Poultry Welfare
Animal Welfare in Poultry: A continuos challenge for Poultry Veterinarians and Poultry Production
Published: September 22, 2011
By: Claire Knott (Crowshall Veterinary Services)
The welfare of poultry is a key concern to veterinarians and poultry producers in developed countries of the world. In developing countries where poultry welfare may not currently be a primary concern at present, it likely to become more important in the future as the global trend of increasing awareness of animal welfare develops further.
There are many factors which impact on, and influence poultry welfare including
There are many factors which impact on, and influence poultry welfare including
• disease
• nutrition
• genetics
• availability of drugs and vaccines
• legislation and codes of practice, assurance schemes
• climate
• economics
• environmental management and stockmanship
• consumer and customer requirements and perceptions (retailers and assurance schemes)
• food safety
• The need to feed a rapidly growing world population- projected global population of 8 billion by 2030.
This paper summarises what we consider to be the important animal welfare factors in poultry and to discuss some of the challenges which face the poultry veterinarian and the poultry producer in this respect in the 21st century.
How do we define welfare?
In the UK, there has always been a strong interest in animal welfare. A similar interest in welfare is observed in many other countries of the world and is the subject of increasing concern, partly driven by consumer pressure, and partly by the activities of various interest groups in raising public awareness.
There have been many attempts to define animal welfare over the years. One of the simplest is "Animal welfare relates to both physical health and mental wellbeing in animals". The Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) Animal Health and Welfare Strategy for Great Britain further expanded this definition as "Freedom from disease or abnormality and the state of well being brought about by meeting the physical, environmental, nutritional, behavioural and social needs of the animals or groups of animals". In an attempt to provide more specific detail about the wants and needs of animals, the Farm Animal Welfare Council in the UK (FAWC) established the five freedoms which have gained worldwide acceptance as criteria for good animal welfare.
The FAWC five freedoms are:
1. Freedom from hunger and thirst by ready access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and vigour.
2. Freedom from discomfort - by providing an appropriate environment including shelter and a comfortable resting area.
3. Freedom from pain, injury and disease - by prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment.
4. Freedom from fear and distress - by ensuring conditions and treatment which avoid mental suffering.
5. Freedom to express normal behaviour - by providing sufficient space proper facilities and the company of the animals´ own kind.
The five freedoms have provided a useful "yard stick" against which to monitor systems and procedures as they attempt to capture the aspects of the various definitions of what constitutes good animal welfare, considering the physical, biological and behavioural needs of the animals. The first three freedoms relate to disciplines which have been studied extensively by animal behaviourists, scientists and veterinarians, looking at what is required for both good welfare and good performance in poultry. The requirement for freedom from fear and distress is more difficult to assess at farm level but research is ongoing to help provide an understanding of what poultry require. The Treaty of Rome recognised that all farm animals are sentient beings so we accept that poultry are capable of feeling and we now have evidence that hens can also feel pain and emotions such as fear. In the 21st century, we now realise that chickens are a lot more sophisticated than previously thought.
The fifth freedom, the freedom to express normal behaviour, is perhaps the mostcont entious issue for wider society to consider as consumer perception of thisfreedom may be very different from the view of scientists and poultry producers. Recently the Farm Animal Welfare Council have built on the five freedoms standards by considering the need to determine whether an animal has a life worth living.
The suggestion is that acceptable welfare, the so-called minimum standard, should move beyond the current test of whether there is suffering or unnecessary pain or distress or whether the animals needs are met, to a new standard of whether the
animal has a life worth living from the animal´s point of view. This positive approach to animal welfare is felt to be a logical development in man´s humane treatment of farm animals. A life "worth living" is a statement about an animals´ quality of life during its lifetime including the manner of its death. Because animals cannot speak, we largely have to rely on external observable signs and cues-outcome based measures just as a doctor does when dealing with a baby who cannot speak. Some might argue that it may never be possible to make the judgement from the animal´s point of view but veterinarians,stockmen and producers are used to interpreting observable signs of welfare.
FAWC´s suggestion now is that good welfare should be one of the main aims of husbandry- this being achieved by good disease control, an environment which meets the animals wants and needs, and the highest standards of veterinary care and
stockmanship What do consumers think regarding animal welfare?
Most individuals, if asked about welfare of animals, would reply that they were concerned. Many surveys have been carried out which indicate the strong feelings held by consumers, both in the UK and worldwide about animal welfare. An EU on-line consultation carried out in 2005 on the welfare of farmed animals received 44000 responses. Of those responding, 64.4% rated the level of protection of animals farmed within the EU as "poor" or "very poor". Almost 80% of those responding thought more action was needed to improve animal welfare in the EU. 87% of the respondents wanted similar conditions for animals which were imported, as for home produced meat or meat products.
With regard to their knowledge of production systems, the respondents felt that the most important sources of information on animal welfare were from the media and animal welfare organisations rather than from Government but the overall view was that there was not enough clear information generally available.
