ABATTOIR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

A modern abattoir should have essential components like lairage, ante mortem examination facility,
stunning section, humane slaughter facility, facility for flaying, dressing and washing of the carcasses,
postmortem inspection section, veterinary office and laboratory, facility for handling byproducts,
rendering and effluent treatment plant. The guiding principle for designing abattoir is to provide all
related services under hygienic conditions. The essential facilities required in any abattoir are as
follows:
1. Livestock receiving area: It is the area where animals are received. Receiving area must have
watering, feeding and animal inspection facilities. Animals are to be inspected by a Veterinarian.
Healthy animals are sent to lairage while sick and injured animals are to be sent to isolation pen.
2. Lairage: Place where animals are provided rest before slaughter. Rest is to be provided up to 24
hours to overcome the physiological stress involved in transportation of animals. Sheep have to
be kept off feed up to 12 hours before slaughter in lairage to reduce the gut contents thereby
reducing the chances of contamination during dressing of carcasses. Space requirement for
lairaging of sheep is 0.6 m2 per animal.
3. V race: It is the pathway that connects lairage with the slaughter hall. Length of the V race can
be up to 36 m. Pathway will be tapering with width of 50 cm and 80 cm in bottom and at the top
respectively.
4. Slaughter hall: Premises where stunning, bleeding and dressing of carcasses takes place in the
abattoir. Animal need to be stunned before slaughter for painless killing. To ensure proper and
safe stunning a restrainer has to be provided which will hold the animals firmly while stunning.
Stunning will be followed by bleeding which has to be done on a bleeding trough of 1.1 to 1.2 m
width for small ruminants. Dressing of the animals has to be done on rail for ensuring hygiene.
Height of the overhead rails has to be about 2.7 m at bleeding area and 2.3 m at dressing area.
5. Tripe and gut room: Space for cleaning of stomach and intestine. Proper water supply and
provision for disposal of gastro intestinal contents has to be provided at the tripe room.
6. Byproduct store room: Space for storing fat, skins, head and feet.
7. Offal room: Place for trimming and storing of liver, lungs, kidneys etc.
8. Isolation pen: Place for accommodating sick or suspect animals.
9. Chilling room: For chilling of carcasses after dressing. Temperature maintained in carcass store
room will be 70 C and that of offal will be at 30 C.
10. Cutting room: Room where carcasses are cut into cutup parts/ retail packs and packed as per
consumer requirement. Temperature maintained at cutting room will 100 C.
11. Freezer room: Storage of packaged meat at 17 to 200 C till dispatch.
12. Veterinary room: Section for Veterinarians who undertake ante and post mortem of animals.
13. Changing room: For changing dress of slaughterhouse personnel.
14. Effluent Treatment Plant: Facility for treating the effluent generated from an abattoir before
releasing to drainage or reuse or using for irrigation.

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 1

15. Emergency slaughter hall: This is the miniature abattoir for lairaging and harvesting of
diseased and suspect animals
16. Compound area: Whole slaughterhouse premises must be completely compounded along with
plantation across the boundaries.
17. Electrical & generator room: To ensure supply of adequate electricity in the plant.
18. Toilets Adequate toilet facility is required to maintain hygiene (@ One/ 25 persons).
19. Office room
20. Security
21. Water storage sumps: Sumps for storing the required quantity of water for adequate and
timely supply of water.
22. Parking: For parking vehicles transporting animals, meat and the personnel.
In general the following basic guidelines should receive serious considerations.
1. A clear-cut separation between clean and unclean sections
2. There should be only forward flow of operation without any possibility of reversal
3. Building floor should be made up of easily cleanable and non slippery material.
4. Walls should have white ceramic tiles to promote sanitation and light reflection
5. Buildings should have efficient drainage and the drain should have effluent flow in opposite
direction from edible product flow
6. Open windows should be screened
7. In modern abattoirs, overhead rail system ensures the basic requirements of hygienic conditions
during slaughter and dressing

