Poultry Welfare and its positive behavioral indicators

Poultry Welfare and its positive behavioral indicators

Abhijeet Champati^1*, Juli Chakma¹ and DivyaPrakash R. Choravada²

¹Assistant Professor, Department of Livestock Farm Complex, Institute of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry, SOA (Deemed to be) University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha-751003

²Assistant Professor, Department of Veterinary Biochemistry, COVS, SKnagar, Kamdhenu University, Gujarat-385506

*corresponding author email id: abhijeetchampati92@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

Around the globe, poultry birds are commercially reared in conventional cages to increase productivity efficiently. The most commercial method of raising chickens globally is the cage-rearing system, in which the birds are watered and fed in prefabricated cages that have precise measurements for effective control but in such cages birds are deprived of appropriate space requirements due to which they are unable to express their natural welfare behaviours like perching, nesting, dustbathing, foraging, etc. There have been growing concerns and awareness among consumers regarding the welfare needs of birds and the source of their poultry products. The concepts of welfare focus on the freedoms and needs of birds as well as their physiological, mental and social well being and also take into account the economics, legality of the rearing systems. It’s the well educated and informed decisions made by the consumers that can promote the all round welfare in poultry rearing. To aid them into better decision making, more research and survey of economical welfare practices in different situations is required. This article reviews the welfare in poultry and its governing behavioural indicators that can help make decisions in management and improve production without hampering the physical and mental health of birds.

Keywords: Welfare,Poultry, Behaviour, dustbathing

INTRODUCTION

Poultry birds are commercially grown and raised for their eggs and meat all over the world. Poultry has proven to be the most effective animal product in the world market for producing high-quality protein (Pandey, 2018). The sector has experienced significant expansion and advancement in recent decades, both in India and globally. With a yearly growth rate of 6-7% in egg production and 7-8% in broiler meat, poultry is currently one of the fastest-growing agricultural sectors in India (BAHS, 2023). The rapid advancements in animal genetics, feeding, and management techniques are responsible for this spike in output. This fast growth is also supported by the high stock density intensive rearing viz. deep litter and cages, commercially seeking to maximize profit by application of modern technologies and facilities of management and reduce about cost and boost productivity.

The most commercial method of raising chickens globally is the cage-rearing system, in which the birds are watered and fed in prefabricated cages that have precise measurements for effective control (Tauson, 2005). Even still, the cage rearing has drawn a lot of criticism because it doesn’t always accommodate the demands and behaviors of birds in their natural habitat. The obvious welfare concerns associated with raising chicken birds in cages have been brought to light (Appleby, 1991; Bhanja & Bhadauria, 2018). In contrast to battery cages, alternative laying hen housing systems such as barns and free-range allow hens to walk about freely. However, they differ greatly in terms of design, management techniques, and requirements. This led the Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC), to declare that “We do not approve of the cage systems in their present commercial form on welfare grounds” (FAWC, 1986). Animal welfare encompasses both an animal’s physical and mental health. Hen welfare can be impacted by a housing system or rather the environment in a variety of ways. As a result, a variety of indicators, including mortality rate, physiological measures (usually of stress indicators), sickness and health status, behavior, and production, must be considered in tandem in order to assess an animal’s welfare within a particular housing system (Papageorgiou et al.,2023). Presently, people are more interested in learning where poultry products come from and how to improve the welfare of the birds. This consequently influences their attitude when making product purchases. The global chicken business has moved away from the traditional cage system and toward more welfare-conscious alternative rearing techniques as a result of these welfare issues. This article examines the notions of wellbeing in the raising of chicken as well as the variety of metrics used to measure it.

Concepts of Poultry Welfare

Animal welfare is influenced by an animal’s mental and physical health. There are several ways that the housing system may impact the welfare of birds. Researchers that work on animal welfare generally agree that integrating data from various sources using a variety of approaches is the most comprehensive way to assess welfare. (Bhanja and Bhadauria, 2018; EFSA, 2005)

Concept of Freedom

The five freedoms as applicable to poultry an ideal state of welfare for poultry birds that need to be kept in mind while rearing. These are:-

• Freedom from thirst and hunger: To preserve optimal health and energy, fresh food and water are always available.
• Freedom from discomfort: Creating a comfortable environment for resting.
• Freedom from pain, injury and disease: Illness prevention, identification, and management.
• Freedom to express normal behaviour: Allowing birds to behave normally means giving them enough room, suitable amenities, and others similar to them.
• Freedom from fear and distress: Ensuring conditions and treatment to avoid mental suffering. (Brambell report, 1965)

Concept of Comprehensive Approaches

A thorough approach to animal welfare was presented by Dockès and Kling-Eveillard (2006), concentrating on four key concerns. The following summarizes them, with implications for the welfare of poultry:

• Technical and biological definitions: these give poultry their basic requirements, liberties, and capacity to withstand harsh environments.
• Regulation strategies: acknowledging poultry as delicate creatures and establishing environments that meet their biological requirements.
• Philosophical approaches: To emphasize the significance of chickens’ standing and function in human civilization.
• Human-animal communication: Emphasize the relationship between farmers and poultry and how it affects industrial systems used for poultry production.

