Search

In free-range and organic production systems, hens can make choices according to their needs and desires, which is in accordance with welfare definitions. Nonetheless, health and behavioral problems are also encountered in these systems. The aim of this article was to identify welfare challenges observed in these production systems in the EU and the most promising solutions to overcome these challenges. It is based on a review of published literature and research projects complemented by interviews with experts. We selected EU specific information for welfare problems, however, the selected literature regarding solutions is global. Free range use may increase the risk of infection by some bacteria, viruses and parasites. Preventive methods include avoiding contamination thanks to biosecurity measures and strengthening animals' natural defenses against these diseases which can be based on nutritional means with new diet components such as insect-derived products, probiotics and prebiotics. Phytotherapy and aromatherapy can be used as preventive and curative medicine and vaccines as alternatives to antibiotics and pesticides. Bone quality in pullets and hens prevents keel deviations and is favored by exercise in the outdoor range. Free range use also lead to higher exposure to variable weather conditions and predators, therefore shadow, fences and guard animals can be used to prevent heat stress and predation respectively. Granting a free range provides opportunities for the expression of many behaviors and yet many hens usually stay close to the house. Providing the birds with trees, shelters or attractive plants can increase range use. Small flock sizes, early experiences of enrichment and personality traits have also been found to enhance range use. Severe feather pecking can occur in free range production systems, although flocks using the outdoor area have better plumage than indoors. While many prevention strategies are facilitated in free range systems, the

The humane killing of individual broiler chickens on-farm requires a minimum of suffering. In this regard, rapid and irreversible loss of consciousness are important determinants. This can be verified by cerebral and spinal reflexes. Also, on-farm feasibility determines whether producers will apply the method. The aim of the study was to compare the effectiveness and animal welfare impact of two different methods for killing individual broilers of varying ages (2, 4, and 6 weeks): manual cervical dislocation (CD) and captive bolt (CB). The evaluation of CD and CB was based on effectiveness and on time to onset (convulsions) or cessation (pain response, pupillary light reflex, convulsions, heartbeat) of non-invasive indicators. In addition, a pilot study was conducted on-farm to assess the feasibility of two alternative methods, CB and nitrogen gasification (N2), and to survey farmers’ opinions on them. The onset of convulsions was almost immediate for both methods in the first study. No differences between CD and CB were observed for the cessation of pain response for chickens at age of 2 weeks (5.0 and 7.5 s, respectively) and 6 weeks (14.0 and 14.1 s, respectively). However, at 4 weeks a longer pain response was measured after CD (11.3 s) than after CB (4.7 s). For the three age categories, the pupillary light reflex disappeared later after CD (54.9 - 80.7 s) compared to CB (8.3 - 13.7 s). The same was observed for cessation of convulsions in 2- and 6-week-old chickens (185.3 and 172.0 s for CD and 79.0 and 82.9 s for CB). This suggests that brain death occurred faster after CB compared to CD. No difference between the methods was found for the cessation of the heartbeat. After the pilot study, the producers preferred N2 over CB in terms of animal-friendliness, time-efficiency, ease of use, and effectiveness. However, both methods were found rather expensive and required some experience. CB and N2 are good killing alternatives to CD due to rapid and irreversible i

The use of insects in animal feed has the potential to reduce the demand for soybean production and reduce the deforestation and loss of natural resources. In particular, the black soldier fly (BSF, Hermetia illucens) larvae have received attention due to their ability to convert organic waste into high-value biomass. Several studies have investigated the effects of providing BSF larvae to both broilers and laying hens. However, knowledge gaps regarding hens’ voluntary intake of live larvae and the effects of larvae consumption on egg production still remain. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to determine the effects of the consumption of 4 different amounts of live BSF larvae on laying hen feed consumption, hen health and fearfulness, and egg production and quality. To this end, 40 Bovans White laying hens were housed individually and provided with 0, 10, 20% or ad libitum daily portions of live larvae from 18 to 30 wk of age. The larvae consumption and concentrate consumption, hen weight, egg production, and egg quality were monitored. Overall, differences were found between the hens given ad libitum access to larvae compared to the other treatments. Ad libitum hens, consumed 163 ± 41 g larvae/hen/day, consumed less concentrate (P = 0.03) and gained more weight (P = 0.0002) than all other treatments. They also had an overall higher consumption of protein, fat and energy (P < 0.03). There was no effect of larvae consumption on egg production, egg weight, shell thickness, shell breaking strength, or Haugh unit (P > 0.05). There was also no effect on hen behavior toward a novel object or in an open field test. This study is the first to provide different amounts of live BSF larvae, including an ad libitum portion to laying hens. The 20% diet could promote sustainability in the egg industry and be economically advantageous if BSF larvae can be bought in bulk for less than 40% of the cost of the concentrate.

The Welfare Quality® consortium has developed and proposed standard protocols for monitoring farm animal welfare. The uptake of the dairy cattle protocol has been below expectation, however, and it has been criticized for the variable quality of the welfare measures and for a limited number of measures having a disproportionally large effect on the integrated welfare categorization. Aiming for a wide uptake by the milk industry, we revised and simplified the Welfare Quality® protocol into a user-friendly tool for cost- and time-efficient on-farm monitoring of dairy cattle welfare with a minimal number of key animal-based measures that are aggregated into a continuous (and thus discriminative) welfare index (WI). The inevitable subjective decisions were based upon expert opinion, as considerable expertise about cattle welfare issues and about the interpretation, importance, and validity of the welfare measures was deemed essential. The WI is calculated as the sum of the severity score (i.e., how severely a welfare problem affects cow welfare) multiplied with the herd prevalence for each measure. The selection of measures (lameness, leanness, mortality, hairless patches, lesions/swellings, somatic cell count) and their severity scores were based on expert surveys (14-17 trained users of the Welfare Quality® cattle protocol). The prevalence of these welfare measures was assessed in 491 European herds. Experts allocated a welfare score (from 0 to 100) to 12 focus herds for which the prevalence of each welfare measure was benchmarked against all 491 herds. Quadratic models indicated a high correspondence between these subjective scores and the WI (R 2 = 0.91). The WI allows both numerical (0-100) as a qualitative ("not classified" to "excellent") evaluation of welfare. Although it is sensitive to those welfare issues that most adversely affect cattle welfare (as identified by EFSA), the WI should be accompanied with a disclaimer that lists adverse or favorable effects

The objective was to determine broiler chicken behavioral differences in response to novel flooring treatments. Broilers (n = 182) were housed in 14 pens (a random subset from a larger-scale study including 42 pens), with 13 birds/pen. One of seven flooring treatments were randomly allocated to 14 pens (2 pens per treatment). The flooring treatments (provided from day 1 {1} or day 29 {29}) included regularly replaced shavings (POS), a mat with 1% povidone-iodine solution (MAT), and the iodine mat placed on a partially slatted floor (SLAT). In addition, a negative control treatment was included with birds kept on used litter from day 1 (NEG). Behavior was recorded in weeks 1, 2, 5, and 6. In week 5, treatments affected the behavioral repertoire (p ≤ 0.035). Birds in POS-1 showed more locomoting, preening and activity overall compared to MAT and/or SLAT treatments. Birds in POS-29 showed more drinking, foraging, preening and overall activity than birds in MAT and/or SLAT treatments. In week 6, birds in the POS-1 treatment spent more time foraging compared to birds in all MAT and SLAT treatments (p ≤ 0.030). In addition, birds in the POS-1 treatment spent more time preening than birds in the MAT-1 treatment (p = 0.046). Our results indicate that access to partially slatted flooring and/or disinfectant mats does not benefit broiler chicken welfare in terms of their ability to express highly motivated behaviors. Access to clean, regularly replaced litter is beneficial for broiler chicken welfare in terms of their ability to express their normal behavioral repertoire.

Contact dermatitis (footpad dermatitis (FPD), hock burns, and breast dermatitis) is a welfare issue for broiler chickens, causing pain and behavioral restrictions. Once lesions develop, often nothing is done to remedy the issue for the affected flock. Our objective was to evaluate novel flooring treatments at the flock level by providing preventative and remedial treatments against contact dermatitis, plumage soiling, and gait impairment. Broilers (n = 546) were housed in 42 pens, with 13 birds/pen. The flooring treatments (four) included used litter (NEG), new pine shavings replaced regularly (POS), a mat filled with 1% povidone-iodine solution (MAT), and the iodine mat placed on a slatted floor (SLAT). Flooring treatments were provided from day one of age (preventative approach; PREV) or day 29 (remedial approach; REM). Contact dermatitis, soiling, gait, and weight were recorded weekly (seven birds/pen). Results showed a treatment effect for all measures, dependent on bird age. Overall, the POS treatment resulted in the best welfare outcomes (FPD, hock burns, and gait). The worst contact dermatitis was found in the MAT and SLAT groups. NEG birds showed little contact dermatitis, opposite to expectations. Weights were lower for PREV-POS in week seven only. The treatments with povidone-iodine were deemed ineffective against contact dermatitis. Access to clean litter prevented and remedied contact dermatitis, and a comparable approach may be commercially feasible.

