DOCSLIB.ORG

Consumers´ Perspective on Chicken Husbandry: the Case of Dual

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Consumers´ Perspective on Chicken Husbandry: the Case of Dual Consumers’ perspective on chicken husbandry: The case of dual-purpose chickens Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades (Dr. sc. agr.) der Fakultät für Agrarwissenschaften der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen vorgelegt von Nanke Brümmer geboren am 08.05.1989 in Husum Göttingen, im März 2019 1. Gutachter: PD Dr. Martin Banse, Thünen-Institut für Marktanalyse in Braunschweig 2. Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Achim Spiller, Department für Agrarökonomie und Rurale Entwicklung der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen 3. Gutachter: Jun.-Prof. Dr. Jan-Henning Feil, Department für Agrarökonomie und Rurale Entwicklung der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 03.05.2019 Table of contents Summary .......................................................................................................................... II Zusammenfassung .......................................................................................................... IV 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 The role of consumers .............................................................................................. 2 1.2 Problem of chick culling and alternatives ................................................................... 4 1.3 The usage of dual-purpose chickens ......................................................................... 6 1.4 Research questions and objectives ........................................................................... 8 2 Methodology ............................................................................................................ 10 2.1 Qualitative methods ................................................................................................ 10 2.2 Quantitative methods .............................................................................................. 11 2.3 Mixed methods........................................................................................................ 14 2.4 Ethical matrix .......................................................................................................... 15 3 Structure and summary of the contributions ............................................................. 16 4 Articles included as part of the thesis ....................................................................... 21 4.1 Consumers’ perspective on dual-purpose chickens as alternative to the killing of day‐old chicks ..................................................................................... 21 4.2 Consumer acceptance of dual-purpose chickens A mixed methods approach ........ 31 4.3 German consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for eggs and meat from dual-purpose chickens: A latent class analysis ............................................... 44 4.4 Dual purpose chickens as alternative to the culling of day-old chicks - the ethical perspective .......................................................................................... 66 5 Discussion ............................................................................................................... 72 6 Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 80 References ..................................................................................................................... 83 Appendix A: Further Publications .................................................................................... 92 Appendix B: Danksagung ............................................................................................... 95 I Summary According to several studies, chicken farming is seen as the most controversial form of livestock farming among society. One element that is increasingly noticed and criticised is the culling of day-old male chicks. Annually, in Germany, 45 million male chicks of layer breeds are culled directly after hatching because the fattening of the males is unprofitable. This applies to both, conventional and organic animal husbandry. Dual-purpose chickens are one alternative to the culling of day-old chicks being discussed. They can both, produce meat and lay eggs. The hens lay fewer and smaller eggs than current specialised layers, and the cockerels put on less meat than broilers and need more time and feed to grow, which leads to a higher demand for resources. Consequently, eggs and meat from dual-purpose chickens have a different appearance and are more expensive than products from specialised chickens. Consumers, therefore, play an essential role when it comes to the acceptance and marketability of dual-purpose chickens, as they ultimately decide the success of products at the counter. Therefore, the main objective of this thesis is to analyse consumer perspectives on dual-purpose chickens in order to provide implications and recommendations for policy-makers, economy and research when discussing the use of dual-purpose chicken breeds. In contribution 1, an explorative approach was used to gather insights into the topic. Six focus groups provided findings about consumer perspectives on dual-purpose chickens. The results show that the culling of day-old chicks was known to most of the participants and rejected for ethical reasons. They were aware of few alternatives, and information on dual-purpose chickens and the other alternatives to the culling was given to the participants. The naming was seen as inappropriate and misleading, but the participants were generally in favour of this chicken breed. Some participants raised concerns regarding economic efficiency and higher product