Search

This paper focuses on systems producing short rotation coppice willows (SRCW) in chickens’ free-range areas. We aim to map chicken farmers’ motivation to implement SRCW, and to assess the economic viability of these systems. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 free-range chicken farmers. Farmers agreed that chickens would prefer SRCW over grassland, which could benefit chicken welfare. They expected establishing an SRCW system would be labor intensive, and doubted if it would be a profitable investment. Some concerns of farmers might be taken away by exchanging information with farmers with SRCW experience. A partial budget analysis was performed to calculate the net present value (NPV) of six different scenarios, differing in the type of chickens, in whether the produced biomass was sold or valorized on-farm and in harvest pattern, all over a 23-yr period. The NPV was positive but low for all scenarios. A sensitivity analysis showed that changes in biomass yield, wood chip price, a price premium for poultry products and current fuel price were most likely to influence the NPV. A risk analysis revealed that NPVs were positive in the majority of the modeled cases. Scenarios in which biomass was used for on-farm heat production showed the highest risk of a negative NPV. A price premium for poultry products may be most effective at increasing profitability, but may only be feasible for farms selling directly to consumers. Establishing a solid market for biomass energy, including guaranteed demand and availability of appropriate machinery for cultivation, may mitigate farmers’ concerns.

Planting short rotation coppice willows (SRCW) in chickens’ free-range areas could have several advantages for the chickens, environment and farmer. Our aim was to test the effects of combining SRCW and chickens on free-range use, soil conditions and SRCW growth. A free-range chicken area was partially planted with a grass/clover mixture, and partially with SRCW. Chickens preferred to range in SRCW compared to grassland. No effects of periodical chicken presence on SRCW growth were observed. Total mineral N (Nmin) was affected by interactions between vegetation type, location, and soil depth; it was generally higher in SRCW than in grassland and in areas close to the chicken houses. Nmin did not appear to accumulate in the soil over the years, but there were strong indications for higher risk of N leaching to deeper soil layers and possibly to groundwater close to the houses and in SRCW. SRCW was beneficial for the chickens, but the combination needs to be studied further with a focus on strategies for preventing nutrient leaching to groundwater.

Free-range use by broiler chickens is often limited, whereas better use of the free-range area could benefit animal welfare. Use of free-range areas could be stimulated by more appropriate shelter or environmental enrichment (by decreasing birds’ fearfulness). This study aimed to assess the effects of shelter type, early environmental enrichment and weather conditions on free-range use. Three production rounds with 440 slow-growing broiler chickens (Sasso T451) were carried out. Birds were housed indoors in four groups (two with males, two with females) from days 0 to 25, during which two of the groups received environmental enrichment. At day 23 birds’ fearfulness was assessed with a tonic immobility (TI) test (n=100). At day 25 all birds were moved (in mixed-sex groups) to mobile houses, and provided with free-range access from day 28 onwards. Each group could access a range consisting for 50% of grassland with 21 artificial shelters (ASs, wooden A-frames) and for 50% of short rotation coppice (SRC) with willow (dense vegetation). Free-range use was recorded by live observations at 0900, 1300 and 1700 h for 15 to 21 days between days 28 and 63. For each bird observed outside the shelter type (AS or SRC), distance from the house (0 to 2, 2 to 5, >5 m) and its behaviour (only rounds 2 and 3) were recorded. Weather conditions were recorded by four weather stations. On average, 27.1% of the birds were observed outside at any given moment of observation. Early environmental enrichment did not decrease fearfulness as measured by the TI test. It only had a minor effect on the percentage of birds outside (0.4% more birds outside). At all distances from the house, SRC was preferred over AS. In AS, areas closer to the house were preferred over farther ones, in SRC this was less pronounced. Free-range use increased with age and temperature and decreased with wind speed. In AS, rainfall and decreasing solar radiation were related to finding more birds outside, whereas the opposite was true in SRC. Behaviour of the birds depended on shelter type, distance from the house, early environmental enrichment, time of day and age. Chickens ranged more and farther in SRC, possibly because this provided a greater sense of safety because of the amount of cover and/or better protection against adverse weather conditions. These results indicate that SRC with willow is a more appropriate shelter for slow-growing broiler chickens than A-frames.

