Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T04:10:37.321Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tree cover and injurious feather-pecking in commercial flocks of freerange laying hens: a follow up

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

A Bright ,
R Gill  and
TH Willings
A Bright*
Affiliation:
FAI Farms Ltd, The Field Station, Wytham, Oxfordshire OX2 8QJ, UK
R Gill
Affiliation:
The Lakes Free Range Egg Company Ltd, Meg Bank, Stainton, Penrith CA11 0EE, UK
TH Willings
Affiliation:
Noble Foods Ltd, The Moor, Bilsthorpe, Newark NG22 8TS, UK
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Injurious feather-pecking in non-cage systems is a serious economic and welfare concern for the egg-producing industry. This study presents results from data of over 1,000 flocks from producers who supplied free-range eggs to McDonald's Restaurants Ltd UK between 2008 and 2013. These producers had a minimum 5% of the outdoor range planted in trees. We investigated the correlation between the plumage damage of end-of-lay hens with i) proportion of the total range planted with trees and ii) proportion of canopy cover within tree-planted areas. As tree canopy developed over the study period, we also investigated whether there were any changes in end-of-lay plumage-damage scores within farms, with year over the five years. There was a negative correlation between canopy cover and plumage damage at the end of lay, ie less canopy cover within tree-planted areas resulted in significantly worse plumage damage at the end of lay. There was no correlation between the amount of range planted and plumage damage at the end of lay. These results support the notion that it is the degree of shade and shelter (ie quality of cover) that is important to the hens rather than the absolute area. We did not find any association between year and end-of-lay plumage-damage scores. Due to commercial changes in supply, the proportion of farms providing data for ≥ 3 years was small, thereby limiting the data set with which to compare individual farms’ plumage-damage scores. It is hoped the relationship between year and plumage-damage score will be reexamined in a future study.

Keywords

animal welfarefree rangeinjurious feather-peckinglaying hensplumage damagetree cover
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , February 2016 , pp. 1 - 5
Copyright
© 2016 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Appleby, M, Hughes, B and Arnold Elson, H 1992 Poultry Production Systems. Behaviour, Management and Welfare. CAB International: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
Bestman, MWP and Wagenaar, JP 2003 Farm level factors associated with feather pecking in organic laying hens. Livestock Production Science 80: 133–140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(02)00314-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bestman, MWP, Wagenaar, JP and Nauta, W 2002 Shelter in poultry outdoor runs. Proceedings of the 14th IFOAM Organic World Congress. 21-24 August 2002, Victoria Conference Centre, CanadaGoogle Scholar
Bright, A, Brass, D, Clachan, J, Drake, KA and Joret, AD 2011 Canopy cover is correlated with reduced injurious feather pecking in commercial flocks of free range laying hens. Animal Welfare 20: 329–338Google Scholar
Bright, A and Joret, A 2012 Laying hens go undercover to improve production. Veterinary Record 170: 228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.100503CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gentle, M and Hunter, LN 1990 Physiological and behavioural responses associated with feather removal in Gallus gallus var domesticus. Research in Veterinary Science 50: 95–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0034-5288(91)90060-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilani, AM, Knowles, TG and Nicol, CJ 2014 Factors affecting ranging behaviour in young and adult laying hens. British Poultry Science 55: 127–135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00071668.2014.889279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glatz, PC 1998 Productivity and profitability of caged layers with poor feather cover. A report for the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. RIRDC Publication: AustraliaGoogle Scholar
Green, LE, Lewis, K, Kimpton, A and Nicol, CJ 2000 Cross-sectional study of the prevalence of feather pecking in laying hens in alter-native systems and its associations with management and disease. Veterinary Record 147: 233–238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.147.9.233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunnarsson, S, Keeling, LJ and Svedberg, J 1999 Effect of rearing factors on the prevalence of floor eggs, cloacal cannibal-ism and feather pecking in commercial flocks of loose housed laying hens. British Poultry Science 40: 12–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00071669987773CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hagger, C, Marguerat, C, Steiger-Stafl, D and Strangizer, G 1989 Plumage condition, feed consumption, and egg production relationships in laying hens. Poultry Science 68: 221–225. http://dx.doi.org/10.3382/ps.0680221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hocking, P, Channing, C, Robertson, G, Edmond, A and Jones, RB 2004 Between breed genetic variation for welfare-related behavioural traits in domestic fowl. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 89: 85–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2004.03.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horton, L 2006 A study into the effect of tree cover on the range on the welfare of free-range layer hens by observing animal behaviour. Unpublished report EMS G84. Royal Veterinary College, University of London, UKGoogle Scholar
Huber-Eicher, B and Sebö, F 2001 The prevalence of feather pecking and development in commercial flocks of laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 74: 223–231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(01)00173-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, R, Blokhuis, H, de Jong, I, Keeling, LJ, McAdie, T and Preisinger, R 2004 Feather pecking in poultry: the appli-cation of science in a search for practical solutions. Animal Welfare 13(S): S215–S219Google Scholar
Lambton, SL, Knowles, TG, Yorke, C and Nicol, CJ 2010 The risk factors affecting the development of gentle and severe feather pecking in loose housed laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 123: 32–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applan-im.2009.12.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambton, SL, Nicol, CJ, Friel, M, Main, DCJ, McKinstry, JL, Sherwin, CM, Walton, J and Weeks, CA 2013 A bespoke management package can reduce levels of injurious pecking in loose-housed laying hen flocks. The Veterinary Record 172: 423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.101067CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leeson, S and Morrison, W 1978 Effect of feather cover on feed efficiency in laying birds. Poultry Science 57: 1094–1096. http://dx.doi.org/10.3382/ps.0571094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahboub, H, Muller, J and von Borrell, E 2004 Outdoor use, tonic immobility, heterophil/lymphocyte ratio and feather condition in free-range laying hens of different genotypes. British Poultry Science 45: 738–744. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00071660400014267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicol, CJ, Bestman, M, Gilani, AM, De Haas, E, De Jong, IC, Lambton, S, Wagenaar, JP, Weeks, CA and Rodenburg, TB 2013 The prevention and control of feather pecking: application to commercial systems. Worlds Poultry Science Journal 69: 775–788. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0043933913000809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicol, CJ, Pötzsch, C, Lewis, K and Green, LE 2003 Matched con-current case-control study of risk factors for feather pecking in hens on free-range commercial farms in the UK. British Poultry Science 44:515–523. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00071660310001616255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicol, CJ and Sherwin, CM 2009 A comparative study to assess the welfare of laying hens in current housing systems. Injurious Feather Pecking Workshop. 8 July 2009, FAI Farms Ltd, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
Peguri, A and Coon, C 1993 Effect of feather coverage and tem-perature on layer performance. Poultry Science 72: 1318–1329. http://dx.doi.org/10.3382/ps.0721318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pötzsch, CJ, Lewis, K, Nicol, CJ and Green, LE 2001 A cross-sectional study of the prevalence of vent pecking in laying hens in alternative systems and its associations with feather pecking, man-agement and disease. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 74: 259–272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(01)00167-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Core Team 2014 R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/Google Scholar
Rodenburg, TB, van Hierden, YM, Buitenhuis, A, Riedstra, B, Koene, P, Korte, SM, van der Poel, J, Groothuis, T and Blokhuis, H 2004 Feather pecking in laying hens: new insights and directions for research. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 86: 291–298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2004.02.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodenburg, TB, Van Krimpen, MM, De Jong, IC, De Hass, EN, Kops, MS, Riedstra, BJ, Nordquist, RE, Wagenaar, JP, Bestman, M and Nicol, CJ 2013 The prevention and control of feather pecking in laying hens: identifying the underlying principles. World's Poultry Science Journal 69: 361–374. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0043933913000354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savory, C 1995 Feather pecking and cannibalism. World's Poultry Science Journal 51: 215–219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/WPS19950016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Su, G, Kjaer, JB and Sørensen, P 2006 Divergent selection on feather pecking behavior in laying hens has caused differences between lines in egg production, egg quality and feed efficiency. Poultry Science 85: 191–197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ps/85.2.191CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tauson, R and Svensson, SA 1980 Influence of plumage condition on the hen's feed requirement. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 10: 35–39Google Scholar
Tullett, S, Macleod, M and Jewitt, T 1980 The effects of partial defeathering on energy metabolism in the laying fowl. British Poultry Science 21: 241–245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00071668008416662CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yngvesson, J, Keeling, LJ and Newberry, RC 2004 Individual production differences do not explain cannibalistic behaviour in laying hens. British Poultry Science 45: 453–462. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00071660412331286163Google Scholar
Zeltner, E and Hirt, H 2008 Factors involved in the improve-ment of the use of hen runs. Applied Animal Behavioural Science 114: 395–408. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2008.04.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar