Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T17:25:20.185Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improving the poultry shackle line

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

JA Lines,
P Berry,
P Cook,
CP Schofield and
TG Knowles
JA Lines*
Affiliation:
Silsoe Livestock Systems, Silsoe, Bedford MK45 4HS, UK
P Berry
Affiliation:
PB Technical, 67 Rosamond Road, Bedford MK40 3UG, UK
P Cook
Affiliation:
Food Animal Initiative, The Field Station, Wytham, Oxford OX2 8QJ, UK
CP Schofield
Affiliation:
Silsoe Livestock Systems, Silsoe, Bedford MK45 4HS, UK
TG Knowles
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Sciences, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: Jeff.Lines@Silsoeresearch.org.uk
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The most significant welfare problems associated with the current design of the shackle lines and water-bath stunners are the pain caused by compression of the birds’ legs in the shackles, the stress caused by being inverted and suspended by the legs, poor or inadequate stunning caused by the commercial need to minimise carcase damage, and poor water-bath entry. Research is described in which some practical solutions to these problems were investigated. The aim is to identify solutions that individually, or jointly, could be retro-fitted to existing plants, or incorporated into the design of new, small processing plants to improve poultry welfare. The development and commercial availability of such systems would enable small, local and niche market poultry processing lines to continue operating following the implementation of EC Council Regulation No 1099/2009.

Keywords

animal welfarebroilerspoultryshackle lineslaughterwater-bath

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Barker, R 2006 The effect of waterbath stunning current, frequency and waveform on carcass and meat quality in broilers. MSc Dissertation, University of Bristol, UKGoogle Scholar
Bedanova, I, Voslarova, E, Chloupek, P, Pistekova, V, Suchy, P, Blahova, J, Dobsikova, R and Vecerek, V 2007 Stress in broilers resulting from shackling. Poultry Science 86: 1065–1069CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
EC 2009 Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 of 24 September 2009 on the Protection of Animals at the Time of Killing. EC: Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
EFSA 2004 Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) on a Request from the Commission Related to Welfare Aspects of the Main Systems of Stunning and Killing the Main Commercial Species of Animals. www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/scdoc/45.htm. (Accessed January 5, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAWC 2009 Report on the Welfare of Farmed Animals at Slaughter or Killing Part 2: White Meat Animals. www.fawc.org.uk/pdf/report-090528.pdf. (Accessed January 5, 2011)Google Scholar
Gentle, MJ and Tilston, VL 2000 Nociceptors in the legs of poultry: implications for potential pain in pre-slaughter shackling. Animal Welfare 9: 227–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, RB, Satterlee, DG and Cadd, GC 1998 Struggling responses of broiler chickens shackled in groups on a moving line: effects of light intensity, hoods, and ‘curtains’. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 58: 341–352. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00091-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kannan, G, Heath, JL, Wabeck, CJ and Mench, JA 1997 Shackling of broilers: effects on stress responses and breast meat quality. British Poultry Science 38: 323–333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00071669708417998CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lines, JA, Robb, DH, Kestin, SC, Crook, SC and Benson, T 2003 Electric stunning: a humane slaughter method for trout. Aquacultural Engineering 28: 141–154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0144-8609(03)00021-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lines, JA, Jones, TA, Berry, PS, Cook, J, Spence, J and Schofield, CP 2011a Evaluation of a breast support conveyor to improve poultry welfare on the shackle line. Veterinary Record 168: 129–129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.c5431CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lines, JA, Raj, ABM, Wotton, SB, O’Callaghan, M and Knowles, TG 2011b Head-only electrical stunning of poultry using a waterbath: a feasibility study. British Poultry Science 52: 432–438CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lines, JA, Wotton, SB, Barker, R, Spence, J, Wilkins, L and Knowles, TG 2011c Broiler carcass quality using head-only electrical stunning in a waterbath. British Poultry Science 52: 439–445. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00071668.2011.587181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raj, ABM and O’Callaghan, M 2001 Evaluation of a pneumatically operated captive bolt for stunning/killing broiler chickens. British Poultry Science 42: 295–299CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raj, ABM and O’Callaghan, M 2004 Effect of amount and frequency of head-only stunning currents on the electroencephalograms and somatosensory evoked potentials in broilers. Animal Welfare 13: 159–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raj, ABM, O’Callaghan, M and Hughes, SI 2006a The effects of amount and frequency of pulsed direct current used in waterbath stunning and of slaughter methods on spontaneous electroencephalograms in broilers Animal Welfare 15: 19–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raj, ABM, O’Callaghan, M and Knowles, TG 2006b The effects of amount and frequency of alternating current used in waterbath stunning and of slaughter methods on electroencephalograms in broilers. Animal Welfare 15: 7–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sparrey, J 1995 Aspects in the design and operation of shackle lines for the slaughter of Poultry. MPhil Thesis, University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UKGoogle Scholar