Consumers expressed the wish for clearer food labelling regarding welfare conditions and most respondents thought that better animal welfare led to better animal health and improved food safety. It is clear from the replies to this consultation that consumers do associate high standards of animal welfare with high food quality and high standards of food safety.
Other surveys including a recent Institute of Grocery Distribution (IGD) consumer unit 2007 survey showed that consumers did not have any real knowledge or understanding of animal production systems. While consumers demand more information, they then tend to ignore it and most do not wish to think in any depth or understand the realities of livestock production. The same consumers claim to purchase products withhigher welfare standards but this is often not reflected in their buying patterns. There is, however, some evidence that this behaviour is changing. The same IGDsurvey identified a number of factors which are thought to be modifying consumer behaviour patterns. The suggestion is that these relate to a combination of increasing affluence, more disposable income and reduced confidence in food production methods because of the impact of food "scares" and press reports of poor welfare .
The consumers completing the survey questionnaire admitted to little knowledge about the supply chain, especially from the slaughter process through to the supermarket. There was more awareness about rearing and living conditions on farm perhaps due to the activities of celebrity chefs and animal welfare groups.
Consumer opinion may favour a "natural" environment for the bird but the producerwith a large commercial flock has to balance the need for high levels of biosecurity to protect birds from disease, compliance with food safety requirements, the need to protect the environment and the need to maintain a profitable business.
Costs of production in alternative and more "natural" systems will inevitably be higher than for more intensive production systems.
Some current Welfare challenges
Meat birds
One of the challenges facing poultry veterinarians and poultry producers is the very rapid rate of genetic development of the modern bird. The "goal posts "are constantly changing with regard to the nutritional and management requirements of the bird. The meat bird and its parent are very different today from those of fifteen or even five years ago and it is an ongoing challenge to make sure that we can provide the conditions that the modern bird requires for optimum health and performance.
Welfare concerns raised over the last decade relating to broiler welfare include stocking density, environmental conditions, problems associated with rapid growth rate, cardiovascular health, foot and leg health, and conditions during transport and slaughter.
Research by Marian Dawkins investigating the relationship between stocking density in commercial broilers and environment showed that the environment provided for the chickens had more impact on welfare outcomes than the stocking density itself.
Marian Dawkins stated that stocking density per se is, within limits, less important than other factors in the birds´ environment and legislation to limit stocking density which does not consider the environment that the birds experience could thus have major repercussions for European poultry producers without the hope for improvements in animal welfare. These will come from improving the environment, nutrition and genetics for millions of birds that we eat.
In the UK, the importance of welfare outcomes is being considered as a good starting point to maintain a high standard of welfare across all poultry production systems. The poultry industry would argue that they are already assessing outcomes as health and performance in terms of liveability, growth rate, efficiency of production and resistance to disease.
The EU Meat Chicken Directive means the introduction of the first specific welfare legislation for broilers. This legislation tends to concentrate on welfare outcomes rather than welfare inputs. The EU Meat Chicken Directive involves monitoring of cumulative daily mortality from broiler farms and monitoring of a number of post mortem conditions at processing and the level of dead on arrival (DOA) at the factory which can indicate any welfare problem in transport. The level of foot pad dermatitis will also be monitored at slaughter. If mortality, particular post mortem conditions, or foot pad dermatitis levels exceed previously set trigger levels, this may indicate on-farm welfare problems and, if these are identified, then Government veterinarians, in association with the producer and their veterinarian, will take action to resolve any problems.
The legislation also specifies a maximum stocking density of 42 Kg per m2, with any producer wishing to stock above 33kg per m2 to satisfy a number of environmental and husbandry conditions.
Wet litter and scouring issues can be a significant welfare problem in meat birds. In addition this can have a significant economic impact associated with reduced bird performance. Resolving scouring problems is a challenge as the condition is often multifactorial relating to a combination of environmental, nutritional, disease and genetic factors.
Commercial Layers
One of the ongoing concerns about laying hen welfare, particularly in the UK and Europe, is over confinement in laying cages. The public perception is that cage systems are inhumane and deny birds the opportunity to indulge in natural behaviour (the fifth freedom).
In the EU, it is proposed to ban the housing of layer hens in conventional cages in 2012. To this end, many EU countries have producers who have invested in alternative production systems but there is some concern that not all countries will meet the EU 2012 deadline. Considerable work has been carried out on different production systems for layers and welfare implications of these, in particular the Laywel project. A number of studies looking at welfare in different housing systems for layers show that some welfare indicators are better in cage systems, both conventional and furnished cages, than in non-cage systems, particularly in terms of mortality. Although free range and barn systems may allow birds to carry out more of their "natural" investigative behaviour, when birds are in very large groups, if vices develop such as feather pecking or cannibalism these can bedifficult to bring under control. Birds housed in colony cages where the flock size is smaller may be less prone to show thesetypes of behaviour.