To date, information about reasons to select and kill poultry on-farm and which method veterinarians and poultry producers preferably use is scarce. Little is also known about their knowledge of the legislation regarding on-farm killing methods and of methods alternative to the one(s) they use, as well as their perception of those alternatives. In this study, Flemish poultry veterinarians (n = 13), broiler chicken producers (n = 27), and turkey producers (n = 4) were surveyed on killing methods they currently use in practice and alternative methods, on their opinion about what constitutes an appropriate method for on-farm killing of poultry, and on their reasons for killing. All poultry veterinarians and chicken producers who filled out the survey kill poultry by manual cervical dislocation (CD), whereas some turkey farmers also indicated killing by percussive blow to the head (n = 1) or exsanguination (n = 1). Turkey producers seem to be more inclined not to kill animals with injuries or symptoms of disease as compared to veterinarians or chicken producers, such that moribund turkeys are more likely to remain in the flock. Veterinarians considered the following properties of a killing method important: animal friendliness, applicability inside the stable, a high success rate, and time efficiency. Producers ranked the properties similarly, but for them, ease of performance and cost efficiency were more important than applicability inside the stable. Producers scored those killing properties rather positively for manual as well as mechanical CD. Veterinarians and chicken producers considered the captive bolt method to be easy to perform, to have a high success rate, to be feasible to perform in the stable, and to be animal friendly. Turkey producers, however, had doubts about the latter 2 properties. Gas, injection, and electrocution were inferior methods to kill poultry according to producers. In conclusion, manual CD is the most common method for killing broiler ch

Contact dermatitis (footpad dermatitis (FPD), hock burns, and breast dermatitis) is a welfare issue for broiler chickens, causing pain and behavioral restrictions. Once lesions develop, often nothing is done to remedy the issue for the affected flock. Our objective was to evaluate novel flooring treatments at the flock level by providing preventative and remedial treatments against contact dermatitis, plumage soiling, and gait impairment. Broilers (n = 546) were housed in 42 pens, with 13 birds/pen. The flooring treatments (four) included used litter (NEG), new pine shavings replaced regularly (POS), a mat filled with 1% povidone-iodine solution (MAT), and the iodine mat placed on a slatted floor (SLAT). Flooring treatments were provided from day one of age (preventative approach; PREV) or day 29 (remedial approach; REM). Contact dermatitis, soiling, gait, and weight were recorded weekly (seven birds/pen). Results showed a treatment effect for all measures, dependent on bird age. Overall, the POS treatment resulted in the best welfare outcomes (FPD, hock burns, and gait). The worst contact dermatitis was found in the MAT and SLAT groups. NEG birds showed little contact dermatitis, opposite to expectations. Weights were lower for PREV-POS in week seven only. The treatments with povidone-iodine were deemed ineffective against contact dermatitis. Access to clean litter prevented and remedied contact dermatitis, and a comparable approach may be commercially feasible.

To date, information about reasons to select and kill poultry on-farm and which method veterinarians and poultry producers preferably use is scarce. Little is also known about their knowledge of the legislation regarding on-farm killing methods and of methods alternative to the one(s) they use, as well as their perception of those alternatives. In this study, Flemish poultry veterinarians (n = 13), broiler chicken producers (n = 27), and turkey producers (n = 4) were surveyed on killing methods they currently use in practice and alternative methods, on their opinion about what constitutes an appropriate method for on-farm killing of poultry, and on their reasons for killing. All poultry veterinarians and chicken producers who filled out the survey kill poultry by manual cervical dislocation (CD), whereas some turkey farmers also indicated killing by percussive blow to the head (n = 1) or exsanguination (n = 1). Turkey producers seem to be more inclined not to kill animals with injuries or symptoms of disease as compared to veterinarians or chicken producers, such that moribund turkeys are more likely to remain in the flock. Veterinarians considered the following properties of a killing method important: animal friendliness, applicability inside the stable, a high success rate, and time efficiency. Producers ranked the properties similarly, but for them, ease of performance and cost efficiency were more important than applicability inside the stable. Producers scored those killing properties rather positively for manual as well as mechanical CD. Veterinarians and chicken producers considered the captive bolt method to be easy to perform, to have a high success rate, to be feasible to perform in the stable, and to be animal friendly. Turkey producers, however, had doubts about the latter 2 properties. Gas, injection, and electrocution were inferior methods to kill poultry according to producers. In conclusion, manual CD is the most common method for killing broiler ch