These concerns are central to the definition of body-and mind-related animal welfare, and they emphasize the significance of integrating animals into human social environments and providing them with a role for moral as well as utilitarian purposes.

Behavioural Indicators of welfare

Animal welfare includes an animal’s state of mind and body. A housing system, or rather the environment, can have a number of effects on hen welfare. Therefore, in order to evaluate an animal’s welfare within a specific housing system, a number of indicators, such as the mortality rate, stress, illness and health condition and most prominently behavioural indicators must be taken into account simultaneously.

Natural behaviours of poultry birds

Natural selection has shaped animal behavior over thousands, if not millions of years, considerably more strongly than selective breeding, which has affected animals in some ways through the process of domestication over thousands of years. The majority of the basic behavioral repertoire exhibited by wild animals is still present in domesticated animals. Linares and Martin (2010) stated that amidst the various welfare indicators, the natural behaviour of birds is the most reliable. Natural behaviour as defined as behaviour an animal normally shows when exposed to conditions similar to its natural habitat. Natural behaviours are congenial and promote biological functions that are significant to the animal’s welfare. Birds reared in cages often lack the expressions of certain natural behaviour. Some of the natural behaviours have been listed below.

• Nesting– In the wild, the hen finds a secluded area, scrapes the ground, and constructs a nest before oviposition. Biological cues from within determine the nesting behavior regardless of the surrounding environment. Before oviposition, cage-raised birds exhibit stereotypical pacing and escape behaviors, become restless, or engage in “phantom” nesting activities. Egg retention in the eggshell gland was the result of nesting space being deprived. When hens are kept in cages without a place to build a nest, they express their anguish and dissatisfaction by remaining motionless (Appleby et al., 1992; Hemsworth and Edwards, 2020).
• Scratching and Foraging– Even while birds kept in cages or deep litter are fed a full food on an as-needed basis, they still have an innate desire to forage. Research has shown that chickens prefer to search the ground for food instead of using feeders. The bird pecks at the litter in quest of food and uses its feet to scratch it in a backward motion. Better bird welfare is indicated by higher intensity, duration, and incidence (Bhanja and Bhadauria, 2018).
• Perching– The domestic hen’s behavior of perching is largely driven by intrinsic motivation and is connected to her roosting behavior. It is a behavior associated to avoiding predators. In aviary cages and multitier systems, hens prefer the upper perches for night roosting and become irate if they are unable to gain access (Campbell et al., 2016).Birds’ usage of perches is essential to preserving the volume and strength of their bones. Approximately 25–41% of the day, and up to 90% of the night, are spent perching by hens. (Pohle and Cheng, 2009).
• Dustbathing– Chickens’ skin and feathers stay healthy when they are dust-bathed. It lays on a dust bath, rubbing dust over its feathers before shaking off any loose bits. Dustbathing may assist maintain the proper balance of lipid levels in feathers, according to experimental research (Hemsworth and Edwards, 2020). Dust bathing is encouraged by both internal and exterior elements, including light, ectoparasites, loose substrate, warmth, and pleasure (Bhanja and Bhadauria, 2018). When birds aren’t able to dust themselves, they exhibit signs of stress and are thought to be doing it for enjoyment rather than necessity. Because happiness and the absence of suffering are prerequisites for optimal welfare, dust-bathing is a significant behavioral behavior for birds.
• Comfort behaviour– Stretching, wing-flapping, body-shaking, and preening provide comfort to the birds which are gravely affected in cage rearing (Papageorgiou et al.,2023).
• Exercising– Birds raised in cages have little to no opportunity to exercise or be exposed to normal physical environments, which leads to improper bone structure and compromised bone strength. Numerous studies come to the conclusion that caged birds’ bone strength was significantly lower than that of birds raised outside of cages (Regmi et al.,2016).
• Exploring– Birds screen and assess their environment because they are inherently inquisitive, invasive, and exploratory in nature (Hemsworth and Edwards, 2020). Birds’ general health and mental, bodily, and social well-being are enhanced by rich outdoor settings. The barren and confined atmosphere that caged birds experience is harmful to their mental health.