There has been increasing interest in multi tier aviary systems for layers. These seemto be working well particularly if birds are reared in systems with multiple tiers so that birds are well prepared for the laying shed. There is ongoing concern over the welfare implications of beak trimming in laying birds at day old to reduce the risk of injurious pecking/cannibalism at a later date. Much work has been done into tryingto reduce the need for beak trimming and understand what factors are necessary on farm in terms of bird management, nutrition and of course bird genetics to overcome the risk of pecking. In the UK, it is planned to phase out beak trimming in laying birds but no date has yet been confirmed for this. Hatcheries have moved from hot blade trimming to the use of an infra red system which research has shown to be more humane. Organic birds are generally non-beak trimmed.
Bone strength continues to be a concern in laying hens and is a significant welfare problem. The condition is seen both in hens housed in cages and in free range and barn flocks. The problem seems partly to arise due to the efficiency of the modern layer in transferring minerals from the skeleton to the egg.
A study by Gregory et al in 1990 showed 31% fractures at processing ( stunner) in birds from cages compared to 14% fractures in free range layers. In cage layers the welfare issue is with fractures occurring during handling and transport when birds are removed from cages at the end of lay. In layers in alternative systems the problem is mainly of keel damage due to collisions with house "furniture". Improvements in genetic selection for bone strength and greater understanding of the optimum nutrition for the laying bird at all stages of her rearing and production is need to make further progress in this area.
One consequence of the increased number of free range flocks in the UK layer sector, almost 50% of egg production now in outdoor flocks, is the increased exposure of these flocks to predators and to parasitic and infectious diseases which can compromise bird welfare. This is a particular problem on multi-age sites where a mixture of diseases may persist on site.
Controlling disease can be a challenge due to the limited number of antibiotics available with a nil egg withdrawal period required for treating the laying hen, the difficulties of adding additional vaccines into an already crowded rearing programme, and the costs of additional treatment and vaccination programmes needed to control diseases in some free range flocks.
Extremes of weather can also create welfare problems for free range flocks. In the last two very severe winters we have experienced in the UK, we saw significant problems in free range flocks particularly post housing when house temperatures were too low and no supplementary heating was available. Consequently feed consumption increased markedly because of the cold weather and it was difficult to control egg size leading to increased mortality.
• nutrition
• genetics
• availability of drugs and vaccines
• legislation and codes of practice, assurance schemes
• climate
• economics
• environmental management and stockmanship
• consumer and customer requirements and perceptions (retailers and assurance schemes)
• food safety
• The need to feed a rapidly growing world population- projected global population of 8 billion by 2030.
This paper summarises what we consider to be the important animal welfare factors in poultry and to discuss some of the challenges which face the poultry veterinarian and the poultry producer in this respect in the 21st century.
How do we define welfare?
In the UK, there has always been a strong interest in animal welfare. A similar interest in welfare is observed in many other countries of the world and is the subject of increasing concern, partly driven by consumer pressure, and partly by the activities of various interest groups in raising public awareness.
There have been many attempts to define animal welfare over the years. One of the simplest is "Animal welfare relates to both physical health and mental wellbeing in animals". The Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) Animal Health and Welfare Strategy for Great Britain further expanded this definition as "Freedom from disease or abnormality and the state of well being brought about by meeting the physical, environmental, nutritional, behavioural and social needs of the animals or groups of animals". In an attempt to provide more specific detail about the wants and needs of animals, the Farm Animal Welfare Council in the UK (FAWC) established the five freedoms which have gained worldwide acceptance as criteria for good animal welfare.
The FAWC five freedoms are:
1. Freedom from hunger and thirst by ready access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and vigour.
2. Freedom from discomfort - by providing an appropriate environment including shelter and a comfortable resting area.
3. Freedom from pain, injury and disease - by prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment.
4. Freedom from fear and distress - by ensuring conditions and treatment which avoid mental suffering.
5. Freedom to express normal behaviour - by providing sufficient space proper facilities and the company of the animals´ own kind.
The five freedoms have provided a useful "yard stick" against which to monitor systems and procedures as they attempt to capture the aspects of the various definitions of what constitutes good animal welfare, considering the physical, biological and behavioural needs of the animals. The first three freedoms relate to disciplines which have been studied extensively by animal behaviourists, scientists and veterinarians, looking at what is required for both good welfare and good performance in poultry. The requirement for freedom from fear and distress is more difficult to assess at farm level but research is ongoing to help provide an understanding of what poultry require. The Treaty of Rome recognised that all farm animals are sentient beings so we accept that poultry are capable of feeling and we now have evidence that hens can also feel pain and emotions such as fear. In the 21st century, we now realise that chickens are a lot more sophisticated than previously thought.
The fifth freedom, the freedom to express normal behaviour, is perhaps the mostcont entious issue for wider society to consider as consumer perception of thisfreedom may be very different from the view of scientists and poultry producers. Recently the Farm Animal Welfare Council have built on the five freedoms standards by considering the need to determine whether an animal has a life worth living.