prices. For others, ethical values predominated. Additionally, the results demonstrated that the participants had specific expectations regarding the production and labelling of dual-purpose chickens and linked better husbandry conditions to the potential purchase of products from dual- purpose chickens. In order to analyse consumer acceptance of dual-purpose chicken breeds, a mixed methods study was applied in the second contribution. The combination of qualitative and quantitative methods is particularly suitable for this research question since little is known about this topic thus far. On the basis of the focus groups and the results from the first contribution, an online survey was conducted with 1,502 participants in Germany. The data was analysed with the help of a factor analysis in order to find independent latent variables, called factors. Seven factors were identified which explained consumer II attitudes towards dual-purpose chickens. A cluster analysis segmented the respondents into three cluster groups based on the previously identified factors. These were opponents (37.5%), supporters (23.4%), and indifferents (39.1%). A discriminant analysis was carried out for verification purposes. The indifferent segment represented the largest group of respondents and is therefore an important target group when it comes to potential marketing strategies for products from dual-purpose chickens. Within this cluster group, there is the greatest potential for reducing uncertainty by means of providing more and better information on dual-purpose chickens. The online survey also contained a choice experiment for finding out more about consumer preferences and their willingness to pay for products from dual-purpose chickens. In contribution 3, we applied a latent class model to account for consumer heterogeneity. Four consumer segments regarding eggs and chicken meat were identified each. For both products, the largest segments consisted of price conscious consumers. Small potential consumer groups with a willingness to pay more for dual-purpose chicken products were also identified. For eggs, 25.3% of respondents belonged to this segment, whereas a smaller segment of 16.2% showed a willingness to pay for meat from dual- purpose chickens. Contribution 4 concerns the usage of dual-purpose chickens from an ethical standpoint and allows for a comprehensive view on dual-purpose chickens beyond consumer perspectives. Therefore, Mepham’s ethical matrix was applied as a tool of applied ethics for the interpretation of stakeholder interests with regard to the ethical principles of well- being, autonomy and justice. The aim is to present a well-balanced consideration from different angles and thus to reduce the complexity of the topic. In this case, the rearing of dual-purpose chickens was compared to the current practice (culling of day-old chicks). We applied the matrix to five interest groups: dual-purpose chickens, consumers, egg and meat industry, farmers and the environment. The results show that dual-purpose chickens as alternative to the culling of day-old chicks is a very complex topic as, for example, the implementation of dual-purpose chicken breeds could have positive implications for the chickens itself but might affect the environment negatively. With respect to the overarching objective of this thesis, the results illustrate the importance of analysing consumer acceptance of innovations in animal husbandry from different perspectives before new breeds are established and their products come onto the market. This thesis provides detailed insights into consumer perspectives on dual- purpose chickens and contributes to the debate surrounding alternatives to the culling of day-old chicks in Germany by showing that there is a low market potential for products from dual-purpose chickens. The potential for eggs is still
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hawaii State Legislature
    »=_‘ ‘ 9;; '-.1 DAVID Y. IGE PHYLLIS SHIMABUKURO-GEISER Governor Acting Chairperson Board of Agriculture 1'. .' JOSH GREEN -"Q _%....,....»-it Lt. Governor >~Q.“.»::.‘:,,.;;~',#' ";§@@<§¢'-- "'- ,' I \I1 State of Hawaii DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 1428 South King Street Honolulu, Hawaii 96814-2512 Phone: (808) 973-9600 FAX: (808) 973-9613 TESTIMONY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE BEFORE THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE FEBRUARY 8, 2019 8:30 A.M. CONFERENCE ROOM 312 HOUSE BILL NO. 1281 RELATING TO ANIMAL CRUELTY Chairperson Creagan and Members of the Committee: Thank you for the opportunity to present testimony on House Bill 1281. This bill proposes to criminalize and economically penalize livestock and poultry producers for various standard livestock and poultry production methods. The Department of Agriculture opposes this bill due to the negative impacts on local livestock producers. The Department supports prohibiting the slaughter of dogs and cats for any reason and believes regulations already exist which prohibits this. The proposed bill is inappropriately placed in Chapter 145, entitled Regulation of Farm Produce. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on this measure. I3 Testimony by Ashley Welgan of the Humane Society of the United States In support of House Bill 1281 Presented to the Committee on Agriculture, Hawaii House of Representatives February 8, 2019 Thank you, Representatives, for hearing my testimony today. The Humane Society of the United States, on behalf of our thousands of supporters across Hawaii, thanks Representatives Lee, Mizuno, Saiki, and Wildberger for introducing HB 1281. We wholeheartedly support the passage of this measure, which would explicitly prohibit the sale of dog and cat meat while creating modest protections for farm animals.
    [Show full text]
  • A Modest Proposal
    PUBLIC AFFAIRS QUARTERLY Volume 18, Number 1, January 2004 A MODEST PROPOSAL Richard Hanley eter Singer does not think that eating meat is wrong in and of itself. PThe case he makes in Practical Ethics against the use of non-human animals for food consists of two connected arguments.1 It will be con- venient to call them the Suffering Argument and the Killing Argument. The Suffering Argument is primarily an argument against factory farm- ing—the mass production of meat and animal products as it occurs in developed nations at least—and is well expressed by paraphrasing an explicit argument Singer gives (230–231) concerning absolute poverty: S1. If we can prevent something bad from happening without sacrific- ing anything of comparable moral significance, we ought to do it. S2. Animal suffering is bad. S3. We can prevent most of the animal suffering produced by factory farming without sacrificing anything of comparable moral significance. C. We ought to prevent most of the animal suffering produced by factory farming. If the conclusion of the Suffering Argument is granted outright,2 then there is still some work to do to mount an argument for vegetarianism. Assume that the market for animal products other than meat—leather, for in- stance—could not sustain factory farming by itself. Global vegetarianism would then be an effective means of preventing all the animal suffering involved in factory farming, since presumably factory farming would cease to exist without a market for its products. But it might reasonably be ob- jected that other global strategies short of vegetarianism would do at least as well.
    [Show full text]
  • A British Pandemic the Cruelty and Danger of Supermarket Chicken
    A BRITISH PANDEMIC THE CRUELTY AND DANGER OF SUPERMARKET CHICKEN Professor Veterinarian Andrew Knight MANZCVS, DipECAWBM (AWSEL), DipACAW, PhD, FRCVS, PFHEA. Professor Physician David Wiebers, M.D. 1 September 2020 ABOUT OPEN CAGES Established in the UK in 2018 as a member of Anima International, Open Cages is an animal protection organisa- tion working towards a future free from animal suffering. Open Cages is a registered charity with charity number 1190484. Our work includes: Undercover Investigations Publishing evidence of animal cruelty in the UK farming industries. Awareness Educating the public about animal cruelty through campaigns and public engagement, in collaboration with scientists, academics and specialists. Advocacy Working with law and corporate policy makers to protect farmed animals from harm. Movement Building Empowering and uniting animal advocates to develop the skills, knowledge and opportunities to create positive change for animals. ABOUT THE CO-AUTHORS Professor Veterinarian Andrew Knight MANZCVS, DipECAWBM (AWSEL), DipACAW, PhD, FRCVS, PFHEA Professor Knight is: • Professor of Animal Welfare and Ethics, & Founding Director, Centre for Animal Welfare at the University of Winchester. • A European & RCVS Veterinary Specialist in Animal Welfare Science, Ethics and Law; American & New Zealand Veterinary Specialist in Animal Welfare. • A Fellow at the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, & a member of the Australian and New Zealand College of Veterinary Scientists (Animal Welfare chapter.) • A Principal Fellow, Advance HE (formerly the Higher Education Academy) Professor Physician David Wiebers, M.D. Professor Doctor Wiebers is: • Emeritus Professor of Neurology and Consultant Emeritus in Neurology and Health Sciences Research/Clinical Epidemiology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, USA • The author of over 360 scientific publications, 6 medical textbooks and 3 books for the general public • The recipient of 24 international and 55 U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Our Full Report
    As we look back over the four years since we announced the Perdue Commitments to Animal Care, it has been a journey of listening, learning and evolving. The Perdue Commitments to Animal Care was shaped with input from diverse stakeholders – including some of our harshest critics – and we continue to seek their input. We learn from a wide range of perspectives, whether they be farmers, our associates, advocates, customers or consumers, in formal and informal ways. Cumulatively this has resulted in 65 initiatives designed to address one of the Five Freedoms or one of the other three pillars of our program. And perhaps more importantly, these initiatives have moved from studies or intentions to programs and best practices that are now embedded in how we do business every day. We’re proud of our progress and eager to continue our journey. The following pages report on the most recent and core ongoing initiatives as well as our future goals. Highlights of our recent progress include: • Expanding the number of farms with free-range, outdoor access • Testing the feasibility and benefits of on-farm hatching to improve early chick care • Collaborating on animal welfare research with Mercy for Animals • Conducting our second farmer contest to tap into their experience and expertise in raising chickens • Opening our third Poultry Learning Center, viewing farms which offer a transparent, interactive experience to learn about poultry farming and proper animal care • Holding our fourth Animal Care Summit, bringing together animal care experts and advocates, customers, farmers, and our leadership, in July 2019. Our next summit will be held in October 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Khazaal & Almiron 2014
    Published in Journalism Studies, 2016, 17(3):374-391. DOI: 10.1080/1461670X.2014.982966. “An Angry Cow Is Not A Good Eating Experience” How US and Spanish media are shifting from crude to camouflaged speciesism in concealing nonhuman perspectives Natalie Khazaal and Núria Almiron Recent developments in the ideology of speciesism (meaning bias against members of other animal species) within the media deserve analysis. Such discussion is important because speciesism is a major ethical concern. Nonhuman animals suffer massive harm within the industrial farming complex, confined throughout their lives and a high proportion killed while still infants or juveniles. The joint efforts of material institutions, cultural narratives and embodied affects conceal this from the public. As research on this topic is scarce, this study aims to provide tools to improve the quality of journalism regarding ethical issues that concern our relationship with nonhuman animals. We hope to help to formulate an emerging critical animal studies perspective on journalism studies. This article explores the role of news media in constructing perceptions of nonhumans used for food and their treatment. We compare 60 articles from The New York Times (United States) and El País (Spain) over a two-year time frame (2011–2013) using a critical discourse analysis. Our results show that, while both newspapers play a major role in concealing the nonhumans’ cruel reality, a distinction can be drawn between the crude speciesism of El País and the camouflaged, more deceptive style of The New York Times. KEYWORDS agribusiness; ideology; language; media; nonhuman animals; oppression; speciesism Introduction The 2009 episode “Dealbreakers Talk Show,” from the US sitcom 30 Rock, provided a telling quip about how often print journalism spares its readership the truth.
    [Show full text]
  • Colombia a Country Situation Report About the Researcher 1
    Farm Animal Welfare in Colombia A country situation report About the researcher 1 Hector Anibal Delgado Rodriguez Veterinary Zootechnician Surgeon graduated from Universidad de Caldas (1992), with a specialisation in University Teaching from Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia (2004) and a Master’s in Business Administration (Universidad Santo Tomas, 1999). University Professor of Agricultural and Livestock Enterprises, Dean, Faculty of Veterinary and Zootechnics (2001, 2002), Academic Coordinator at the same faculty until 2005. Currently working at the WSPA as Veterinarian in charge of Projects for the Colombia Office. Acknowledgements Harry Jones Jones, Luis Fernando Galvis, Nelson Otero Medina and Nelson Gregorio Avila, final-year students at the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnics at Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia in Bucaramanga, played an active part in gathering data, visiting farms and carrying out photographic procedures. Our sincere appreciation to them for their contribution: they were the heart and soul of this project. We must also thank Luis Carlos Sarmiento, the WSPA’s General Manager for Colombia, whose permanent support and investigative mind made this project possible. Thanks also to Dr Michael Appleby, Amy Firth and Hélène O’Donnell. Farm Animal Welfare in Colombia A country situation report Table of contents 2 Chapter Page Chapter Page List of acronyms 3 4.4 The Colombian layer industry 19 Abstract 4 4.4.1 Egg production and consumption 19 Introduction 6 4.4.2 Housing 19 1 Colombia: General features 7
    [Show full text]
  • Know the Facts – Recent Vegan Activist Claims Are Misleading and Misguided
    Know the Facts – Recent Vegan Activist Claims Are Misleading and Misguided About the Animal Care Program Chicken Farmers of Canada effectively administers the only Animal Care Program that reaches all 2,800 chicken farms in Canada; no other program can achieve this reach. This mandatory, enforced, and third-party-audited program has a credible, science-based foundation. It is based on the Code of Practice developed by the National Farm Animal Care Council (NFACC). NFACC is a world leader in bringing together stakeholders with different perspectives – farmers, veterinarians, processors, transporters, animal welfare associations, researchers, and provincial/federal governments – to develop robust and sound Codes of Practice. NFACC’s Code Development process involves a full scientific review which is used to draft the Code that then undergoes a public consultation process. In this way, all Canadians have an opportunity to contribute to the final Code. The NFACC process is a standard that is internationally recognized and applauded. CFC’s Animal Care Program is verified through a comprehensive third-party audit by NSF International, an internationally-recognized, third-party certification body, accredited by the American National Standards Institute to ISO 17065. Recent Vegan Activist Activity The commitment of Canadian chicken partners to animal welfare recently became the target of a campaign, specifically against restaurant and retail companies to pressure them through extortion of their brands into mandating changes to our practices. While claiming to be advocating change for the betterment of industry practices, one such vegan activist group has publicly stated that it is “unabashedly a vegan organization.” (National Post, Mercy for Animals: Activists making a difference — or radicals distorting the truth? - July 20, 2017).
    [Show full text]
  • Poultry Layer Farming
    Poultry Layer Farming 1. Introduction Poultry egg and meat are important sources of high quality proteins, minerals and vitamins to balance the human diet. Commercial layer strains are now available with traits of high egg production and high feed conversion efficiency. Superior germplasm of chicken have been developed by both public and private sectors which met the requirement of Indian Poultry Industry. Depending on the farm-size, layer (for eggs) farming can be main source of family income or can provide income and gainful employment to farmers throughout the year. Poultry manure has high manure value and can be used for increasing yield of all crops. 2. Scope for Layer farming and its National Importance Poultry is one of the fastest growing segments of the agricultural sector in India today. India has emerged on the world map as the 3rd largest egg producer (56 billion eggs) and annual growth rate in egg production approximated 6% per year (Source; Report of the Working Group on AH & dairying, 12th Five Year Plan). The current strength of layers in India is estimated to be 230 million and the annual per- capita availability of eggs has increased from 7 eggs in 1961 to 52 eggs in 2010. However, the present availability is far below the ICMR recommendation of 180 eggs per capita per annum. In the poultry industry, value added products utilizing poultry eggs, culled birds for human consumption have been developed. However only 6% of the eggs produced in the country are converted into processed egg products mainly for export. The poultry sector in India has undergone a paradigm shift in structure and operation.
    [Show full text]
  • How Does Respeggt Gmbh Live up to the Promise of “Free of Chick Culling”?
    FAQ What does the respeggt GmbH do? We, the respeggt GmbH, hold the rights to the respeggt label “Free of Chick Culling”. The label represents the promise that the table eggs and the egg products in foodstuffs have been produced free of the usual “chick culling” of day-old male chicks. This product promise is based on the implementation of a method for gender identification in the hatching egg. At the end of the 21-22 days incubation period, the laying hen chicks hatch from the fertilised hatching eggs. Usually, the male chicks, who hatch alongside the females, are killed in the hatcheries since they are unable to lay eggs. Only the female chicks are reared and later lay the table eggs as adult laying hens. Gender identification in the hatching egg allows the male hatching eggs to be identified and sorted out during the incubation period. As a result, only the female hatching eggs are incubated until the end. This way we avoid killing the day-old male chicks. We offer all hatcheries the service of gender identification in the hatching egg to sort their hatching eggs. This service is offered to hatcheries at no extra cost. Only when the subsequently produced table eggs are sold, do we charge the packing centres a licence fee per table egg. A major advantage of this approach is that smaller hatcheries will still be able to compete in the market. No extra investment is required in order to implement the process of gender identification in the hatching egg and to sell female chicks with the label “Free of Chick Culling”.
    [Show full text]
  • Technology and Poultry Welfare
    animals Review Technology and Poultry Welfare Neila Ben Sassi 1, Xavier Averós 1 and Inma Estevez 1,2,* 1 Neiker Tecnalia, Arkaute Agrifood Campus, 01080 Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain; [email protected] (N.B.S.); [email protected] (X.A.) 2 Ikerbasque, Basque Foundation for Science, Maria Diaz de Haro 3, 48013 Bilbao, Spain * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +34-637422176 Academic Editors: Christine Nicol and T. Bas Rodenburg Received: 4 July 2016; Accepted: 27 September 2016; Published: 11 October 2016 Abstract: Consideration of animal welfare is essential to address the consumers’ demands and for the long term sustainability of commercial poultry. However, assessing welfare in large poultry flocks, to be able to detect potential welfare risks and to control or minimize its impact is difficult. Current developments in technology and mathematical modelling open new possibilities for real-time automatic monitoring of animal welfare and health. New technological innovations potentially adaptable to commercial poultry are appearing, although their practical implementation is still being defined. In this paper, we review the latest technological developments with potential to be applied to poultry welfare, especially for broiler chickens and laying hens. Some of the examples that are presented and discussed include the following: sensors for farm environmental monitoring, movement, or physiological parameters; imaging technologies such as optical flow to detect gait problems and feather pecking; infrared technologies to evaluate birds’ thermoregulatory features and metabolism changes, that may be indicative of welfare, health and management problems. All these technologies have the potential to be implemented at the commercial level to improve birds’ welfare and to optimize flock management, therefore, improving the efficiency of the system in terms of use of resources and, thus, long term sustainability.
