San Francisco Chronicle: Poultry slaughter suit OKd

[Guest guest]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/09/07/BAGF5L0IM71.DTL & feed\

=rss.bayarea

 

SAN FRANCISCO

Poultry slaughter suit OKd

 

Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer

 

Thursday, September 7, 2006

 

 

Animal-rights advocates can sue the federal government to seek humane

slaughtering methods for chickens and turkeys, a federal judge ruled

Wednesday.

 

Animals, however, will have to rely on humans to make their case. The

judge tossed out an effort to include them as plaintiffs.

 

U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel rejected a dismissal motion by

the U.S. Agriculture Department, which declared last September that a

federal law requiring humane methods of slaughter does not apply to

poultry. Patel did not decide whether the department's decision was

legal but said it can be challenged in court.

 

Specifically, the judge said the plaintiffs, members of the Humane

Society of the United States and East Bay Animal Advocates, had shown

that they could be harmed by the USDA policy by citing studies

declaring that poultry-killing methods increase the risk of food

poisoning.

 

The ruling is " the first step in ensuring that turkeys, chickens and

other birds are protected from inhumane slaughter, as Congress

specifically ordered, " said Humane Society lawyer Sarah Uhlemann.

 

She was referring to a 48-year-old law requiring humane methods of

slaughter for " cattle, calves, horses, mules, sheep, swine and other

livestock.'' The lawsuit contends that " other livestock'' includes

poultry, contrary to the USDA's interpretation last year.

 

A humanely slaughtered animal is first rendered unconscious by electric

shock. According to the lawsuit, poultry processors shackle birds

upside down onto an assembly line, shock them into paralysis, cut them

at the neck and then dip them into scalding water to remove their

feathers.

 

The process is painful for the birds and dangerous for people, the

plaintiffs contended, saying USDA studies show an increased likelihood

of bacterial contamination when such methods are used. Two poultry

workers from North Carolina joined the suit, saying the slaughtering

procedures exposed them to greater risks of injury from scratches or

illness from airborne contamination. Patel said the workers may have to

sue in their home state.

 

The suit was also joined by lawyers representing reindeer, bison and

other species that are not entitled to humane slaughtering under the

USDA policy. Patel dismissed them from the case Wednesday, saying

animals have no standing to sue.

 

E-mail Bob Egelko at begelko.