have to understand firearms and the foot pounds of the firearm to truly understand what fire arm is sufficient,” Woods said. Penetrating captive bolt followed by immediate exsanguination (bleeding out) is the preferred method for euthanasia of cattle in packing houses. The mode of action of a penetrating captive bolt gun is concussion and trauma to the brain, therefore this device must be held firmly against the surface of the head over the intended site. “Because placement and positioning of the projectile is critical, some degree of restraint is generally required for proper use of this device,” Shearer said. “Persons conducting euthanasia procedures should attempt to minimize animal distress. Cattle should be approached quietly and restrained only if necessary to properly conduct the procedure.” Woods stresses that in the packing house, operators are only wanting to stun the animal in preparation for processing. On the farm, the animal needs to die. “There is a captive bolt gun out there now that will kill cattle as a single step. Not all captive bolt guns require a second step,” Woods said. If the animal to be euthanized is ambulatory and able to be moved without causing distress, discomfort or pain, it may be moved to an area where the carcass may be more easily reached by removal equipment. “Dragging of non-ambulatory animals is unacceptable,” Shearer said. “In cases where movement may increase distress or animal suffering, the animal should be euthanized first, and moved following confirmation of death.” Death must be confirmed before disposal of the animal. Consciousness should be evaluated by the following: lack of a heartbeat; lack of respiration; lack of a corneal reflex; presence of rigor mortis; and lack of movement over an extended period of time (two to three hours). “The presence of a heartbeat can best be determined with a stethoscope placed under the left elbow,” Shearer said. “Note that a pulse is usually not palpable under such circumstances and should not be used to confirm death.” Unacceptable methods of euthanasia Although laws vary by state, the following methods are generally considered unacceptable for euthanasia of cattle: —Manually applied blunt trauma to the head. —Injection of any chemical substance not labeled for use as a euthanasia agent. —Injection of air into a vein. —Electrocution as with a 120- or 220-volt electrical cord. Additional information and specifics can be found at www.vdpam.iastate.edu/HumaneEuthanasia/pref.htm. Remember why Shearer said euthanasia might be characterized as the “kindest act”—one of the easiest to perform, but often one of the hardest to do. There is little question in the minds of most that when excruciating pain and suffering are uncontrollable by medical means, euthanasia is indicated. Nonetheless, many producers, managers, farm employees or others find it difficult to perform this task, not because the procedures are difficult, but because it is hard to kill an animal under any circumstances, but particularly so when it is their animal or one under their care. “Few enter the livestock business thinking that this is one of the tasks they must be prepared to do,” Shearer said. “However, once a person accepts the moral responsibility implicit in owning and working with livestock, they must also accept that one day they may be in a position where they are required to conduct this procedure.” Kylene Scott can be reached by phone at 620-227-1804 or by e-mail at kscott@hpj.com.
Copyright/Privacy
Copyright 1995-2011. High Plains Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved. Any republishing of these pages, including electronic reproduction of the editorial archives or classified advertising, is strictly prohibited. If you have questions or comments you can reach us at High Plains Journal 1500 E. Wyatt Earp Blvd., P.O. Box 760, Dodge City, KS 67801 or call 1-800-452-7171. Email: webmaster@hpj.com |
|