Model of slaughterhouse for small ruminants

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 2

Design of loading facilities and holding pens

T. Grandin
Animal Science Department, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 (U.S.A.)

Abstract
Grandin, T., 1990. Design of loading facilities and holding pens. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 28: 187-201.
Holding pens and loading facilities are used in abattoirs, saleyards, stockyards, and sorting facilities.
Long, narrow pens are recommended where animals enter through one end and leave through the
other. Constructing the pens on a 60-80 angle eliminates sharp 90 corners. Flooring in holding pens
should be non-slip. Indoor holding pens should have even, diffuse lighting that minimizes shadows.
Cattle, pigs and sheep have a tendency to move more easily from a dimly illuminated area to a more
brightly illuminated area. Facilities should be designed to minimize excessive noise.
In large facilities more than one unloading ramp may be required to facilitate prompt unloading.
During warm weather prompt unloading is essential because heat rapidly builds up in a stationary
vehicle. Ideally, holding pens should be built at truck height to eliminate ramps.
The maximum recommended angle for adjustable ramps for cattle, pigs, and sheep is 25 . Twenty
degrees is the maximum recommended angle for non-adjustable ramps. For pigs, 15 is
recommended. Ramps should have a level dock at the top equal to one animal body length.
Stairsteps are recommended on concrete ramps. Recommended dimensions are a 30 cm minimum
tread width and a 10 cm rise for cattle, and a 25 cm tread width and 5 cm rise for slaughter weight
pigs. Both loading and unloading ramps should have solid fences. The crowd pen that leads to the
ramp should also have solid sides and it must never be placed on a ramp. Crowd pens must be level.
Single file, curved ramps with solid fences are very efficient for loading cattle onto trucks. Ramps
used for unloading only should be 2.5 to 3-m wide to provide animals with a clear exit off the vehicle.
In Denmark and other Scandinavian countries trucks used for transporting pigs are equipped with a
hydraulic tailgate lift. Well designed holding pens and loading ramps can help reduce bruises and
stress.
Introduction
Holding pens and loading facilities are used in abattoirs, saleyards, stockyards, and sorting facilities.
Well designed facilities will help reduce bruises, stress, and mortality. Bruises and mortality cost the
livestock industry millions of dollars annually (Marshall, 1977; Livestock Conservation Institute,
1988a,b). Stress-related meat quality problems, such as dark cutting (DFD) and pale, soft exudative
(PSE) meat are also very costly (Canadian Meat Council, 1980). Another advantage of good facilities
is an improvement in animal welfare.
The basic principles of design are universal for all facilities but the purpose of the facility will affect
certain parts of its design. For example, American and Australian trucks hold more animals than
trucks in some European countries. This will affect the size of the holding pens. When a holding
facility is designed, space must be allocated for specialized functions such as weighing, sorting,
washing, or checking animal identification. To avoid serious design mistakes, the designer must fully
understand the specific handling requirements of the country or region where the facility will be
located.
Pen Layout
Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 3

Long, narrow pens are recommended in holding facilities where livestock are held for a relatively
short period of time (Kilgour, 197 1; Grandin, 1980a,b; R. Hoenderken, personal communication, 198
1 ). A major advantage of long, narrow pens is efficient animal movement. Animals enter through one
end and leave through the other. To eliminate 90" corners, the pens can be laid out on a 60-800
angle (Figs. I and 2). Each pen gate should be longer than the width of the alley, so that it opens on
an angle to eliminate the sharp corner (Fig. 1). Figure 2 is an indoor holding yard at a pig abattoir
which slaughters > 5000 pigs day. Long, narrow pens maximize lineal fence length in relation to floor
area. This may help reduce stress (Kilgour, 1978; Grandin, 1980a,b). Cattle and pigs prefer to lie
along the fenceline (Stricklin et al., 1979; Grandin, 1980b). Observations indicate that long, narrow
pens may help reduce fighting (Kilgour, 1976). Government regulations in some countries may
require walkways in between the pens for observation of animals prior to slaughter. The layout
remains the same except that a 1-m-wide walkway is placed between every other pen.

Fig. 1. Long, narrow holding pens, unloading ramps and curved race system for a cattle
abattoir.

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 4

Fig. 2. Diagonal holding pens in a large pig abattoir.

Group size
The size of the holding pens required for an abattoir or stockyard is at least partially dictated by size
of the trucks. When small groups of animals are handled, block gates can be used in a long, narrow
pen to keep different groups separated. Minimum space requirements for holding fattened, feedlot
steers for < 24 h are 1.6 m' for hornless cattle and 1. 8 5 m' for horned cattle (Grandin, 1979;
Midwest Plan Service, 1980), and 0.5 M2 for slaughter weight pigs and lambs. During warm weather
pigs require more space. Wild, extensively raised cattle may require additional space. However,
providing too much space may increase stress because wild cattle tend to pace in a holding pen.
There must be adequate space for all animals to lie down.
Mixing
To reduce stress and preserve meat quality, strange animals should not be mixed shortly before
slaughter (Tennessen and Price, 1980; Grandin, 1983; Barton-Gade, 1985). Solid pen walls between
holding pens prevent fighting through the fences (Fig. 2). Solid fences in holding pens are especially
important if wildlife such as deer, elk, or buffalo are handled.
Pigs present some practical problems. In the U.S.A., pigs are transported in trucks with a capacity of
> 200 animals. However, they are fattened in much smaller groups. Observations at U.S. abattoirs;
indicate that mixing 200 pigs from three or four farms resulted in less fighting than mixing 6-40 pigs.
One advantage of the larger group is that an attacked pig has an opportunity to escape. Price and
Tennessen (1981) found a tendency towards more DFD carcasses and hence more stress when small
groups of 7 bulls were mixed, compared with larger groups of 21 bulls.
Pen and alley dimensions

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 5

In countries with large trucks, larger pens and wider alleys will be required. Alley and pen widths are
also dictated by the number of animals per hour which must move through the facility (Tables I and
2). To avoid bunching and trampling, 25 m is the maximum recommended length of each holding
pen, unless block gates are installed to keep groups separated. Shorter pens are usually
recommended.
Table I: Pen and alley widths for pig and sheep holding facilities
Animals handled (h1)

Pen width (m)

Alley width (m)

< 4001

1.3

> 4002

3-4.2

2.5-3

Or truckloads of less than 80 animals.

Or truckloads of more than 150 animals.

Table II: Pen and alley widths for cattle-holding facilities1

Method of driving cattle

Pen width (m)

Alley width (m)

On foot

3.5-4.2

On horseback and on foot

N/A

3.5

On horseback

N/A

4.2

These recommendations apply to most facilities except a few specialized situations where

small numbers of cattle are handled.

2

The alley is too wide for a single person to block cattle turnbacks.

Specialized holding facilities

In Denmark, the design of the pig lairage at the abattoir is very specialized (Fig. 3). Pigs are held in
long, narrow pens equipped with manual push gates. A powered push gate moves pigs up the alley to
the stunner. This system was invented by T. Wichmann of the Danish Meat Research Institute. The
Danes have also developed automated block gates within the long, narrow pens to keep small groups
of 15 pigs in separate groups (Barton-Gade, 1989). When strange bulls are mixed, physical activity
during fighting increases DFD meat. The installation of either steel bars or an electric grid over the
holding pens prevented dark cutting in bulls (Kenny and Tarrant, 1987). These devices prevent
mounting. The electric grid should only be used with animals that have been fattened in pens
equipped with an electric grid. In Sweden and other countries where small numbers of bulls are
fattened, individual pens are recommended at the abattoir (Puolanne and Aalto, 1981). In some
European abattoirs, the holding area consists of a series of single-file races which lead to the stunner.
Bulls are unloaded directly into the races and are kept separated by guillotine gates.

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 6

Fig. 3. Danish pig lairage with push gates and a power crowd gate.
Flooring
Holding and loading facilities must have non-slip flooring (Stevens and Lyons, 1977; Grandin, 1983).
For cattle, deep 2.5-cm "V" grooves in a 20 cm square or diamond pattern are recommended. The
deep groove pattern should not be used in living quarters for cattle. In pig holding facilities, the wet
concrete may be imprinted with a stamp made from expanded steel mesh with a 3.8-cm-long opening
(Grandin, 1982).
In abattoirs, concrete slats may be used in livestock holding pens, but the drive alleys should have a
solid concrete floor. Slats or gratings used in pig and sheep facilities should face in the proper
direction. Sheep move more easily when they walk across the slats instead of parallel with them
(Kilgour, 1971; Hutson, 1981 ). Figure 2 shows the correct orientation of slats in holding pens. The
floor appears more solid when the animals walk across the slats. To facilitate animal movement, the
animals must not be able to see light or reflections off water under the slats.
Animals will balk at sudden changes in floor texture or color. Flooring surfaces should be uniform in
appearance and free from puddles (Lynch and Alexander, 1973). In facilities that are washed,
concrete curbs may be installed between the pens to prevent water in one pen from flowing into
another. Drains should be located outside the areas where animals walk. Livestock will balk at drains
or metal plates across an alley (Grandin, 1987). Flooring should not move or jiggle when animals walk
on it. Flooring that moves causes swine to balk (Kilgour, 1988).
Bruise Prevention
Edges with a small diameter such as steel angles and channels will cause severe bruises. Round pipe
posts are recommended and surfaces which come into contact with animals should be smooth and
rounded (Stevens and Lyons, 1977; Grandin, 1980c). Sharp corners should be padded with split tires
or conveyor belting.
All gates should be equipped with tie-backs to prevent them from swinging out into the alley.
Guillotine gates should be counter-weighted and padded on the bottom (Grandin, 1983).

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 7

Lighting and Sound Levels

Indoor holding pens and loading facilities should have even, diffuse lighting that minimizes shadows
(Fig. 2). Cattle, pigs, and sheep have a tendency to move more easily from a dimly illuminated to a
more brightly illuminated area (Kilgour, 1971; van Putten and Elshof, 1978; Hitchcock and Hutson,
1979; Grandin, 1982). At night or in enclosed facilities, lamps can be used to attract animals into
trucks or races (Grandin, 1982). The lamps must illuminate the floor and must not shine into the eyes
of approaching animals. Loading ramps must never be pointed into the sun (Vowles, 198 5 ).
Livestock are more likely to balk if they are forced to move towards blinding sunlight. Pigs reared
indoors under artificial illumination preferred to walk up a ramp illuminated at 80 Ix (Phillips et al.,
1987). This was similar to the illumination of their living quarters. A ramp illuminated with less than 5
Ix was avoided. There was also a tendency to avoid an excessively bright ramp illuminated at 1200 Ix
(Phillips et al., 1987).
Livestock have sensitive hearing and they are stressed by excessive noise (Kilgour and de Langen,
1970; Kilgour, 1983). In steel facilities, gate strike posts should have rubber stops to reduce noise. Air
exhausts on pneumatically powered gates should be piped outside (Grandin, 1983). If hydraulics are
used to power gates, the motor and pump should be located away from the animals. Cattle held
overnight in a noisy yard close to the unloading ramp were more active and had greater bruising
compared with cattle held in a quiet pen (Eldridge, 1988).
Unloading and Loading Layout
In large stockyards, sale yards, or abattoirs more than one loading or unloading ramp is usually
required to facilitate prompt loading or unloading. During warm weather, prompt unloading is
essential because heat rapidly builds up in stationary vehicles.
In some facilities, unloading pens (Fig. I ) will be required. These pens enable animals to be unloaded
promptly prior to sorting, weighing, or identification checking. After one or more procedures are
performed the animals move to a holding pen.
Loading dock height varies depending on the types of vehicles used. If vehicle heights vary by a few
centimeters, construction of nonadjustable ramps is recommended, even with the lowest vehicles
used. This will enable the crossover bridge that is attached to the higher vehicles to be used more
effectively.
Width
Facilities used for unloading only should be 2.5-3 in wide to provide the animals with a clear exit to
the alley (Fig. I) (Grandin, 19 80d). The recommended width for facilities used to load livestock into a
truck varies depending on vehicle type. A vehicle with a tailgate that opens up to the full width of the
vehicle can be loaded with a ramp the same width as the vehicle. The large trucks used in North
America usually have a door which is just wide enough to admit cattle in single-file or pigs and sheep
double-file. A single-file loading ramp for cattle should be 76 cm wide. For pigs and sheep, a ramp 86
cm wide will enable 2 animals to walk up side by side. A partition down the middle of the ramp
improves efficiency because it prevents the pigs from turning around (Grandin, 1987) (Figs. 4 and 5).
The partition is made from "see through" wire mesh to promote following. It is a serious design
mistake to make a ramp or race 1 1/2 animal wide. This will result in jamming. Recommended widths
for single-file ramps used by slaughter weight pigs and sheep will vary from 3 5 to 43 cm depending
on animal size.

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 8

Ramp slope
Ideally a holding facility should be built at truck deck level to eliminate ramps (Fig. 3). Sheep move
most easily on a level surface (Hitchcock and Hutson, 1979). Many animals are injured on excessively
steep ramps. The recommended maximum angle for cattle and sheep ramps is 25 for adjustable
ramps which are raised to the second or third deck of a truck (Grandin, 1979). For fattened slaughter
weight pigs a 15 angle is recommended (van Putten, 1981 ). The maximum angle for nonadjustable
livestock ramps is 20 (Grandin, 1979). A pig's heart rate increases with the angle of the ramp (van
Putten and Elshof, 1978), and is faster when the pig is climbing than when it is descending a ramp
(Mayes and Jesse, 1980). Excessively steep ramps were avoided by pigs in a preference test: 20-24
ramps were preferred to 28-32 ramps (Fraser et al., 1986; Phillips et al., 1988). To reduce the
possibility of falls, ramps should have a flat dock at the top. This provides a level surface for animals
to walk on when they first step off the truck (Stevens and Lyons, 1977; Grandin, 1979; Agriculture
Canada, 1984). The level dock should have a minimum width of one animal body length. A selfaligning dock bumper will help prevent injuries caused by an animal stepping down between the truck
and the dock (Rider et al., 1974). Telescoping side gates are also recommended to block the gap. To
facilitate entry from the crowd pen into a single-file ramp there should be a level section of race equal
to one animal body length at the junction between the ramp and the crowd pen.

Fig. 4. Crowd pen and ramp system for loading pigs onto trucks that have a narrow
entrance door.

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 9

Fig. 5. The "see through" partition promotes following. The outer fences of this loading
ramp are solid.
Ramp surface
Stairsteps are recommended on concrete ramps. Stairsteps are easier to walk on after the ramp
becomes worn or dirty. However, in new clean facilities, small pigs expressed no preference between
stairsteps or closely spaced cleats (Phillips et al., 1987). The movements in this experiment were
voluntary.
Recommended dimensions for stairsteps are a 30 cm minimum tread width and a 10 cm rise for
cattle, and a 2 5 cm tread width and a 5 cm rise for slaughter weight pigs (U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA), 1967; Grandin, 1980c, 1982). The steps should be grooved to provide a non-slip
surface. When cleats are used, they should be spaced 20 cm apart for large cattle and slaughter
weight pigs (Mayes, 1978). The 20 cm is measured from the beginning of one cleat to the beginning
of the next cleat. For small, 16 kg pigs, maximum cleat spacing is 10 cm apart (Phillips et al., 1987).
Spacing the cleats 5 cm apart improved traction. During a choice test, small pigs readily walked up
steep ramps with the narrower spacing (Phillips et al., 1990). Possibly, the 20 cm spacing
recommended by Mayes ( 1978) for slaughter weight pigs should be decreased. On outdoor ramps
that become covered with ice, closely spaced cleats may be more likely to become slick.
Curved ramps and solid fences
Curved single-file ramps are especially recommended for loading cattle onto a truck (Figs. 6 and 7)
(Rider et al., 1974; Grandin, 1980a). A curved ramp with an inside radius of 5 m will work well for
both loading and unloading. A shorter radius is not recommended if the ramp is going to be used for
unloading. The curve must be laid out as shown in Fig. 6. If the ramp is bent too sharply at the
junction between the single-file race and the crowd pen it will appear as a dead end. This will cause
livestock to balk (Grandin, 1987). Handler walkways should run alongside the ramp and crowd pen
(Grandin, 1987). Overhead walkways should be avoided.

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 10

For all species, solid sides are recommended on both the ramp and the crowd pen which leads to the
loading ramp (Rider et al., 1974; Brockway, 1977; Grandin, 1980a,b, 1982; Vowles et al., 1984). For
operator safety, mangates must be constructed so that people can escape charging cattle. The crowd
gate should also be solid to prevent animals from turning back. Wild animals tend to be calmer in
facilities with solid sides. In holding pens, solid pen gates along the main drive alley facilitate animal
movement (Fig. 2) (Grandin, 1980b).
When young pigs were given a choice of ramps, they preferred a ramp with either solid or woven
wire sides (Phillips et al., 1987). Ramps with vertical or horizontal barred sides were avoided. The
overhead lighting used in the indoor experiment may have made the wire mesh appear solid.
Crowd pen design
The crowd pen used to direct animals into a single- or double-file ramp must never be built on the
ramp. A sloping crowd pen will cause livestock to pile up against the crowd gate (Grandin, 1979). The
round crowd pens shown in Figs. 5, 6 and 7 are very efficient for all species. The recommended
radius for round crowd pens is 3.5 m for cattle, 1.83 m for pigs and 2.4 m for sheep.

Fig. 6. Curved, cattle loading ramp with a round crowd pen. A double row of long, narrow
holding pens is constructed on both sides of a central alley.
Cattle and sheep crowd pens should have one straight fence and the other fence should be on a 30
angle (Meat and Livestock Commission). This layout should not be used with pigs as they will jam at
the ramp entrance. Jamming is very stressful for pigs (van Putten and Elshof, 1978). A single, offset
step equal to the width of one pig should be used to prevent jamming at the entrance of a single-file
ramp (Grandin, 1982, 1987). Jamming can be further prevented by installing an entrance restrictor at
single-file race entrances. The entrance of the single-file race should provide only 0.5 cm on each
side of each pig. The double-race ramp in Fig. 4 also has a single offset step to prevent jamming.

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 11

Ramps for double deck trucks

The best adjustable ramps have a level dock which moves up and down (Grandin, 1980d). The ramp
must be mounted on rollers so that it will not pull away from the truck when it is raised. The best
design for an adjustable ramp is one where the floor and side walls move up and down as a single
unit (Grandin, 1979). This design eliminates space between a moving floor and the sides where
animals' feet may be caught. This is especially a problem in single-file ramps. Double-deck trucks can
also be loaded or unloaded with stationary "over and under" ramps. Animals can be moved onto both
truck decks at the same time (G.J. Lapworth, personal communication, 1988).

Fig. 7. A round crowd pen with solid fences leads up to a curved ramp for loading cattle.
Tailgate lift
In Denmark and other Scandinavian countries, trucks used for transporting pigs are equipped with
hydraulic tailgate lifts (Fig. 8 )'. The tailgate lift has a folding fence and gates. The use of ramps is
eliminated. This system works well in countries where < 100 pigs are transported in each truck. Many
trucks in England and Ireland have a tailgate that folds down to form a ramp. Many of these ramps
are excessively steep (Weyman, 1987). Livestock loading and unloading could be greatly improved in
these countries if stationary unloading platforms were built on farms, abattoirs, and stockyards.
Lowering the tailboard down onto a 40-cm-high platform would reduce the angle.

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 12

Fig. 8. In Denmark, trucks are equipped with a tailgate lift for loading and unloading pigs.
Conclusion
Well designed loading and holding facilities will help to reduce stress and injuries to livestock.
Facilities that incorporate principles of livestock behavior will be more efficient.
References
Agriculture Canada, 1984. Recommended code of practice for care and handling of pigs. Publication
177 1 /E, Agriculture Canada, Ottawa, Ont., pp. 1-37.
Barton-Gade, P., 1985. Developments in the pre-slaughter handling of slaughter animals. Proceedings
of the European Meeting of Meat Research Workers, Albena, Bulgaria. Institute of Meat Industry,
Sofia, Paper 1: 1, pp. 1-6.
Barton-Gade, P., 1989. Pre-slaughter treatment and transportation research in Denmark. Proceedings,
35th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, Copenhagen, August 20-25, 1989.
Danish Meat Research Institute, Roskilde.
Brockway, B., 1977. Planning a sheep handling unit. Farm Buildings Centre. National Agriculture
Centre, Kenilworth, pp. 1-30.
Canadian Meat Council, 1980. Guide to PSE Pork. Canadian Meat Council, Islington, Ont., pp. 1-9.
Eldridge, G.A., 1988. The influence of abattoir lairage conditions on the behaviour and bruising of
cattle. Proceedings of the 34th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, Brisbane
Qld., 29 August2 September 1988. Livestock and Meat Authority of Queensland, Brisbane, Qld.
Fraser, D., Phillips, P.A. and Thompson, B.K., 1986. A test of a free-access two level pen for fattening
pigs. Anim. Prod., 42: 269-274.
Grandin, T., 1979. Designing meat packing plant handling facilities for cattle and hogs. Trans. Am.
Soc. Agric. Eng., 22: 912-917.

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 13

Grandin, T., 1980a. Observations of cattle behavior applied to design of cattle handling facilities. Appl.
Anim. Ethol., 6: 19-3 1.
Grandin, T., 1980b. Livestock behavior as related to hand4ng facility design. Int. J. Stud. Anim.
Probl., 1: 33-52.
Grandin, T., 1980c. Bruises and carcass damage. Int. J. Stud. Anim. Probl., 1 121-137.
Grandin, T., 1980d. Designs and specifications for livestock handling equipment in slaughter plants.
Int. J. Stud. Anim. Probl., 1: 178-200.
Grandin, T., 1982. Pig behaviour studies applied to slaughter plant design. Appl. Anim. Ethol., 9:
141151.
Grandin, T., 1983. Welfare requirements of handling facilities. In: S.H. Baxter, M.R. Baxter and J.A.D.
MacCormack (Editors), Farm Animal Housing and Welfare. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, pp. 137-149.
Grandin, T., 1987. Animal handling. In: E.O. Price (Editor), Farm Animal Behaviour. Vet. Clin. N. Am.
3: 323-338.
Hitchcock, D.K. and Hutson, G.D., 1979. The movement of sheep on inclines. Aust. J. Exp. Agric.
Husb., 19: 176-182.
Hutson, G.D., 1981. Sheep movement on slotted floors. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Husb., 21: 474479.
Kenny, F.J. and Tarrant, P.V., 1987. The behaviour of young Friesian bulls during social regrouping at
an abattoir. Influence of an overhead electrified wire grid. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 18: 233-246.
Kilgour, R., 1971. Animal handling in works; pertinent behaviour studies. In: Proceedings of the 13th
Meat Industry Research Conference, Hamilton, New Zealand, College of Veterinary Medicine,
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, pp. 9-12.
Kilgour, R., 1976. The behaviour of farmed beef bulls. N.Z. J. Agric., 13 (6): 31-33.
Kilgour, R., 1978. The application of animal behaviour and the humane care of farm animals. J. Anim.
Sci., 46: 1478-1486.
Kilgour, R., 1983. Using operant test results for decisions on cattle welfare. Proceedings of a
Conference on the Human-Animal Bond, Minneapolis, MN. College of Veterinary Medicine, University
of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.
Kilgour, R., 1988. Behaviour in the pre-slaughter and slaughter environments., Proceedings of the
International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, Part A, Brisbane, Qld., 29 August-2
September, 1988. Livestock and Meat Authority of Queensland, Brisbane, Qld., pp. 130-138.
Kilgour, R. and de Langen, H., 1970. Stress in sheep from management practices. Proc. N.Z. Soc.
Anim. Prod., 30: 6 5-76.
Livestock Conservation Institute, 1988a. Livestock Trucking Guide. Livestock Conservation Institute,
Madison, WI, pp. 1- 15.
Livestock Conservation Institute, 1988b. Livestock Handling Guide. Livestock Conservation Institute,
Madison, WI, pp. 1- 15.
Lynch, J.J. and Alexander, G., 1973. The Pastoral Industries of Australia. University Press,
Sydney,pp.371-400.