Aggressive behaviour

Frustrated or scared, hens can also exhibit harmful behaviors that are detrimental to their well-being. Fear is an instinctive reaction to an impending threat or a prelude to one. It is linked to aggressive behavior, tonic immobility, aggression, freezing behavior, adrenal cortical activity, and heart rate increase and its impact on the quality of meat. The behavior of cannibalism is harmful to the wellbeing of birds, especially as it results in pain and injury. It has to do with extreme feather pecking, and some authors think that rather than social and natural behaviors, it results from genetic selection favoring individual performance (Bhanja and Bhadauria, 2018).

Social behaviour

Poultry are frequently gathered into sizable, homogeneous flocks made up of same-sex groups of birds of comparable sizes. Large groups may lead to more hostile encounters since they make things more challenging.  for the bird to create a strong hierarchy of authority.  Typically, chicken species are gregarious, flocking together or  collectives. The birds frequently divide into smaller groups when there is room, each with its own set social hierarchy. Particularly in high-density systems where a few dominant individuals may control the feed, water, and available space, social dominance can lead to management issues. When new groups or flocks mix, the dominance hierarchy and the agonistic interactions that go along with it are always restored.

Birds restricted of their important behavioural needs when reared in cages would result in poor quality of life and impaired physical and psychological health (EFSA, 2005).

Table: On farm welfare assessment of poultry

CONCLUSION

In today’s intense production units, the wellbeing of laying hens is widely acknowledged as a concern. Concurrently, there has been a shift in favor of housing schemes that are more welfare-friendly.Because animal welfare is an essential and unique component of sustainable agricultural development, which is a component of sustainable development for the environment, society, economy, and humanity as a whole, positive welfare indicators are linked to sustainable systems for producing chickens. Welfare notions have biological, cultural, economic, social, philosophical, emotional, legal, and political components in addition to emphasizing the five freedoms. When welfare measures are implemented, the degree of freedom that informed and educated consumers have over their choices may be crucial. Therefore, our decisions about ensuring the welfare of laying hens should be guided by our understanding of the motivations for their behavior and choice of environmental alternative.

REFERENCES

Tauson, R. (2005). Management and housing systems for layers—Effects on welfare and production. World’s Poultry Science Journal. 61: 477–490.

Papageorgiou, M. Goliomytis, M. Tzamaloukas, O. Miltiadou, D. and Simitzis, P. (2023). Positive Welfare Indicators and Their Association with Sustainable Management Systems in Poultry. Sustainability. 15: 10890.

Campbell, D.L.M. Makagon, M. M.J. Swanson, J.C. and Siegford, J.M. (2016). Perch use by laying hens in a commercial aviary. Poultry Science. 95: 1736–1742.

Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics (BAHS). (2023). GoI, DAHD. pp14-23.

Appleby, M.C. (1991). Do Hens Suffer in Battery Cages? A Review of the Scientific Evidence. The Athene Trust, Petersfield, UK.

Brambell Report. (1965). Report of the Technical Committee to enquire into the welfare of animals kept under intensive livestock husbandry systems. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London, UK.

Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC). (1986). An Assessment of Egg Production Systems. Farm Animal Welfare Council, Tolworth, U.K.

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). (2005). Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare. 2005. Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare on a request from the Commission related to the welfare aspects of various systems of keeping laying hens. The EFSA Journal 197:1-23.

Dockès, A.C. and Kling-Eveillard, F. (2006). Farmers’ and advisers’ representations of animals and animal welfare. Livestock Science. 103:243–249.

Linares, J.A. and Martin, M. (2010). Poultry: Behaviour and welfare assessment. In Encyclopaedia of Animal Behaviour. Academic Press, USA, pp: 750-756.

Appleby, M.C., Hughes, B.O., and Elson, H.A. (1992). Poultry Production Systems: Behaviour, Management and Welfare (Wallingford, U.K.: CAB International, p. 186).

Hemsworth, P. H. and Edwards, L. E. (2020). Natural behaviours, their drivers and their implications for laying hen welfare. Animal Production Science, 61(10), 915-930.

Pohle, K. and Cheng, H.W. (2009). Comparative effects of furnished and battery cages on egg production and physiological parameters in White Leghorn hens. Poultry Science, 88(10): 2042-2051.

Regmi, P., Smith, N., Nelson, N., Haut, R. C., Orth, M. W. and Karcher, D. M. (2016). Housing conditions alter properties of the tibia and humerus during the laying phase in Lohmann white Leghorn hens. Poultry science, 95(1): 198-206.

Please follow and like us: