Developing a Mobile Restraint System for Small-Scale Kosher and Halal Slaughter

Project Overview

FS26-391
Project Type: Farmer/Rancher
Funds awarded in 2026: $20,000.00
Projected End Date: 03/31/2028
Grant Recipient: Schoolhouse Farm
Region: Southern
State: North Carolina
Principal Investigator:
Drew Grim
Schoolhouse Farm

Commodities

Not commodity specific

Practices

  • Animal Production: animal protection and health, meat processing facilities, meat product quality/safety
  • Education and Training: technical assistance

    Proposal summary:

    The proposed solution to this problem is to develop and field-test a mobile, humane restraint system that enables small-scale, on-farm, and mobile kosher and halal slaughter while meeting USDA and state humane-handling requirements.

    The system will be built by adapting a commercially available squeeze chute - already familiar to most cattle producers - and adding custom-fabricated attachments that make it suitable for religious slaughter. The attachments will stabilize the animal in a calm and secure position, while allowing for a quick and humane cut consistent with kosher and halal law.

    This approach directly supports the goals of sustainable agriculture as defined by Congress in the 1990 Farm Bill:

    • Economically Viable: By creating an accessible and replicable design, the system lowers barriers for small and mid-scale farms to enter premium kosher and halal markets, increasing farm income opportunities.

    • Environmentally Sound: On-farm and local slaughter reduces animal transport distances and stress, lowers fuel use, and keeps processing within regional supply chains.

    • Socially Responsible: The project supports regional market development and consumer access to locally produced meat while supporting regional farmers.

    The solution is specific and measurable:

    • Prototype fabricated and tested on three cooperating farms.

    • Measured outcomes will include handling efficiency, animal welfare indicators, operator safety, and adaptability to existing USDA mobile harvest workflows.

    • Success will be demonstrated when the prototype can safely and humanely restrain livestock under both custom-exempt and inspected scenarios, with open-source blueprints and training materials published for public use.

    This project leads to a more sustainable outcome by closing a key infrastructure gap in local food systems. Rather than building expensive new slaughter plants, it creates modular, mobile equipment that can be replicated for under $10,000 - accessible for cooperative ownership, mobile butchers, or shared farm networks.

    The long-term vision is for the design to become part of regional USDA mobile harvest units or small-scale inspected facilities, enabling ongoing production and sale of local kosher and halal meat while maintaining animal welfare and ecological integrity

    .Supporting Documents - Proposed Solution

    Project objectives from proposal:

    Project Site

    Research and prototype development will take place at The Schoolhouse Farm in North Carolina, a 15-acre regenerative livestock operation managing cattle, sheep, and poultry on rotationally grazed pasture and silvopasture. Field testing will also occur with cooperating farms Matt Vaughn (dairy) and Thad Wymer (grass-fed beef).

    These farms represent the diversity of livestock types, temperaments, and handling environments common in the Southern region. Both have existing handling facilities that can accommodate a standard squeeze chute for on-farm testing.


    Experimental Design

    The project follows on-farm research methods recommended in SARE's How to Conduct Research on Your Farm or Ranch.

    Step 1 - Prototype Construction
    A commercially available squeeze chute (Tarter or Hi-Hog) will serve as the research platform. Custom-fabricated components-head restraint, stabilization system, and mobile base-will be designed, welded, and installed.

    Step 2 - Controlled Testing at The Schoolhouse Farm
    Initial trials will evaluate mechanical function, safety, and animal comfort using the farm's Dexter and Pineywoods cattle. Data recorded: handling time, animal movement score, operator effort, and any safety issues. Adjustments will be made before off-site testing.

    Step 3 - Field Testing on Cooperating Farms

    • Site A: Matt Vaughn's dairy herd - evaluates adaptability for smaller-framed dairy cattle and calm handling.

    • Site B: Thad Wymer's beef herd - tests stability, mobility, and practicality for larger beef breeds in rotational systems.
      Each farm will test the prototype with 3-5 animals per session over two separate visits.

    Step 4 - Halachic & Humane Review
    Rabbis Chaim-Eliezer Edelstein and Shlomo Zacharow will review field performance for alignment with kosher/halal humane-handling and slaughter requirements. Their qualitative feedback will guide final design recommendations.

    Step 5 - Data Compilation & Evaluation
    All quantitative and qualitative data will be compiled into a final report comparing performance metrics across sites. Photos and schematic drawings will document prototype evolution.


    Data Collection

    Category Measurement Method / Tool
    Handling efficiency Time from entry to exit Stopwatch & observation
    Animal stress Movement, vocalization, recovery time 5-point scoring scale (Temple Grandin method)
    Operator safety Number of near misses / injuries Observation log
    Ease of use Operator rating (1-5) Post-test survey
    Cost feasibility Material and labor totals Expense tracking
    Religious compliance Rabbi feedback Written evaluation form

    Quantitative Analysis: Mean handling times and movement scores will be compared before/after modifications using simple descriptive statistics (averages, ranges).
    Qualitative Analysis: Thematic review of operator feedback, animal behavior notes, and rabbinic comments will guide refinement.


    Materials and Tools

    • Base squeeze chute (research platform)

    • Steel, hardware, hydraulics for fabrication

    • Welding tools and safety gear

    • Recording sheets, stopwatch, camera, thermometer

    • Personal protective equipment (PPE) for operators

    • Laptop and spreadsheet for data entry and analysis

    All fabrication and testing will follow humane-handling and farm-safety protocols consistent with USDA FSIS guidance.


    Evaluation Criteria for Success

    1. Prototype allows safe, stable restraint for both dairy and beef cattle without increased stress indicators.

    2. Operators report improved control and safety versus unmodified chutes.

    3. Rabbis confirm religious compliance and humane positioning.

    4. Fabrication can be replicated for under $10,000 using readily available materials.

    5. At least 25 farmers reached through demonstrations and online resources adopt or inquire about replication.


    Analysis and Reporting

    Data and photos will be compiled monthly during testing phases.
    Findings will be summarized in a final 10-page report including:

    • Prototype schematics and bill of materials

    • Field-testing results (tables and charts)

    • Lessons learned and recommendations

    The report and open-source plans will be posted on The Schoolhouse Life website, the SARE project portal, and shared through NC Cooperative Extension channels.


    Replication and Validation

    To ensure reproducibility, all measurements, materials, and methods will be documented step-by-step. The prototype will remain available for future demonstrations and independent evaluation by other farms or institutions after the project period.


    Sustainability Relevance

    By creating an affordable, humane, and replicable tool for kosher and halal slaughter, this research links economic viability with improved livestock handling practices and regional market expansion. It demonstrates how innovation at the farm level can close critical infrastructure gaps while maintaining humane and sustainable practices.


    Data Collection Sheet - Mobile Restraint System Project

    Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and should not be construed to represent any official USDA or U.S. Government determination or policy.