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 14

Marshall, B.L., 1977. Bruising in cattle presented for slaughter. N.Z. Vet. J., 25: 83-86.
Mayes, H.F., 1978. Design criteria for livestock loading chutes. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng., St. Joseph, MI,
Tech. Pap. No. 78-6014, pp. 1-9.
Mayes, H.F. and Jesse, G.W., 1980. Heartrate data of feeder pigs. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. St. Joseph,
MI, Tech. Pap. No. 80-4023, pp. 1-8.
Meat and Livestock Commission. Cattle handling. Livestock Buildings Consultancy, Meat and Livestock
Commission, Milton Keynes, pp. 1-7.
Midwest Plan Service, 1980. Structures and Environment Handbook. Iowa State University, Ames, IA,
I Oth edn., p. 319. DESIGN OF LOADING FACILITIES AND HOLDING PENS 201
Phillips, P.A., Thompson, B.K. and Fraser, D., 1987. Ramp designs for young pigs. Am. Soc. Agric.
Eng., St. Joseph, MI, Tech. Pap. No. 87-4511.
Phillips, P.A., Thompson, B.K. and Fraser, D., 1988. Preference tests of ramp designs for young pigs.
Can. J. Anim. Sci., 68: 41-48.
Phillips, P.A., Thompson, B.K. and Fraser, D., 1989. The, importance of cleat spacing in ramp design
for young pigs. Can. J. Anim. Sci., 69: 483-486.
Puolanne, E. and Aalto, H., 198 1. The incidence of dark cutting beef in young bulls in Finland. In:
D.E. Hood and P.V. Tarrant (Editors), The Problem of Dark Cutting Beef. Martinus Nijhoff, London,
pp. 462-475.
Price, M.A. and Tennessen, T., 198 1. Preslaughter management and dark cutting carcasses in young
bulls. Can. J. Anim. Sci., 61: 205-208.
Rider, A., Butchbaker, A.F. and Harp, S., 1974. Beef working, sorting and loading facilities. Am. Soc.
Agric. Eng., St. Joseph, MI, Tech. Pap. No. 74-4523.
Stevens, R.A. and Lyons, D.J., 1977. Livestock bruising project: Stockyard and crate design. National
Materials Handling Bureau, Department of Productivity, Australia, pp. 1-20.
Stricklin, W.R., Graves, H.B. and Wilson, L.L., 1979. Some theoretical and observed relationships of
fixed and portable spacing behavior in animals. Appl. Anim. Ethol., 5: 201-214.
Tennessen, T. and Price, M.A., 1980. Mixing unacquainted bulls: The primary cause of dark cutting
beef. 59th Annu. Feeder's Day Rep., Agric. For. Bull., University of Alberta, Alta., pp. 34-35.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1967. Improving services and facilities at public stockyards.
Agriculture Handbook 337, Packers and Stockyards Administration USDA, Washington, DC, pp. 147.
Van Putten, G., 198 1. Handling slaughter pigs prior to loading and unloading on a lorry. Paper
presented at the Seminar on Transport, C.E.C., Brussels, July 7-8, 198 1.
Van Putten, G. and Elshof, W.J., 1978. Observations on the effect of transport on the well being and
lean quality of slaughter pigs. Anim. Regul. Stud., 1: 247-27 1.
Vowles, W.J., 1985. The design of saleyards. Workshop on cattle handling procedures and facilities,
Rutherglen, 18-22 February 1985.
Vowles, W.J., Eldridge, G.A. and Hollier, T.J., 1984. The behaviour and movement of cattle through
forcing yards. Proc., Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod., 15: 766.

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 15

Weyman, G., 1987. Unloading and loading facilities at livestock markets. Council of National and
Academic Awards, Environmental Studies, Hatfield Polytechnic, Hatfield.

Click here to return to the Homepage for more information on animal behavior, welfare, and care.
Dr. Temple Grandin's Web Page

Livestock Behaviour, Design of Facilities

and Humane Slaughter

Who is Dr. Temple Grandin?

Behaviour of cattle, pigs, bison and antelope during handling and transport
Design of stockyards, lairages, corrals, races, chutes, and loading ramps
Design of restraining systems
Humane Slaughter
Stress and Meat Quality
Ritual Slaughter (Kosher and Halal)
Research Articles
Guidelines for Auditing Welfare in Slaughter Plants, Beef Feedlots, and Dairies
Surveys of Stunning and Handling in Slaughter Plants
Animal Welfare and Rights
Books and Videos
Spanish translations of selected articles
German translations of selected articles
Video Collection

Abattoir Design Guidelines

qobit@yahoo.com

Page 16