The suggestion is that acceptable welfare, the so-called minimum standard, should move beyond the current test of whether there is suffering or unnecessary pain or distress or whether the animals needs are met, to a new standard of whether the
animal has a life worth living from the animal´s point of view. This positive approach to animal welfare is felt to be a logical development in man´s humane treatment of farm animals. A life "worth living" is a statement about an animals´ quality of life during its lifetime including the manner of its death. Because animals cannot speak, we largely have to rely on external observable signs and cues-outcome based measures just as a doctor does when dealing with a baby who cannot speak. Some might argue that it may never be possible to make the judgement from the animal´s point of view but veterinarians,stockmen and producers are used to interpreting observable signs of welfare.
FAWC´s suggestion now is that good welfare should be one of the main aims of husbandry- this being achieved by good disease control, an environment which meets the animals wants and needs, and the highest standards of veterinary care and
stockmanship What do consumers think regarding animal welfare?
Most individuals, if asked about welfare of animals, would reply that they were concerned. Many surveys have been carried out which indicate the strong feelings held by consumers, both in the UK and worldwide about animal welfare. An EU on-line consultation carried out in 2005 on the welfare of farmed animals received 44000 responses. Of those responding, 64.4% rated the level of protection of animals farmed within the EU as "poor" or "very poor". Almost 80% of those responding thought more action was needed to improve animal welfare in the EU. 87% of the respondents wanted similar conditions for animals which were imported, as for home produced meat or meat products.
With regard to their knowledge of production systems, the respondents felt that the most important sources of information on animal welfare were from the media and animal welfare organisations rather than from Government but the overall view was that there was not enough clear information generally available.
Consumers expressed the wish for clearer food labelling regarding welfare conditions and most respondents thought that better animal welfare led to better animal health and improved food safety. It is clear from the replies to this consultation that consumers do associate high standards of animal welfare with high food quality and high standards of food safety.
Other surveys including a recent Institute of Grocery Distribution (IGD) consumer unit 2007 survey showed that consumers did not have any real knowledge or understanding of animal production systems. While consumers demand more information, they then tend to ignore it and most do not wish to think in any depth or understand the realities of livestock production. The same consumers claim to purchase products withhigher welfare standards but this is often not reflected in their buying patterns. There is, however, some evidence that this behaviour is changing. The same IGDsurvey identified a number of factors which are thought to be modifying consumer behaviour patterns. The suggestion is that these relate to a combination of increasing affluence, more disposable income and reduced confidence in food production methods because of the impact of food "scares" and press reports of poor welfare .
The consumers completing the survey questionnaire admitted to little knowledge about the supply chain, especially from the slaughter process through to the supermarket. There was more awareness about rearing and living conditions on farm perhaps due to the activities of celebrity chefs and animal welfare groups.
Consumer opinion may favour a "natural" environment for the bird but the producerwith a large commercial flock has to balance the need for high levels of biosecurity to protect birds from disease, compliance with food safety requirements, the need to protect the environment and the need to maintain a profitable business.
Costs of production in alternative and more "natural" systems will inevitably be higher than for more intensive production systems.
Some current Welfare challenges
Meat birds
One of the challenges facing poultry veterinarians and poultry producers is the very rapid rate of genetic development of the modern bird. The "goal posts "are constantly changing with regard to the nutritional and management requirements of the bird. The meat bird and its parent are very different today from those of fifteen or even five years ago and it is an ongoing challenge to make sure that we can provide the conditions that the modern bird requires for optimum health and performance.
Welfare concerns raised over the last decade relating to broiler welfare include stocking density, environmental conditions, problems associated with rapid growth rate, cardiovascular health, foot and leg health, and conditions during transport and slaughter.
Research by Marian Dawkins investigating the relationship between stocking density in commercial broilers and environment showed that the environment provided for the chickens had more impact on welfare outcomes than the stocking density itself.
Marian Dawkins stated that stocking density per se is, within limits, less important than other factors in the birds´ environment and legislation to limit stocking density which does not consider the environment that the birds experience could thus have major repercussions for European poultry producers without the hope for improvements in animal welfare. These will come from improving the environment, nutrition and genetics for millions of birds that we eat.
In the UK, the importance of welfare outcomes is being considered as a good starting point to maintain a high standard of welfare across all poultry production systems. The poultry industry would argue that they are already assessing outcomes as health and performance in terms of liveability, growth rate, efficiency of production and resistance to disease.
The EU Meat Chicken Directive means the introduction of the first specific welfare legislation for broilers. This legislation tends to concentrate on welfare outcomes rather than welfare inputs. The EU Meat Chicken Directive involves monitoring of cumulative daily mortality from broiler farms and monitoring of a number of post mortem conditions at processing and the level of dead on arrival (DOA) at the factory which can indicate any welfare problem in transport. The level of foot pad dermatitis will also be monitored at slaughter. If mortality, particular post mortem conditions, or foot pad dermatitis levels exceed previously set trigger levels, this may indicate on-farm welfare problems and, if these are identified, then Government veterinarians, in association with the producer and their veterinarian, will take action to resolve any problems.