There is increasing evidence that the field of applied ethology is prone to expectation biases invalidating research outcomes. Nevertheless, outcome assessors are rarely blinded. We surveyed delegates of the International Society for Applied Ethology (ISAE) 2014 congress shortly before (n = 39 respondents) and after (n = 51 respondents) a combined congress plenary and workshop on expectation bias in applied ethology. The aims were to evaluate the effect of the plenary and workshop on the opinion of applied ethologists in order to better comprehend why blinding outcome assessors seems so rarely practiced as a debiasing technique in this field of research. The results suggest that a moderate awareness about expectancy effects among ethologists and the logistic constraints of blinded observations rather than a perceived low susceptibility of the research field is the larger part of the explanation. Although awareness about expectancy effects and debiasing techniques was higher immediately after than before the congress plenary and workshop, a more sustained and concerted effort is needed throughout all stages of the research process to avoid expectation bias invalidating research finding and to improve the scientific credibility of the field of applied ethology.

The European Union (EU) Broiler Directive (2007/43/EC) is unique amongst current EU Directives, which address animal welfare, in that it uses outcome data collected at abattoirs and on farm to monitor on-farm broiler welfare and vary the maximum permitted stocking density on farm. In this study, we describe how, by bringing together personnel from the competent authorities in 22 member states (MSs) who have responsibility for implementing the Directive, and engaging in exchange of information and technical methods regarding the Broiler Directive, it has been possible to identify differences in approach with regard to ‘what data is being collected, and by whom’ across EU MSs. Online questionnaires and workshop exercises enabled us to identify priority areas for knowledge transfer and training. For example, foot pad dermatitis, hock burn, dead on arrival and total rejections (birds rejected as unfit for human consumption by the meat inspection staff at slaughter) were identified by the MSs as measures of medium-to-low priority in terms of knowledge transfer because there are assessment methods for these conditions that are already well accepted by competent authorities. On the other hand, breast lesions, cellulitis, emaciation, joint lesions, respiratory problems, scratches, wing fractures and a number of environmental measures were identified as having high priority in terms of knowledge transfer. The study identified that there is significant variability in the stage of implementation between MSs, and responses from the participating MSs indicated that sharing of guidance and technical information between MSs may be of value in the future set-up process for those MSs engaged in implementation of the Directive.

Most observers in behaviour studies are aware of relevant information about the animals being observed. We investigated whether observer expectations influence subjective scoring methods during a class practicum. Veterinary students were trained in recording negative and positive interactions between pigs, in scoring the degree of panting in cattle and in applying qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA) using a fixed set of terms for assessing hens' behaviour. The students applied these methods in three trials in which they were shown duplicated video recordings of the same animals: the original and a slightly modified version (to prevent recognition at second viewing). When scoring the duplicated recordings they were told either correct or false information about the conditions in which the animals had been filmed. The false information reflected plausible study scenarios in ethology and was used to create expectations about the outcome. As in reality the students scored the identical behaviour twice, the difference in the scores for the original and modified recordings reflects expectation bias due to providing different contextual information. In all trials there was evidence of expectation bias: students scored the ratio of positive to negative interactions higher when told that the observed pigs had been selected for high social breeding value, they scored cattle panting higher when told that the ambient temperature was 5 °C higher than in reality, and in the QBA they indicated more positive and fewer negative emotions when told that the hens were from an organic instead of a conventional farm. The magnitude of the bias in the QBA trial was related to the opinion of the students about hen welfare in organic versus conventional farms. Although veterinary students may not be representative of practising ethologists, these findings do indicate that observer bias could influence subjective scores of animal behaviour and welfare.

Free-range access for broiler chickens can benefit animal welfare because the birds have access to a more natural environment and more opportunities to perform natural behaviours than in indoor systems. Also, they have more space and more environmental enrichment, which could lead to better leg health and decreased fearfulness. In practice, however, use of the free-range area is often low. Lack of shelter likely plays an important role in this, as do weather conditions. In this study during 2 production rounds of slow-growing broiler chickens, 200 chickens were housed indoors (IN), 200 were provided with free-range access to grassland with artificial shelter (AS), and 200 were provided with free-range access to an area with short rotation coppice (SRC) from 4 until 10 weeks of age. Free-range use was monitored using photographs and live observations. Weather conditions and free-range use were monitored throughout the outdoor period. Tonic immobility (TI) as fearfulness assessment was done at the beginning (round 2 only) and the end of both production rounds; leg health and tibia bone health were assessed at the end of the production rounds. Mean percentage of birds using the free-range area was higher in SRC than in AS groups (42.8% vs. 35.1%; F1,7 = 1180.00, P < 0.001). The mean percentage of animals located further than 5 m from the house was 10.6 ± 1.1% of the chickens that were outside in the SRC groups vs. 4.1 ± 0.8% in the AS groups (F1,7 = 24.03, P = 0.002). The interactions of shelter type with rainfall (F2,5578 = 70.59, P < 0.001), increasing radiation (F2,5578 = 300.93, P < 0.001) and increasing wind speed (F2,5578 = 14.77, P < 0.001) showed that these factors were related with fewer chickens being outside; and that these effects were more pronounced in SRC than in AS chickens. An increasing temperature was related with more free-range use (F1,5578 = 32.24, P < 0.001). A shorter TI duration in week 3 (at group level) was associated with more chickens further than 5 m from the house (F1,250 = 13.79, P < 0.001). The percentage of animals needing more than one induction to induce TI in week 10 was higher for chickens from SRC (29.7%) than from IN groups (4.8%; t102 = −2.61, P = 0.028) but not AS (14.8%). Hock dermatitis occurred less in AS (7.6%) than in IN (40.1%; t222 = 3.15, P = 0.005) but not SRC (13.7%). These findings indicate that presence of SRC was most effective in encouraging chickens to use the free-range area, but that free-range access was only moderately related to better leg health and fearfulness (at group level).

Demand for meat from free-range broiler chickens is increasing in several countries. Consumers are motivated by better animal welfare and other product attributes such as quality and taste. However, scientific literature is not unanimous about whether free-range access influences quality, composition, and taste of the meat. Because chickens normally do not use free-range areas optimally, it is possible that provision of more suitable shelter will lead to more pronounced differences between chickens raised indoors and outdoors. In this study, an experiment with 2 production rounds of 600 slow-growing broilers each was performed. In each round, 200 chickens were raised indoors (IN), 200 had free-range access to grassland with artificial shelter (AS), and 200 had free-range access to short-rotation coppice with willow (SRC). Free-range use, feed intake, and growth were monitored, and after slaughter (d72) meat quality, composition, and taste were assessed. Free-range use was higher in SRC than in AS chickens (42.8 vs. 35.1%, P < 0.001). IN chickens were heavier at d70 than AS and SRC chickens (2.79 vs. 2.66 and 2.68 kg, P = 0.005). However, feed intake and conversion did not differ. Breast meat of chickens with free-range access was darker (P = 0.021) and yellower (P = 0.001) than that of IN chickens. Ultimate pH was lower (5.73 vs. 5.79; P = 0.006) and drip loss higher (1.29 vs. 1.09%; P = 0.05) in IN versus AS chickens. The percentage of polyunsaturated fatty acids was higher in AS than in IN meat (35.84 vs. 34.59%; P = 0.021). The taste panel judged breast meat of SRC chickens to be more tender (P = 0.003) and less fibrous (P = 0.013) compared to that of AS and IN chickens, and juicier compared to the IN chickens (P = 0.017). Overall, free-range access negatively affected slaughter weight, but positively affected meat quality, taste, and composition. Only a few differences between AS and SRC were found, possibly due to limited differences in free-range use.

