On the farm
In a comment, Fabian Fabian said, "A good answer should provide the laws and regulations involve" -- although it'sinvolve, but also provide some evidence if those laws are not easy to prove thatenforced properly."
In summary:
There are no Federal laws at all regarding "animal abuse" on farms
State-level cruelty laws usually exempt "normal" farm practices
There is one Federal law which should regulate "abuse" at slaughter-houses, but which:
- Isn't thoroughly enforced by the USDA
- Doesn't apply to chickens
Laws on the farm
There are no suchFederal laws exist, hereregarding animal cruelty on farms. Here are two relevant quotes:
The five laws (from five States) listed in this section of Wikipedia all pertain (only) to use of gestation crates.
There's
There's a compendium of all State laws listed here (which I haven't read, but which you could if you want details about any specific State).
Reading this list, it does seem to beassuming it's complete, shows that it's true that there are no Federal laws which condemn cruelty to farm animals before they are taken for slaughter: which includes all animals which will not enter the human food chain (e.g. because they are too sick).
OnLaws on slaughter
On at least one occasion, theThe USDA has "suspended"sometimes "suspends" a slaughterhouse, after an "undercover investigator" from an animal welfare group took somecaptures video and sentsends it to the USDA: for example, USDA suspends slaughterhouse after video appears to show animal cruelty says,
Effectiveness of USDA inspections
USDA inspections are apparently insufficient toinspectors do not detect or prevent all instances of cruelty: I say that because at least one animal welfare group claims to have discovered (and has corresponding video of) several instances of 'cruelty' over the years. I presume there are other instance of cruelty, undiscovered, or discovered by other animal welfare groups. Some of these investigations result in criminal charges being laid.
Earlier I said "On at least one occasion" (because I only provided one link to a news article), but thisThis document shows that in 2008 and 2009, there were 80 or 90 "suspensions" per year, issued to federally inspected
plants for violations of humane handling and humane
slaughter regulations.
And, perhaps it is possible or
It does seem true to say that USDA inspectors do or have "condoned" cruelty: ibid says, on its first page,
- Ibid says, on its first page,
[In early 2008, multiple incidents of egregious cruelty
to cattle at the Westland-Hallmark Meat Packing
Co. in Chino, California, caught on videotape by
animal protection advocates, resulted in widespread
public outrage and eventually led to the largest
beef recall in the history of the U.S.] These incidents happened despite the continual on-site presence of USDA inspection personnel and the performance of periodic third-party humane slaughter audits at the plant.
The Humane Slaughter Act simply requires that animals be rendered insensible to pain before they are harvested. However, apparently this law is not being enforced in some instances. For example, the Washington Post article reported that "enforcement records, interviews, videos and worker affidavits describe repeated violations of the Humane Slaughter Act" and "the government took no action against a Texas beef company that was cited 22 times in 1998 for violations that include chopping hooves off live cattle".
The US Government Accountability Office (which reports to Congress) wrote a document in 2010 titled HUMANE METHODS OF SLAUGHTER ACT:
Actions Are Needed to Strengthen Enforcement. The GAO report things like:
- Only 23% of inspectors would suspend operations on seeing multiple failures to stun an animal
- Inspectors at half of the
plants did not correctly answer basic facts about signs of sensibility [i.e., determine whether stunning was successful]
The GAO made four "Recommendations for Executive Action", only one of which (which was to review the paperwork) now has a status of "Closed - implemented".
The USDA is more concerned with "food safety" than "humane killing".
On the subject of "food safety", the problem at the Canadian XL Foods meat packing (slaughterhouse) was that the workers were too hurried: for example The Globe and Mail's XL Foods workers feared raising food safety concerns, union says article wrote,
However Anti-Whistleblower Bills Hide Factory-Farming Abuses from the Public suggests that anti-whistleblower ("ag-gag") bills have been introduced but not passed; so apparently it is still legal (per the First Amendment which allows journalists to report) to produce videos like the one you cited in the OP.
Conclusion
This story from today's news (from Canada) seems to me typical of other articles I read while researching this answer: 'Horrific' conditions seen in egg industry are 'unacceptable': Egg Farmers of Canada.
In my opinion, the following is a summary of what's happening:
- Apparently "cruel" treatment on the farm is not illegal
- Some methods of killing such as "thumping" (aka 'blunt trauma') are said to be normal industry practice (for unwanted animals, i.e. except at the slaughter-house)
- Undercover animal rights activists take video (on private property)
- The intent of the activists is not to get the law enforced (there is no law), but to coerce companies (e.g. McDonald's) and other suppliers/consumers via the threat of bad publicity
- News such as this is not popular with the general public
- The factory farming industry tries to downplay and deny such news, tries to villify animal rights activists, and tries to prevent such news (video) from being obtained.