The legislation also specifies a maximum stocking density of 42 Kg per m2, with any producer wishing to stock above 33kg per m2 to satisfy a number of environmental and husbandry conditions.
Wet litter and scouring issues can be a significant welfare problem in meat birds. In addition this can have a significant economic impact associated with reduced bird performance. Resolving scouring problems is a challenge as the condition is often multifactorial relating to a combination of environmental, nutritional, disease and genetic factors.
Commercial Layers
One of the ongoing concerns about laying hen welfare, particularly in the UK and Europe, is over confinement in laying cages. The public perception is that cage systems are inhumane and deny birds the opportunity to indulge in natural behaviour (the fifth freedom).
In the EU, it is proposed to ban the housing of layer hens in conventional cages in 2012. To this end, many EU countries have producers who have invested in alternative production systems but there is some concern that not all countries will meet the EU 2012 deadline. Considerable work has been carried out on different production systems for layers and welfare implications of these, in particular the Laywel project. A number of studies looking at welfare in different housing systems for layers show that some welfare indicators are better in cage systems, both conventional and furnished cages, than in non-cage systems, particularly in terms of mortality. Although free range and barn systems may allow birds to carry out more of their "natural" investigative behaviour, when birds are in very large groups, if vices develop such as feather pecking or cannibalism these can bedifficult to bring under control. Birds housed in colony cages where the flock size is smaller may be less prone to show thesetypes of behaviour.
There has been increasing interest in multi tier aviary systems for layers. These seemto be working well particularly if birds are reared in systems with multiple tiers so that birds are well prepared for the laying shed. There is ongoing concern over the welfare implications of beak trimming in laying birds at day old to reduce the risk of injurious pecking/cannibalism at a later date. Much work has been done into tryingto reduce the need for beak trimming and understand what factors are necessary on farm in terms of bird management, nutrition and of course bird genetics to overcome the risk of pecking. In the UK, it is planned to phase out beak trimming in laying birds but no date has yet been confirmed for this. Hatcheries have moved from hot blade trimming to the use of an infra red system which research has shown to be more humane. Organic birds are generally non-beak trimmed.
Bone strength continues to be a concern in laying hens and is a significant welfare problem. The condition is seen both in hens housed in cages and in free range and barn flocks. The problem seems partly to arise due to the efficiency of the modern layer in transferring minerals from the skeleton to the egg.
A study by Gregory et al in 1990 showed 31% fractures at processing ( stunner) in birds from cages compared to 14% fractures in free range layers. In cage layers the welfare issue is with fractures occurring during handling and transport when birds are removed from cages at the end of lay. In layers in alternative systems the problem is mainly of keel damage due to collisions with house "furniture". Improvements in genetic selection for bone strength and greater understanding of the optimum nutrition for the laying bird at all stages of her rearing and production is need to make further progress in this area.
One consequence of the increased number of free range flocks in the UK layer sector, almost 50% of egg production now in outdoor flocks, is the increased exposure of these flocks to predators and to parasitic and infectious diseases which can compromise bird welfare. This is a particular problem on multi-age sites where a mixture of diseases may persist on site.
Controlling disease can be a challenge due to the limited number of antibiotics available with a nil egg withdrawal period required for treating the laying hen, the difficulties of adding additional vaccines into an already crowded rearing programme, and the costs of additional treatment and vaccination programmes needed to control diseases in some free range flocks.
Extremes of weather can also create welfare problems for free range flocks. In the last two very severe winters we have experienced in the UK, we saw significant problems in free range flocks particularly post housing when house temperatures were too low and no supplementary heating was available. Consequently feed consumption increased markedly because of the cold weather and it was difficult to control egg size leading to increased mortality.
Turkeys
Some of the welfare concerns in turkey production are similar to those for broilers in terms of stocking density, environmental control, leg and foot problems. The longer growing period of turkeys means that any leg health issue may become a major welfare insult.
Beak trimming is also of concern in turkeys. Most birds reared in natural light will be beak trimmed to avoid problems with cannibalism and vent pecking. As with layers, this is often carried out now by infra red beak treatment at day old but there is ongoing research into how this mutilation can be avoided.
Humane culling of turkeys on farm can also present welfare problems particularly for larger stags and breeding birds. Proposed recent EU welfare legislation may have unintended consequences, in that it may be no longer permissible to cull turkeys over 3 kg in weight by neck dislocation (neck dislocation currently the standard method for culling juvenile turkeys on farm). The legislation also proposes to limit the number of birds which can be culled in theday by a single operator on farm. This may cause problems on the rare occasions where larger numbers of birds require emergency culling due to the onset of disease problems The regulation also suggests that the non-penetrative captive bolt (percussive bolt device, the Cash poultry killer widely used in the UK for culling large turkeys on farm) may not be used other than as a means of achieving stunning then needing to be followed up by a secondary method such as dislocation, decapitation or bleeding.
