Shade is a mechanism to reduce heat load providing cattle with an environment supportive of their welfare needs. Although heat stress has been extensively reviewed, researched, and addressed in dairy production systems, it has not been investigated in the same manner in the beef cattle supply chain. Like all animals, beef cattle are susceptible to heat stress if they are unable to dissipate heat during times of elevated ambient temperatures. There are many factors that impact heat stress susceptibility in beef cattle throughout the different supply chain sectors, many of which relate to the production system, that is, availability of shade, microclimate of environment, and nutrition management. The results from studies evaluating the effects of shade on production and welfare are difficult to compare due to variation in structural design, construction materials used, height, shape, and area of shade provided. Additionally, depending on operation location, shade may or may not be beneficial during all times of the year, which can influence the decision to make shade a permanent part of management systems. Shade has been shown to lessen the physiologic response of cattle to heat stress. Shaded cattle exhibit lower respiration rates, body temperatures, and panting scores compared with unshaded cattle in weather that increases the risk of heat stress. Results from studies investigating the provision of shade indicate that cattle seek shade in hot weather. The impact of shade on behavioral patterns is inconsistent in the current body of research, with some studies indicating that shade provision impacts behavior and other studies reporting no difference between shaded and unshaded groups. Analysis of performance and carcass characteristics across feedlot studies demonstrated that shaded cattle had increased ADG, improved feed efficiency, HCW, and dressing percentage when compared with cattle without shade. Despite the documented benefits of shade, current industry statistics, although severely limited in scope, indicate low shade implementation rates in feedlots and data in other supply chain sectors do not exist. Industry guidelines and third-party on-farm certification programs articulate the critical need for protection from extreme weather but are not consistent in providing specific recommendations and requirements. Future efforts should include: updated economic analyses of cost vs. benefit of shade implementation, exploration of producer perspectives and needs relative to shade, consideration of shade impacts in the cow–calf and slaughter plant segments of the supply chain, and integration of indicators of affective (mental) state and preference in research studies to enhance the holistic assessment of cattle welfare.

Animal welfare within the U.S. slaughter industry continues to prevail as one of the top priorities for livestock producers, businesses, and consumers alike. There are federal regulations that enforce the humane transport, handling, and slaughter of cattle. The journey that cattle must make to the slaughter facility is comprised of many environmental and human factors that can positively or negatively affect animal welfare. Cattle may be exposed to multiple stressors, such as noise, unfamiliar animals and humans, temperature extremes, temporary food/water deprivation, variable transport distances and experiences, and new pen conditions. The animal caretakers involved in these processes attempt to minimize stress and discomfort for the animals, but research is needed to focus on the gaps in knowledge and to support the implementation of strategies known to enhance the human–animal interactions that occur from farm to slaughter. This literature review will provide a summary of fed cattle welfare topics, research, and industry tools that span across the beef animal’s journey from the farm/feedlot through the slaughter process. In addition, areas that have had little research focus are identified to highlight the need for future work and development of industry tools. Some of these topics include examining trailer design, the use of trailer slats during weather extremes, the welfare aspects of cattle destined for salvage slaughter, multiple preslaughter factors and interactions, abnormal mobility and nonambulatory cattle, lairage environmental conditions, new stunning methods, and the impact of a well-trained, motivated, and stable workforce on cattle and people welfare. The authors conducted a survey at the 2019 North American Meat Institute Animal Care and Handling Conference, which comprised of stakeholders within the meat packing industry, packing plant employees, and food company employees, educators, and auditors. The survey responses identified training/education and communication as areas of need in animal welfare, whereas the majority of survey responses focused on the aspects of the human–animal interaction as the top challenges for the industry. By continuously identifying, measuring, monitoring, and managing animal welfare challenges within the beef cattle slaughter industry, prioritization and execution of programs and training that improve the welfare of cattle can be achieved as animals move through this final stage of the meat production system.

Euthanasia is a valuable management tool utilized on dairies to end the suffering of sick or debilitated cows. Euthanasia should be implemented if an animal’s pain cannot be adequately alleviated and if there is a limited chance of recovery. To be humane, euthanasia should be quick, painless, and administered by a trained individual. Despite its importance in ensuring cow well-being, the timeliness with which euthanasia decisions are made for dairy cattle is often overlooked or neglected. The timeliness of euthanasia is as important as the efficient, rapid administration of euthanasia itself. Timely euthanasia is a critical component of many on-farm animal care and verification programs yet opportunities exist within the industry to improve how effectively the industry is executing this critical component of cow management. There are challenges associated with performing euthanasia in a timely manner, such as inconsistencies in treatment protocols, inadequate employee training, difficulties assessing a cow’s quality of life, and impacts of the human–animal bond on decision-making. The objective of this paper is to explain the importance of timely euthanasia to dairy cattle welfare, identify the challenges that can prevent the timeliness of euthanasia, and provide solutions and practical suggestions for improving the management of timely euthanasia on dairies.

Producers and veterinarians are considered responsible for improving animal welfare, as they are responsible for implementing practices that directly impact the animal’s well-being. Most husbandry procedures performed in cattle do not include pain mitigation, and understanding challenges faced by these stakeholders to use analgesics is key in improving on-farm pain management strategies. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to explore producer and veterinarian perspectives on pain management practices by (1) exploring inquires received by Food Animal Residue Avoidance Databank (FARAD) regarding analgesic use in cattle and (2) using a survey instrument to identify factors that impact pain management implementation in the US cattle industry. Albeit analgesia use increased in the past ten years for some producers and the majority of veterinarians, administering analgesics for pain management on US cattle farms remains a challenge. From a producer perspective, drug cost, availability and logistics for administration. From a veterinarian perspective, lack of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) products hinders the support of on-farm protocols requiring extra-label drug use. Future steps to improve analgesic use on-farm include identifying and approving drugs that demonstrate efficacy for managing pain in cattle and disseminating educational resources to support stakeholders in both the implementation and drug withdrawal process.

Euthanasia is a critical component in swine production and veterinarians play an important role in euthanasia protocol development and training. This study aimed to understand veterinarian involvement in and perspectives on euthanasia on pig farms. An online survey was disseminated both at a pig welfare conference and online via a veterinarian e-newsletter. Twenty-five veterinarians participated in the survey. The majority of respondents indicated that caretakers are the individuals making euthanasia decisions and performing the task (n = 17, 68% and 22, 88%, respectively). The majority (22, 88%) of respondents indicated that most of the facilities with which they work have a written euthanasia protocol, and 72% (18) indicated that they assisted in protocol development. Only half of respondents (13, 52%) agreed that “all employees performing euthanasia have been trained adequately”, and 80% (20) identified an interest in delivering more training. Less than half the respondents indicated that strategies for coping with “personal stress” and “emotional wellness” (12, 48%) were included in euthanasia training. While the moral stress of performing euthanasia is recognized, there is opportunity for addressing mental well-being in euthanasia resources. Although preliminary, this study supports the need for further euthanasia training on-farm, involving veterinarians in the process.

Hind limb post stunning kicking in properly stunned unconscious cattle is a safety hazard for employees. Three different captive bolt lengths of 15.2 cm (STRD), 16.5 cm (MED), and 17.8 cm (LON) were evaluated for amount of tissue damage and hind limb kicking in a Jarvis USSS-1 pneumatic stunner. The air pressure setting was 1378.95 to 1447.90 pKa for all captive bolts. All 45 test cattle were rendered unconscious with a single shot. There was a trend (P = .06) for less kicking to occur when the 16.5 cm length bolt was used in the stunner. Visual appraisal of the brains on the split heads indicated that the shortest bolt caused the least amount of brain damage. The brainstems were intact for all cattle regardless of captive bolt treatment. Young fed English, Continental European, and Holstein steers and heifers can be effectively stunned without visible brainstem disruption.