The Human-Animal Relationship in Australian Caged Laying Hens

Laying Hens: Why Smothering and Not Surviving?-A Literature Review

The proliferation of rearing systems providing opportunities for birds to engage in natural behaviors can trigger behavioral repertoires that when not manageable compromise animal welfare and the economic viability of the flock. Smothering in laying hens has long been perceived as "natural" or the result of hysteria among birds in the flock. However, the current literature has recognized smothering as an abnormal outcome with the potential to result in significant losses in cage-free poultry systems. Recent studies have specifically aimed to categorize the organization of smothering behavior and highlight its potential causes and consequences. In this study, literature review and bibliographic mapping, drawing on published articles and engagement with poultry farmers through extension and rural technical assistance, were employed. The findings indicate that smothering is a behavior triggered by factors related to the environment in which the laying hens are kept. This study concludes that there is a critical need for more rigorous and detailed research to elucidate the nuances of avian behavioral physiology and assess the impact of production systems on animal welfare and the economic impacts on the flock. This research contributes to a deeper understanding of bird behavior in high-production environments and provides practical insights for the poultry industry.

The Relationship between Animal Welfare and Farm Profitability in Cage and Free-Range Housing Systems for Laying Hens in China

Several countries and regions have regulations in place to provide standards for the welfare of production animals, which have implications for breeding, management and trade. In the chicken egg production industry, the welfare impacts of this are not well understood. In the past decades, free-range systems were widely used for local chicken breeds in poultry industry in China, but their use has gradually declined due to the lower competitiveness compared to commercial cage systems. However, the practices of free-range systems for hens raising have gradually increased again over the past decade, as consumer individualized demand for higher food quality and animal welfare has increased. We recruited 14 free-range farms and 45 cage farms from Beijing, Shandong, Hebei, Anhui, Yunnan, Gansu and Jiangsu provinces in China, for an evaluation of hen welfare, production and economic outcomes from farm operations. This study provides data for the welfare outcomes of laying hens in China and preliminarily explored the relationship between welfare level and economic income within farming system types. The researchers visited the farms and used Welfare Quality measures to investigate the welfare, and farm self-reported profits. Nonparametric Mann−Whitney U tests were used to compare the welfare scores between cage and free-range rearing farms. Correlation and regression are used for the analysis of the animal welfare scores, economic data, and production metrics. The general income from free-range farms was linearly correlated with red mite score and stocking density (p < 0.001 and p < 0.05, respectively). The results showed less centimeters of feeder and drinker space per animal in the free-range system than in cage systems (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). Welfare scores for both the stocking density and beak condition were significantly better in the free-range systems than the cage systems (p < 0.001), as were qualitative behavior assessment scores (p < 0.05). The total egg production and peak egg production in cage farms were much higher than in free-range farms (p < 0.001), and egg loss rate was significantly lower (p < 0.001). While the production efficiency of free-range farms was lower than that of cage farms, general income per 10,000 hens was actually higher. Our results provide some evidence that some welfare indicators and general income (per 10,000 hens) in free-range farms in China were better than those of cage farms. The results indicate that better parasite control and lower stocking densities may result in improved hen welfare on free-range farms and potentially improve profitability. The level of welfare and economic benefits of free-range farms vary widely, and there was potential room for improvement in feeding space, drinking water space and human−animal relationship.

Bird Welfare in Zoos and Aquariums: General Insights across Industries

Animal welfare is a priority across accredited zoological institutions; however, historically, research has been prioritized for mammals. Bird-focused studies accounted for less than 10% of welfare research in zoos and aquariums over the last ten years. Due to the lack of scientific publications on bird welfare, zoo scientists and animal practitioners can look to other industries such as agriculture, laboratories, and companion animal research for insight. This qualitative review highlights findings across industries to inform animal care staff and scientists on the welfare needs of birds within zoos and aquariums. Specifically, the review includes an overview of research on different topics and a summary of key findings across nine resources that affect bird welfare. We also highlight areas where additional research is necessary. Future welfare research in zoos and aquariums should prioritize studies that consider a diversity of bird species across topics and work to identify animal-based measures with empirical evidence. Moving forward, research from other industries can help develop innovative research on bird welfare within zoos and aquariums.

The Animal-Human Interface in Farm Animal Production: Animal Fear, Stress, Reproduction and Welfare

Simple Summary

For at least the last four decades, the focus of animal welfare research, quality assurance, and policy initiatives has been on measuring behavioural and physiological stress responses in animals. In the last decade, however, this focus of animal welfare research has shifted to the consequences of these behavioural and physiological stress responses rather than only the responses per se. Modern-day farming, even with the intensification and automation requires regular monitoring and interactions by stockpeople. Research conducted in both experimental and commercial settings has shown widespread effects of the human-animal interactions on behaviour, physiology, and reproductive performance in farm animals. In this paper, we review the implications of human-animal interactions on reproduction in farm animals.

Abstract

A negative human-animal relationship (HAR) from the perspective of the animal is a limiting factor affecting farm animal welfare, as well as farm animal productivity. Research in farm animals has elucidated sequential relationships between stockperson attitudes, stockperson behaviour, farm animal fear behaviour, farm animal stress physiology, and farm animal productivity. In situations where stockperson attitudes to and interactions with farm animals are sub-optimal, through animal fear and stress, both animal welfare and productivity, including reproductive performance, can be compromised. There is a growing body of evidence that farm animals often seek and enjoy interacting with humans, but our understanding of the effects of a positive HAR on stress resilience and productivity in farm animals is limited. In this review, we explore the pathways by which stress induced by human-animal interactions can negatively affect farm animal reproduction, in particular, via inhibitory effects on the secretion of gonadotrophins. We also review the current knowledge of the stockperson characteristics and the nature of stockperson interactions that affect fear and physiological stress in farm animals. The contents of this review provide an insight into the importance of the HAR on farm animal welfare and reproduction while highlighting the gap in knowledge regarding the effects of a positive HAR on farm animals.

The impact of management, husbandry and stockperson decisions on the welfare of laying hens in Australia

The present review examines the impact of management and husbandry decisions on the welfare of laying hens in Australia. The literature on many of these aspects is lacking for the Australian egg industry, and, indeed, for the egg industry in general. Management decisions that can affect hen welfare relate to the initial farm design, husbandry routines, and staff selection and training. As modern laying houses represent a considerable financial investment, the decisions made during the design phase are likely to affect both the hens and stockpeople for substantial periods. Hens in cage systems may benefit from fewer tiers and greater space allowances. In non-cage systems, the brown genotypes used in the Australian egg industry may benefit from lower structures that accommodate their heavier and less agile bodies. Keel fractures can be reduced by improving the skeletal health and spatial cognition of laying hens during the rearing period, in addition to minimising the distances they need to jump when navigating aviary structures. The addition of a wintergarden to fixed free-range systems appears to be beneficial. Housing hens in mobile units on free-range farms may challenge their welfare, particularly in relation to heat stress. There is also room for improvement in biosecurity practices and health monitoring of hens, as these appear to be lacking at some farms. The current strains of hen used in free-range systems may not be best suited to these conditions, on the basis of their body condition and flock uniformity. Feed quality may also need to be monitored for quality assurance and optimal hen nutrition. Hen welfare during depopulation can be improved through staff training and by reducing staff fatigue. Euthanising spent hens on farm offers welfare benefits over transporting spent hens to an abattoir. Both hen welfare and working conditions for stock people should be considered when designing laying houses to provide suitable conditions for both hens and stockpeople. This will help improve the job satisfaction of stockpeople, which may translate into better care for the hens and may aid in retaining quality staff. Stockpeople must be recognised as vital contributors to hen welfare in the egg industry, and it is important for the egg industry to continue to attract, train and retain skilled stockpeople to ensure that they enjoy their job and are motivated to apply best-practice care for their flocks. Promoting the animal-care aspect of stockmanship in combination with a supportive managerial environment with optimal working conditions may increase the attractiveness of the egg industry as a place to work.

Natural behaviours, their drivers and their implications for laying hen welfare

Some believe that farm animals need to be kept in conditions that provide ‘natural’ aspects in the animal’s environment and, thus, provide the opportunity for the animals to perform their full ‘behavioural repertoire’. Captivity may restrict either behaviours that animals have instinctive, intrinsic propensities to perform whatever the environment or behaviours that are elicited by deficits in the animals’ environment. Behavioural restriction may also thwart general motivation to seek variety and/or avoid monotonous conditions. Appreciating whether an animal suffers if deprived of the opportunity to perform natural behaviour requires, first, an understanding of how the behaviour in question is elicited and controlled, the effects of early experience and genetics on the behaviour and the behaviour of the species in the wild, and, second, the behavioural, physiological and fitness effects of deprivation of the behaviour. Housing laying hens in conventional cages compromises their behavioural repertoire, such as nesting in a nest box, dust bathing, perching and foraging, and the present review focuses on the welfare implications if these natural behaviours are thwarted in modern poultry production. A floor space of &lt;561 cm2/hen increases physiological stress, reduces egg production and increases mortality in laying hens. There is also evidence of behavioural restriction in terms of reduced wing stretching, leg stretching, tail wagging, locomotion, floor and object pecking and preening with floor space in the range of 542–750 cm2/hen. Preference and motivation research has indicated that laying hens value resources such as nest boxes for oviposition, substrates for foraging and dust bathing, and perches for roosting. However, there is no convincing evidence that deprivation of these resources results in physiological stress. Furthermore, apart from adverse effects of the absence of perches on bone strength, there is no evidence that deprivation of nest boxes, perches, and foraging and dust-bathing substrates results in reduction in fitness such as reduced egg production or health. Nevertheless, preference research has indicated that the opportunity to utilise these resources, particularly nest boxes, may elicit positive emotional states in laying hens. Therefore, it is important to understand both how motivated the animal is to choose an option or perform a behaviour as well as the consequences of depriving the animal of this opportunity.

The 2020 Five Domains Model: Including Human-Animal Interactions in Assessments of Animal Welfare

Throughout its 25-year history, the Five Domains Model for animal welfare assessment has been regularly updated to include at each stage the latest authenticated developments in animal welfare science thinking. The domains of the most up-to-date Model described here are: 1 Nutrition, 2 Physical Environment, 3 Health, 4 Behavioural Interactions and 5 Mental State. The first four domains focus attention on factors that give rise to specific negative or positive subjective experiences (affects), which contribute to the animal's mental state, as evaluated in Domain 5. More specifically, the first three domains focus mainly on factors that disturb or disrupt particular features of the body's internal stability. Each disturbed or disrupted feature generates sensory inputs which are processed by the brain to form specific negative affects, and these affects are associated with behaviours that act to restore the body's internal stability. As each such behaviour is essential for the survival of the animal, the affects associated with them are collectively referred to as "survival-critical affects". In contrast, Domain 4, now named Behavioural Interactions, focusses on evidence of animals consciously seeking specific goals when interacting behaviourally with (1) the environment, (2) other non-human animals and (3) as a new feature of the Model outlined here, humans. The associated affects, evaluated via Domain 5, are mainly generated by brain processing of sensory inputs elicited by external stimuli. The success of the animals' behavioural attempts to achieve their chosen goals is reflected in whether the associated affects are negative or positive. Collectively referred to as "situation-related affects", these outcomes are understood to contribute to animals' perceptions of their external circumstances. These observations reveal a key distinction between the way survival-critical and situation-related affects influence animals' aligned behaviours. The former mainly reflect compelling motivations to engage in genetically embedded behavioural responses, whereas the latter mainly involve conscious behavioural choices which are the hallmarks of agency. Finally, numerous examples of human-animal interactions and their attendant affects are described, and the qualitative grading of interactions that generate negative or positive affect is also illustrated.