Growing Beef Newsletter
June 2026, Volume 16, Issue 12
Why dart guns should be an absolute last resort
Chris Clark, ISU Extension and Outreach beef specialist
The use of remote drug delivery (RDD) systems such as dart guns is an increasingly popular method of treating cattle. Although this method of drug delivery may seem like a reasonable option, RDD should be used only when there is no other alternative. RDD should be reserved for situations where it is the only viable option to ensure animal welfare of a severely sick or injured animal when capture and restraint for a traditional injection is impossible. Additionally, there are occasional scenarios where escaped, fractious animals cannot be captured through usual methods and RDD systems may be necessary to sedate or tranquilize for capture. There is a long list of challenges and concerns to support this stance on the use of RDD, and this article will highlight this author’s top ten reasons to avoid the use of RDD systems.
- The use of RDD systems jeopardizes beef safety. There have been reports of darts and dart components being found in carcasses at packing plants. Excessive charge, inappropriate angle, and other variables are likely involved. Although it may seem surprising that entire darts would make it through the skin and be embedded in the tissue, somehow it happens. And it is easy to imagine the greater risk of needle breaks when shooting the needle/dart as a projectile. This hazard alone is problematic enough that the debate about darts could end here. Presence of foreign metal objects in the tissue is absolutely unacceptable.
- RDD systems create significant risk for animal injury, injection site abscesses and tissue trauma. There have been reports of injection site abscesses and even fatal cases of cellulitis. The darts are not necessarily sterile and even if they are very clean or sterile, there is notable risk of contamination while filling darts and loading the gun. There is impact when the dart hits the animal that can cause bruising, especially if excessive charge is used at close range. Injections should be given in the injection site triangle of the neck. This is a relatively small area to aim for and there is significant risk of accidentally hitting the animal in the face, eyes, cervical spine, shoulder blade, etc. Serious and debilitating injury could result. Even if the shot is perfect and things go well, there is now a needle stuck in the tissue by either a burred tip or a dissolvable retention collar. Animals will usually respond to the impact by walking or running and with every step that needle is moving around, traumatizing the tissue and increasing risk of a needle break. Research has shown that treatment with RDD is associated with greater acute stress, muscle damage, and pain at the injection site.
- Treatment with RDD systems facilitates treatment without the benefit of an exam and diagnosis. In many cases, it would be extremely helpful to perform an exam, establish a diagnosis, and determine whether antibiotics are even needed. There are probably cases of malaise, depression, anorexia, lameness, etc. where the producer assumes a presumptive diagnosis that may or may not be the case. Pinkeye is probably the one diagnosis that is relatively easy to make from a distance, but many other conditions are not so straightforward. There is an almost endless list of things that could cause malaise, depression and anorexia. And most lameness cases are probably not actually footrot. So in some cases, producers may be employing an illegal, extra-label, risky route of administration to give a drug that is not even indicated or necessary.
- RDD does not allow proper injection technique, nor does it ensure administration route as truly subcutaneous (SQ) or intramuscular (IM). When administering medication by traditional injection, the person administering the drug can adjust the angle and depth of injection to achieve the desired route of administration. IM injections are often given at angles of approximately ninety degrees while SQ injections are usually given at more acute angles. With practice, the person administering the drug may be able to feel whether or not the needle reaches the underlying muscle tissue and may then adjust by retracting and redirecting. Depending on the skill of the administrator and the equipment used, syringe plungers can even be retracted prior to injection, aspirating for blood to ensure that the needle is not in a blood vessel. With RDD, once the trigger is pulled, the drug administrator gives up all control of what happens next. There are many variables including whether or not the animal moves and how well the dart travels through the air. And it is impossible to adjust angles, retract and redirect, aspirate for blood, etc.
- Drug delivery with RDD is inconsistent. Research has demonstrated that discharge failures result in failure of drug delivery in a significant proportion of cases and compared to conventional injections, RDD results in lesser antimicrobial concentrations in the blood and faster clearance of the drug from the body. It may be difficult to know whether or not a dart discharges and thus difficult to know if an animal was truly treated. Inadequate dosages may increase the risk of poor efficacy and development of antimicrobial resistance.
- Uncollected used darts pose an injury risk to animals and humans, and all used darts should be collected. Darts are designed to stay stuck in the skin for a period of time and will then usually fall from the animal to the ground. One study showed an average expulsion time of just over one hour. To collect spent darts, producers must be patient enough and committed enough to wait it out while keeping eyes on the animal. They may opt to come back and search later, but it can obviously be difficult to find spent darts in large areas of rough terrain or tall grass. Uncollected used darts can cause needle stick injuries to animals and humans and could potentially be consumed by cattle leading to hardware disease. Beyond protecting animals and humans from injury, dart collection allows examination of the used darts to evaluate whether medication was discharged and to confirm that darts are intact and that dart fragments do not remain in treated animals.
- The injection site triangle is more difficult to hit than one might expect. In one study, under very controlled conditions, 5 of 15 darts struck calves outside of the injection site triangle. In this study, calves were halter trained and individually restrained in a mobile chute with the neck extended using a rope halter. Hair was clipped from the injection site. Darts were delivered from 30 feet according to manufacturer instructions and all darts were administered by the same trained person. How often might we miss the target in real-world situations?
- Dart capacity does not always match the drug dose. To fly and function properly, darts are meant to be filled completely. Imagine a scenario where the proper dose is too small for the available dart. Adding a liquid filler or diluent of some kind is technically illegal compounding of drugs. Even topping off the dart with water or sterile saline could change how the drug is absorbed and processed by the body, potentially creating greater risk for lack of efficacy, side effects and violative residues.
- There are no drugs labeled specifically to be administered by RDD systems. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates the approval of routes of administration for all animal drugs. Anything administered in a way that is different than label directions must be done according to the rules for extra-label drug use and must be done only under direction of a licensed veterinarian in the context of a valid veterinary-client-patient relationship. The attending veterinarian should provide written directions as part of the prescription including route of administration and the client must follow these directions. Some classes of drugs have been explicitly deemed illegal to be used in extra-label manners so veterinarians would not be able to approve their uses by RDD systems.
- There are few drugs that can legally, safely and logistically be used in this manner. As mentioned above, some drugs simply cannot legally be used in an extra-label manner. Dangerous drugs that may cause human death, injury or illness should never be administered by RDD. Appropriate doses of some drugs will correlate with drug volumes too large to fit into available darts. Even if one argues that many labels do not describe exactly what kind of needle and syringe to use, rather just the administration route, it is impossible to ensure a true SQ or IM injection when using RDD systems. Drugs labeled only for SQ or only for IM administration should not be given by RDD because of administration inconsistencies. Depending on numerous variables, an RDD drug administration intended to be SQ may actually be given at least partially IM or vice versa. If that drug is labeled only for SQ administration, that partial IM injection would technically be extra-label use and could change how the drug is absorbed and processed by the body.
RDD systems are useful tools for those rare instances where there is no other way to treat an animal that absolutely needs treatment or there is no other way to catch an animal. However, there are too many variables and risks to use RDD systems as routine methods of treatment. They should not be used simply for convenience, nor should they be used simply to offset lack of facilities or animal handling capabilities. But what about those scenarios when darts are necessary? Please check in again next month to read about some best management practices and practical suggestions to utilize RDD systems as safely and effectively as possible.
This monthly newsletter is free and provides timely information on topics that matter most to Iowa beef producers. You’re welcome to use information and articles from the newsletter - simply credit Iowa Beef Center.