An online training package providing a concise synthesis of the scientific data underpinning EU legislation on enrichment and tail-docking of pigs was produced in seven languages, with the aim of improving consistency of professional judgements regarding legislation compliance on farms. In total, 158 participants who were official inspectors, certification scheme assessors and advisors from 16 EU countries completed an initial test and an online training package. Control group participants completed a second identical test before, and Training group participants after, viewing the training. In Section 1 of the test participants rated the importance of modifying environmental enrichment defined in nine scenarios from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important). Training significantly increased participants’ overall perception of the need for change. Participants then rated nine risk factors for tail-biting from 1 (no risk) to 10 (high risk). After training scores were better correlated with risk rankings already described by scientists. Scenarios relating to tail-docking and management were then described. Training significantly increased the proportion of respondents correctly identifying that a farm without tail lesions should stop tail-docking. Finally, participants rated the importance of modifying enrichment in three further scenarios. Training increased ratings in all three. The pattern of results indicated that participants’ roles influenced scores but overall the training improved: i) recognition of enrichments that, by virtue of their type or use by pigs, may be insufficient to achieve legislation compliance; ii) knowledge on risk factors for tail-biting; and iii) recognition of when routine tail-docking was occurring.

On 1 January 2012, conventional cages for laying hens were banned in the European Union (EU); all egg farmers must now use alternative hen housing systems. In total, 218 Flemish egg farmers were surveyed in 2013 to 2014 regarding which housing systems they currently use, their degree of satisfaction with the system, and how they experienced the transition from conventional cages to an alternative system. The response rate was 58.3% (127 respondents). Of these, 43 (33.9%) were no longer active as an egg farmer, mainly due to the ban on conventional cages. The respondents who were active as egg farmers both before and after the transition (84, 66.1%) mainly judged the ban as negative for their own finances and for the competitive position of the Belgian egg industry, but were neutral or positive regarding the general consequences for their own business. Most respondents' hens were housed in either aviary systems (47.7%) or in alternative cage systems (38.2%). When choosing a new system, the fit into the farm and consumer demand were the most important factors. Consumer demand was the main reason for choosing a system with free-range access. In general, egg farmers were satisfied with the system they chose, although this differs between systems. When asked to compare the alternative systems to conventional cages, alternatives were judged to be better for hen welfare and consumer demand, but similar or worse for all other aspects, especially labor. Egg farmers previously using conventional cages judged alternative systems more negatively than those who had no prior experience with conventional cages. Farmers who had experience with free-range systems judged these more positively than those without this experience, e.g., for egg consumer demand, profitability, and hen welfare. These results can possibly be extrapolated to other EU countries in which conventional cages were the most common housing system until 2012, and lessons can be drawn from the farmers' experiences when implementing other animal welfare legislation that may require similar far-reaching adaptations for primary production.

Simple Summary Until 2012, laying hens in the EU were often housed in conventional cages that offered limited space and few opportunities to perform highly motivated behaviors. Conventional cages are now banned in the EU in order to improve animal welfare. In this study, egg farmers were surveyed (winter 2013–2014) to assess whether they perceived any changes in animal welfare since changing housing systems, what role hen welfare played in choosing a new housing system, and which aspects of hen welfare they find most important. The data show that the answers differ depending on which housing system the farmers currently use and whether they had used conventional cages in the past. Abstract As of 2012, the EU has banned the use of conventional cages (CC) for laying hens, causing a shift in housing systems. This study’s aim was to gain insight into farmers’ opinions on hen health and welfare in their current housing systems. A survey was sent to 218 Belgian egg farmers, of which 127 (58.3%) responded, with 84 still active as egg farmer. Hen welfare tended to be less important in choosing the housing system for farmers with cage than with non-cage systems. Respondents currently using cage systems were more satisfied with hen health than respondents with non-cage systems. Reported mortality increased with farm size and was higher in furnished cages than in floor housing. Feather pecking, cannibalism, smothering and mortality were perceived to be higher in current housing systems than in CC, but only by respondents who shifted to non-cage systems from previously having had CC. Health- and production-related parameters were scored to be more important for hen welfare as compared to behavior-related parameters. Those without CC in the past rated factors relating to natural behavior to be more important for welfare than those with CC. This difference in opinion based on farmer backgrounds should be taken into account in future research.