It appears that the new regulation may not allow the use of any of the culling methods currently used in the UK for large turkeys and is not consistent with recent published research and industry experience. It is hoped that current research and some recently published work will allow some of the inconsistencies in this EU regulation, EC1099/2009 to be corrected before it comes into force in 2013. This highlights the need for communication between producers, veterinarians in the field and Government to ensure that sensible decisions are made for the benefit of poultry welfare.
One other potential welfare issue which is particularly relevant to turkeys as they are large birds, but also to other poultry species, is the requirement for humane methods of culling large numbers of birds or whole flocks in the event of contagious disease outbreak. Much work has been carried out on this particularly in the US where foam systems have been used.
Ducks and Geese
With regard to duck and goose production concerns have been expressed over the welfare aspects of Foie gras production. Birds are force fed for a short time at the end of the growing period to achieve the desired fat content in the liver at processing and there is concern over the nutritional hepatic steatosis induced in the bird. There is also some concern from consumers about rearing systems for ducks, where birds are reared on slats , or where water is supplied by nipple systems. In the opinion of some these management systems, although offering significant advantages in disease control, may not allow birds to express all their natural behaviours.
Other welfare issues which may affect poultry
Some of the welfare concerns in turkey production are similar to those for broilers in terms of stocking density, environmental control, leg and foot problems. The longer growing period of turkeys means that any leg health issue may become a major welfare insult.
Beak trimming is also of concern in turkeys. Most birds reared in natural light will be beak trimmed to avoid problems with cannibalism and vent pecking. As with layers, this is often carried out now by infra red beak treatment at day old but there is ongoing research into how this mutilation can be avoided.
Humane culling of turkeys on farm can also present welfare problems particularly for larger stags and breeding birds. Proposed recent EU welfare legislation may have unintended consequences, in that it may be no longer permissible to cull turkeys over 3 kg in weight by neck dislocation (neck dislocation currently the standard method for culling juvenile turkeys on farm). The legislation also proposes to limit the number of birds which can be culled in theday by a single operator on farm. This may cause problems on the rare occasions where larger numbers of birds require emergency culling due to the onset of disease problems The regulation also suggests that the non-penetrative captive bolt (percussive bolt device, the Cash poultry killer widely used in the UK for culling large turkeys on farm) may not be used other than as a means of achieving stunning then needing to be followed up by a secondary method such as dislocation, decapitation or bleeding.
It appears that the new regulation may not allow the use of any of the culling methods currently used in the UK for large turkeys and is not consistent with recent published research and industry experience. It is hoped that current research and some recently published work will allow some of the inconsistencies in this EU regulation, EC1099/2009 to be corrected before it comes into force in 2013. This highlights the need for communication between producers, veterinarians in the field and Government to ensure that sensible decisions are made for the benefit of poultry welfare.
One other potential welfare issue which is particularly relevant to turkeys as they are large birds, but also to other poultry species, is the requirement for humane methods of culling large numbers of birds or whole flocks in the event of contagious disease outbreak. Much work has been carried out on this particularly in the US where foam systems have been used.
Ducks and Geese
With regard to duck and goose production concerns have been expressed over the welfare aspects of Foie gras production. Birds are force fed for a short time at the end of the growing period to achieve the desired fat content in the liver at processing and there is concern over the nutritional hepatic steatosis induced in the bird. There is also some concern from consumers about rearing systems for ducks, where birds are reared on slats , or where water is supplied by nipple systems. In the opinion of some these management systems, although offering significant advantages in disease control, may not allow birds to express all their natural behaviours.
Other welfare issues which may affect poultry
The veterinarian and the poultry producer have a responsibility to the bird from the day it is hatched until the day it is killed whether it is a meat bird or an egg layer or breeder. Catching and handling of birds, can, if not carried out properly, create significant welfare problems. Handling is obviously much more difficult in the case of larger birds such as heavy stag turkeys and in the case of geese. The aim should be to maintain the same high welfare standards which are applied on farm throughout the handling and catching process, and during transport.
The introduction of gas stunning systems at slaughter has significant welfare benefits as it avoids the need for double handling and the need to hang birds on shackles It is important for both the producer , customer and consumer to know that the bird has been treated with consideration at all stages in the production, transport and slaughter process.
Other factors which may challenge our ability to provide optimum welfare may include restrictions on medications available, particularly antimicrobials as there are increasing concerns about antimicrobial resistance and conserving antimicrobials for human use. We, as veterinarians and producers, should defend the right for antimicrobials to be available for the poultry under our care. Availability of antibiotics is a particular problem for some of the minor species which, in the UK, includes turkeys and ducks. For these birds, very few antimicrobials are licensed.
Interestingly, a recent report on the use of antimicrobials in people and animals in the UK carried out in 2007 showed that over half the total tonnage of antimicrobials used was in humans. It is important that we also retain a range of vaccines to protect our poultry and that research continues to allow vaccine companies to provide novel and innovative vaccines for poultry. The poultry industry already has the most varied application routes for vaccines of any species. Vaccine delivery devices are still being improved and there are opportunities for more vaccines to be delivered via in ovo vaccination.
An exciting development is the increase in new technology systems which allow for remote monitoring of broiler houses and flocks. These are no substitute for the attention of a good stockman but such technology can provide minute by minute information as to the environmental conditions within the shed in terms of ventilation, temperature and air quality and also information on bird weights and bird distribution. The use of web cams in poultry sheds in addition to other recording
equipment means that poultry flocks can be monitored from anywhere in the World.
This is important, not only for bird welfare but from an economic point of view as key performance indicators can be monitored. Bird activity can also be monitored and this may flag up problems with feed or water availability or lighting which can be quickly addressed. Cameras can provide information on bird distribution within the shed which may highlight problems with temperature or other issues which, again, can be quickly addressed by the stockman. With these With these systems in broiler farms, we may have to review the need for frequent walked inspections as so much information can be gained from the monitoring systems. Bird welfare may be better served by walking thebirds less frequently.
Other innovations which may help bird welfare in terms of providing the optimum environment, in addition to reducing costs for the producer, may be the use of new technologies using novel energy sources to provide heating systems, heat exchange systems and biomass systems to dispose of broiler litter.
Climate change and extremes of weather can have a significant effect on bird welfare - for example the severe storms of April 2011 in the US caused damage to over 25% of poultry farms in Alabama
SUMMARY:
The global poultry industry is ever changing and influenced by factors whether genetic, environmental, consumer and retailer driven, legislation, or new and emerging diseases. These changes can have significant effects on the quality of lives of the birds under our care and our perceptions of what is considered to be "good welfare" The poultry industry has always been a leader in innovation and through an integrated supply chain has been dynamic in meeting the demands placed upon it. As we progress through the 21st century the role of welfare in the decisions that are made in improving poultry production will be greater. The need for communication, understanding and research in animal welfare will continue to increase and thus it is essential that the industry responds to ensure the health and future productivity of our global flock is secured.
Claire I F Knott BVM&S MRCVS, Crowshall
Veterinary Services
April 2011
REFERENCES
Welfare Assessment and Relevant Ethical Decisions: Key Concepts, ARBS Annual Review of Biomedical Sciences 2008 :10:T79-T90 Donald M Broom Centre for Animal Welfare and Anthrozoology, Department of Veterinary Medicine,University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0ES
Chicken Welfare is influenced more by housing conditions than by stocking density. Nature 2226-22/12/2003
Marian Stamp Dawkins, Christi A. Donelly & Tracey A. Jones. Department of Zoology, University of Oxford OX1 3PS
FAWC (2009) Animal welfare in Great Britain Past, Present and Future. www.defra.gov.uk/FAWC
On Farm Culling- the implications of recent EU welfare legislation. Proceedings of the 5th Turkey Science and Production Conference 2011. Dr Kenton A Hazel MRCVS
Aviagen Turkeys Ltd, Chowley Oak Business Park, Tattenhall, CH3 9GA UK
Lay Wel Welfare Implications of changes in production systems for laying hens. www.laywel.eu
Turkey Welfare - satisfying wants and needs. Proceedings of the 3rd Turkey Science and Production Conference 2009.
Stephen A Lister BSc BVetMed Cert PMP MRCVS Crowshall Veterinary Services Management and Welfare of Farm Animals, The UFAW Farm Handbook 5th edition Editor John Webster.ISBN 978-1-4051-8174-7
Overview of antimicrobial usage and bacterial resistance in selected human and animal pathogens in the UK:2007 available at www.vmd.gov.uk
Also my thanks to my colleagues Stephen, Lister and Philip Hammond for their help and advice
The introduction of gas stunning systems at slaughter has significant welfare benefits as it avoids the need for double handling and the need to hang birds on shackles It is important for both the producer , customer and consumer to know that the bird has been treated with consideration at all stages in the production, transport and slaughter process.
Other factors which may challenge our ability to provide optimum welfare may include restrictions on medications available, particularly antimicrobials as there are increasing concerns about antimicrobial resistance and conserving antimicrobials for human use. We, as veterinarians and producers, should defend the right for antimicrobials to be available for the poultry under our care. Availability of antibiotics is a particular problem for some of the minor species which, in the UK, includes turkeys and ducks. For these birds, very few antimicrobials are licensed.
Interestingly, a recent report on the use of antimicrobials in people and animals in the UK carried out in 2007 showed that over half the total tonnage of antimicrobials used was in humans. It is important that we also retain a range of vaccines to protect our poultry and that research continues to allow vaccine companies to provide novel and innovative vaccines for poultry. The poultry industry already has the most varied application routes for vaccines of any species. Vaccine delivery devices are still being improved and there are opportunities for more vaccines to be delivered via in ovo vaccination.