    [Show full text]
  • News & Views January/February 2020 Edition
    January / February 2020 VIEWS & Hinton, Chairman of USPOULTRY USPOULTRY Recognizes Mark Waller as Workhorse of the Year Dr. Maricarmen Garcia Receives 2020 Dr. Charles Beard Research Excellence Award 2020 IPPE Has Great Turnout NEWS The All Feather Association serving the industry through education, research, communication and technical assistance. TABLE OF CONTENTS BOARD OF DIRECTORS Bernie Adcock TYSON FOODS, AR Brian Barrett FEATHER CREST FARMS, TX ASSOCIATION 1 President’s Column Bob “Pic” Billingsley 2 Hinton, Chairman / 2020 USPOULTRY Board of Directors SANDERSON FARMS, MS 3 USPOULTRY Recognizes Mark Waller as Workhorse of the Year Lance Buckert 3 Dr. Garcia Receives 2020 Dr. Charles Beard Research Excellence Award KOCH FOODS, IL 4 Six Industry Leaders Receive USPOULTRY Lamplighter Award Jonathan Cade 5 Lamplighter Awards (cont’d) HY-LINE INTERNATIONAL, IA 6 Seminar Committee Receives USPOULTRY Lamplighter Award Dr. Tom Frost 11 Research Results DSM NUTRITIONAL PRODUCTS, GA 11 USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation Sponsor $200,000 for FFAR-Funded Research That Benefits the Poultry Industry Mikell Fries 12 Bill Lovette, Keynote Speaker at USPOULTRY Foundation Executive Luncheon CLAXTON POULTRY FARMS, GA 17 $5,998 USPOULTRY Foundation Student Recruiting Grant Awarded to the University of Florida Ben Harrison AMICK FARMS, SC EDUCATION Tom Hensley 13 Ergonomic Improvements in the Poultry Industry Highlighted at the 2020 IPPE FIELDALE FARMS, GA 14 Broiler and Layer Production, Processing Issues Focus of 2020 Latin American Poultry Summit
    [Show full text]
  • LAYING HENS: the INSIDE STORY a Viva! Report by Juliet Gellatley, Bsc Zoology, Founder & Director, Viva!
    LAYING HENS: THE INSIDE STORY A Viva! report by Juliet Gellatley, BSc Zoology, Founder & Director, Viva! Viva! is a reg charity 1037486 LAYING HENS: THE INSIDE STORY LAYING HENS: THE INSIDE STORY A Viva! report by Juliet Gellatley, BSc Zoology, Founder & Director, Viva! Written by Juliet Gellatley, with additions by Claire Palmer, Viva! [email protected] www.facebook.com/juliet.gellatley Copyright: Viva! 2017 Viva! 8 York Court Wilder Street Bristol BS2 8QH 0117 944 1000 www.viva.org.uk Viva! is a reg charity 1037486 ISBN 978-0-9571874-7-4 2 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 FREE RANGE EGG FARMS 31 QUALITY ASSURANCE SCHEMES: A life inside 31 WHAT THEY REALLY MEAN 51 INTRODUCTION 6 ‘Happy Egg’ farms 32 RSPCA Assured 51 The Chicken (Gallus gallus CASE STUDY: FREE British Lion Quality Mark 51 domesticus) 7 RANGE FARMS 33 Soil Association 51 Chickens behaving naturally 7 ‘HAPPY EGG’ FARM Housing On Modern-Day Farms 10 A. 2010 investigation THE GLOBAL EGG INDUSTRY 52 Battery (or conventional) cage 10 (Strathruddie Farm and Retailers 53 Enriched cage 11 Bishophill Farm) 33 Cage Egg Company Suppliers 53 Percheries/barn 12 ROWBOTTOM FARM 34 Noble Foods 54 Free range farms 12 Stonegate 54 Organic 12 ORGANIC 35 Supermarket Policies 54 Antibiotics and vaccination 35 Ingredients 55 FROM BIRTH TO DEATH IN Impacts on welfare 36 Vegan Lines 55 JUST A YEAR AND A HALF 13 Egg replacer 55 Chick Production 13 CASE STUDY: Vegan egg replacers chart 56 Baby chicks 13 ORGANIC FARMS 37 Male chicks 13 MAC’S FARM 37 EGGS AND YOUR HEALTH 57 Viva! Investigates UK Hatcheries
    [Show full text]