HonestJohn
Well-Known Member
How do you hide a hat in a carcass?
Condemned
- Thread starter Bugsy
- Start date
That's rubbish. UK vets historically did the job very happily until the salary crashed at which point they thought what's the point when there are other better paying jobs. It was due to very deliberate policy by the winner of the contract, who has recently won more recent rounds despite concerns being raised including by the CMA and that their approach could threaten future self-sufficiency of MHIs. Even now DEFRA/FSA has survey data showing a decent number of UK vets would consider abattoir OV work as a career path. I spent a few years on the vet regulator as a minority voice fighting to try and highlight these issues and fix the system.
See the comment about the survey data whereby a lot of vets are interested in doing the work.
It's not that they don't want to do it but that they want to earn a fair wage- hence why so many of the EU vets used it as a way to get to the UK then switched to other roles/sectors, leading to a perpetual 'need' to keep importing vets rather than the former (healthier) self-sustaining model.
However poor salaries (and even poorer ones when in training) plus intransigence by FSA/contractor select against it. I remember enquiring about doing abattoir OV work around 2017/18 but they were offering about 20k while in training (had to start as an MHI IIRC) and not much more when qualified as an OV. Back then the starting salary for a vet was around 25-30k, averaging at 40k after 10 years although these figures have since increased. The contractor has, after significant pressure, increased the offering since then but it's still far below private practice. At the time I enquired I also spoke to an Irish OV and they were paid 3-4 times what British OVs were paid.
People would do it but it doesn't suit the current business model of the contractor. One idea I suggested was rather than having people who are just OVs, have several vets in an area each doing one day a week at the abattoir. A lot of people would go for that and it would solve a number of issues but FSA/contractor are not fans of the idea, even though it's much closer to the historic model which worked. It is rubbish to suggest the reason for the lack of OVs is that UK vets don't want to do the role.
We're still saying the same thing:
UK vets don't currently want to do it (because the wages are low).
Non UK vets are being "imported" to fill the roles.
That's what you are saying above, and in your earlier post.
That's also what I said.
I agree with you entirely that there is probably a better solution, and if the salary was more attractive then UK vets may be interested in doing the job.
As per previously, UK vets are interested in doing the job. However the contractor is not particularly interested in employing them, as I experienced both when looking into this on the RCVS and when I'd previously contacted them. Salary is one of several factors but you can be interested in doing a role whilst not able to financially justify it, or you can be interested in doing a role but the working hours don't work out. The issue is not lack of interest. For example, I wanted to do OV work but there was no way I could afford to take the pay cut back then with a mortgage and two children. That's not not wanting to do it.
I understand and appreciate your input but when you say ‘ the contractor is not interested in employing him ‘ I’m afraid it all boils down to one thing in my mind and it’s just another buisness with there finger in the pie helping himself , and this probably equates to the lowest prices since 1990 . I appreaciate it’s all goverment regulation but at the end of the day “we “ as the suppliers are being strangled by this red tape and the GD aren’t helping with there minor feeble excuses for not paying out and charging to incinerate the animal
By the amount of PMs I’ve had this “condemning a beast “ is a major major problem and shooters are getting stung and fed up , no wonder there’s such a large deer population .
As I mentioned in an earlier post, ownership of the carcass remains vested in the consignor until payment has been made, therefore the AGHE has no right to dispose of a "condemned" carcass without first giving the stalker the option to come and take it away.
They could be legally challenged over that.
Incidentally, if ever I get a lamb carcass (or part of a carcass) condemned by an abattoir I get a vet report something like shown below.
Are AGHEs providing similar reports to stalkers in the event of a carcass being condemned?
Agreed, definitely the business (I used contractor to refer to the business who won the contract, sorry for any confusion) having their slice of the pie at everyone else's expense. Apparently it's cheaper for the FSA to have the contractor running all the OVs for the country rather than the FSA doing it and paying pensions etc.. Simply because if a contractor takes the contract and offers sod all salary and pension whilst skimming profit, it's cheaper than paying people properly. Essentially privatisation screwing over the taxpayer in this example.I understand and appreciate your input but when you say ‘ the contractor is not interested in employing him ‘ I’m afraid it all boils down to one thing in my mind and it’s just another buisness with there finger in the pie helping himself , and this probably equates to the lowest prices since 1990 . I appreaciate it’s all goverment regulation but at the end of the day “we “ as the suppliers are being strangled by this red tape and the GD aren’t helping with there minor feeble excuses for not paying out and charging to incinerate the animal
By the amount of PMs I’ve had this “condemning a beast “ is a major major problem and shooters are getting stung and fed up , no wonder there’s such a large deer population .
With a great deal of effort … although probably technically possible I’d have thought
I think the point being made is that head shot animals with a completely destroyed brain don’t bleed out properly , hence why captive bolt guns are supposed to stun the animals rather than kill them. Other methods used are an electrical stun or gassing of the animals- all done to enable bleeding to take place with the heart still pumping. The animal dies due to blood loss ; thus providing a better quality of carcass.
In Germany, ive seen local butchers decline head shot animals when they come to buy the carcasses after a driven hunt, because they want well bled carcasses that will yield high quality food to be sold for a high price within their own shops . Their reputation depends on quality produce.
I asked a butcher about this in Germany. He had a mobile slaughter license , and slaughtered a bullock right there in its meadow and I helped him to load into his trailer. He said the same , and explained to me that this is why he only uses a .22 lr rifle to clip the back of the scull of the animals to enable him to then safely and humanely bleed them out there and then. No stress for the animal etc etc. Destroying the brain is exactly what he’s trying to avoid in a field or stable slaughter situation.
Re the original post, it all sounds pretty crappy, especially given that in uk they only want to pay full price for head shot animals…..
Kindest regards, Olaf
NickJ
Well-Known Member
I think he said that the heart often doesn’t stop for a while with head shots
It’s very variable but it can beat for several minutes
It will have stopped by the time the stalker has waited the recommended 10 minutes or so before approaching the carcass. That's the main thing.
If it hasn't stopped by that time then it's a wounded animal, not a dead one.
No eye reaction from the doe but the fawn was still moving.
Neck shot fallow nerves kicking in.
HonestJohn
Well-Known Member
I like that. So in fact we should be paid a premium for chest shot deer and have head shot condemnedWith a great deal of effort … although probably technically possible I’d have thought
I think the point being made is that head shot animals with a completely destroyed brain don’t bleed out properly , hence why captive bolt guns are supposed to stun the animals rather than kill them. Other methods used are an electrical stun or gassing of the animals- all done to enable bleeding to take place with the heart still pumping. The animal dies due to blood loss ; thus providing a better quality of carcass.
In Germany, ive seen local butchers decline head shot animals when they come to buy the carcasses after a driven hunt, because they want well bled carcasses that will yield high quality food to be sold for a high price within their own shops . Their reputation depends on quality produce.
I asked a butcher about this in Germany. He had a mobile slaughter license , and slaughtered a bullock right there in its meadow and I helped him to load into his trailer. He said the same , and explained to me that this is why he only uses a .22 lr rifle to clip the back of the scull of the animals to enable him to then safely and humanely bleed them out there and then. No stress for the animal etc etc. Destroying the brain is exactly what he’s trying to avoid in a field or stable slaughter situation.
Re the original post, it all sounds pretty crappy, especially given that in uk they only want to pay full price for head shot animals…..
Kindest regards, Olaf
I have noticed the same in both chest- and head-shot deer that were sitting around for a long time before getting put in the chiller.
(Although bear in mind it's not a good idea to chill a carcass down too quickly, either).
If not linked to how long it took to cool the carcass, not being bled means there is more fluid in the animal. The liquid component of blood (and cells) along with some of the proteins can diffuse out of vessels as the cells die and the vessels become more permeable.
Assuming these were bled properly, I'd suspext warm dead tissue was probably leading to excessive autolysis where cell membranes break down, resulting in loss of intracellular fluid which can then build up and tissues lose tone. As you allude, it's all about a balance of chilling at the ideal rate to both avoid spoilage but also allow the meat to become more tender.
Most my deer local so not long till lardered ..if summer they go into chill pretty quick ...if winter ill leave hanging 7c or less preferably 4c or less I like....then Into chiller in morning
I cant say i noticed it on chest shot carcasses ...only head shot, but then not every one either ...so go figure hardly scientific
As above may be onto something there
Paul
Similar threads