An exciting development is the increase in new technology systems which allow for remote monitoring of broiler houses and flocks. These are no substitute for the attention of a good stockman but such technology can provide minute by minute information as to the environmental conditions within the shed in terms of ventilation, temperature and air quality and also information on bird weights and bird distribution. The use of web cams in poultry sheds in addition to other recording
equipment means that poultry flocks can be monitored from anywhere in the World.
This is important, not only for bird welfare but from an economic point of view as key performance indicators can be monitored. Bird activity can also be monitored and this may flag up problems with feed or water availability or lighting which can be quickly addressed. Cameras can provide information on bird distribution within the shed which may highlight problems with temperature or other issues which, again, can be quickly addressed by the stockman. With these With these systems in broiler farms, we may have to review the need for frequent walked inspections as so much information can be gained from the monitoring systems. Bird welfare may be better served by walking thebirds less frequently.
Other innovations which may help bird welfare in terms of providing the optimum environment, in addition to reducing costs for the producer, may be the use of new technologies using novel energy sources to provide heating systems, heat exchange systems and biomass systems to dispose of broiler litter.
Climate change and extremes of weather can have a significant effect on bird welfare - for example the severe storms of April 2011 in the US caused damage to over 25% of poultry farms in Alabama
SUMMARY:
The global poultry industry is ever changing and influenced by factors whether genetic, environmental, consumer and retailer driven, legislation, or new and emerging diseases. These changes can have significant effects on the quality of lives of the birds under our care and our perceptions of what is considered to be "good welfare" The poultry industry has always been a leader in innovation and through an integrated supply chain has been dynamic in meeting the demands placed upon it. As we progress through the 21st century the role of welfare in the decisions that are made in improving poultry production will be greater. The need for communication, understanding and research in animal welfare will continue to increase and thus it is essential that the industry responds to ensure the health and future productivity of our global flock is secured.
Claire I F Knott BVM&S MRCVS, Crowshall
Veterinary Services
April 2011
REFERENCES
Welfare Assessment and Relevant Ethical Decisions: Key Concepts, ARBS Annual Review of Biomedical Sciences 2008 :10:T79-T90 Donald M Broom Centre for Animal Welfare and Anthrozoology, Department of Veterinary Medicine,University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0ES
Chicken Welfare is influenced more by housing conditions than by stocking density. Nature 2226-22/12/2003
Marian Stamp Dawkins, Christi A. Donelly & Tracey A. Jones. Department of Zoology, University of Oxford OX1 3PS
FAWC (2009) Animal welfare in Great Britain Past, Present and Future. www.defra.gov.uk/FAWC
On Farm Culling- the implications of recent EU welfare legislation. Proceedings of the 5th Turkey Science and Production Conference 2011. Dr Kenton A Hazel MRCVS
Aviagen Turkeys Ltd, Chowley Oak Business Park, Tattenhall, CH3 9GA UK
Lay Wel Welfare Implications of changes in production systems for laying hens. www.laywel.eu
Turkey Welfare - satisfying wants and needs. Proceedings of the 3rd Turkey Science and Production Conference 2009.
Stephen A Lister BSc BVetMed Cert PMP MRCVS Crowshall Veterinary Services Management and Welfare of Farm Animals, The UFAW Farm Handbook 5th edition Editor John Webster.ISBN 978-1-4051-8174-7
Overview of antimicrobial usage and bacterial resistance in selected human and animal pathogens in the UK:2007 available at www.vmd.gov.uk
Also my thanks to my colleagues Stephen, Lister and Philip Hammond for their help and advice
This paper was presented at the XVII World Veterinary Poultry Association (WVPA) Congress in Cancún, Mexico, August 14-18, 2011. Emgormix.com thanks the author and the organizing committee for this huge contribution.
Related topics:
Authors:
Crowshall Veterinary Services
Recommend
Comment
Share
14 de octubre de 2011
Thanks for delivering such an important issue about challenge for Poultry.
Developing countries like ours government will take initiatives to maintain the welfare of poultryand the professionals engaged with the industry will come out to impliment the work properly by creating awareness and other necessary initiatives.
Thanks again..
Recommend
Reply
13 de octubre de 2011
Only a bird in comfortable situation gives in best performance, please note if cage birds are more productive than floor birds, then caged birds are more comfortable than floor birds. Production is directly related to living conditions of the birds.
Recommend
Reply
13 de octubre de 2011
Best welfare practices for animals are no doubt very important for animals but economically these lower the production of birds. e.g. the production of layers in cage system is greater than the birds on the floor and similar results are for broilers. what will we have to do to achieve the same production?
Recommend
Reply
13 de octubre de 2011
I do believe that only with best welfare practices to animals, you could give best production results and best behavior from animals, may be production animals or companion animals.
It is good informative paperabout challenge for Poultry but with academic value only.
Recommend
Reply
13 de octubre de 2011
thanks for initiating a new issue about challenge for Poultry
Recommend
Reply
Would you like to discuss another topic? Create a new post to engage with experts in the community.
You may be interested in
.jpg&w=3840&q=75)