DOCSLIB.ORG

Evaluation of Different Force Molting Methods on Layers Performance During Molting Period

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evaluation of Different Force Molting Methods on Layers Performance During Molting Period Middle East Journal of Agriculture Volume : 05 | Issue : 04 | Oct.-Dec. | 2016 Research Pages: 655-665 ISSN 2077-4605 Evaluation of Different Force Molting Methods on Layers Performance during Molting Period Mosaad F. Taboosha and Mohammed Sh. Abougabal Animal Production Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt. Received: 30 November 2016 / Accepted: 30 December 2016 / Publication date: 31 December 2016 ABSTRACT This study was conducted to compare four induced molting methods and to determine the preferable method which achieves the main goals of molt in laying hens during molt period. Two hundred and forty Lohmann Brown-Classic commercial layers (73 weeks old) were used. The hens were randomly and equally divided into 5 treatment groups (four experimental and one control) of 45 hens each in three replicates. Experimental groups were as follow; T1) non-molted group and served as control (CONT), T2) molted by California method (CAL), T3) Conventional method (CONV), T4) Standard (STD) method and T5) High zinc diet method (HZD). Body weight, weight loss, mortality, egg production cease, carcass traits, digestive tract and reproductive system organs were determined before and after molting period. The results of this study indicated that, force molting by fasting methods (CAL and CONV method) achieved most main goals of induced molt method. Moreover, California force molt method recorded the best values in productive traits during molt period. California treatment at the end of molting period, recorded maximum body weight loss (27%), lower mortality percent (4.4%), fewer days to cease egg production (7 d.) and minimum body weight (1299 g) followed by CONV, STD and HZD treatments. So it seems that, California method can be used successfully as force molting method because it more suitable, simple to implement, least in cost, resulted low mortality and achieved most objectives during molt period. Nonetheless, further experimentation is suggested to enhance the efficiency of the molting methods for improvement of egg production, egg quality during the subsequent laying cycle. Key words: Force molt methods, molting period, laying hens Introduction Force molting is a management tool adopted by farmers to give the rest at the end of a long period of egg production and extend the productive life of flock to 110 weeks or longer (Aygun, 2013 and UPE, 2016). The practice of molting continued to increase and spread widely in the most of egg production countries of the world with the time as a tool to rejuvenate the spent hens, (Bell, 2003). The decision of using a force molting program depends on several factors, such as: price of replacement new flock, egg quality, egg price, feed cost, maximum facility use and employed molting method, (Gracia et al., 2001 and Reddy et al., 2008). Methods conventionally used for induce molting in commercial layer can be classified in three main ways: limination or limitation of food and/or water; feeding the birds low nutrient rations deficient in protein, energy, calcium or sodium; administration of drugs, hormones, and metals including prolactin, chlormadinone, and progesterone; and high levels of iodine, dietary aluminum, and zinc (Bell and Kuney, 1992), coincided with some variations and modifications, such as length of the treatment, lighting schedule and the age of molt (Bell, 2003). The conventional feed withdrawal/deprivation (fasting) procedure is most widely used in poultry production because it is simple, practicable and economical technique that can be used in combination with light and/or water restriction (Koelkebeck et al., 2001; Bell, 2003 and Khoshoei and Khajali, 2006). Fasting is the most frequently used method to induce molting due to its low cost and high efficiency (Rodrigues et al., 1995). The increasing public awareness of the animal stress associated with feed withdrawal has led researchers to investigate alternative molting processes (Brake, 1993; Park et al., 2004 and Aygun, 2013). Mineral induced molting programs were also adopted. The uses of higher levels of either aluminium salt (Yousaf and Ahmad, 2006) or dietary zinc (Koelkebeck and Anderson, 2007) have been successfully Corresponding Author: Abougabal, M. Sh., Animal Production, Dept. Faculty of Agric. Al-Azhar University, Nasr City, Cairo, Egypt E-mail: [email protected] 655 Middle East J. Agric. Res., 5(4): 655-665, 2016 ISSN 2077-4605 practiced. Also, the use of low sodium diet was found to be an effective procedure for molt induction (Naber et al., 1984). It was observed that molt induction by feeding hens a diet containing high levels of zinc oxide or zinc acetate resulted in stoppage of egg production within 5 days (Keshavarz and Quimby, 2002). Several non-feed removal procedures were used to induce molting in hens. Ideally, a good molting method should: get the flock out of production within 5- 6 days, keep flock out of production until it has rested, bring it back into production when needed, simple to implement, low in cost, result low mortality and lead to high subsequence performance (Koelkebeck et al., 1992). Hence, the objectives of this study were comparison of four induced molting methods and determining the preferable method which achieves the main goals of molt in caged laying hens during molt period. Materials and Methods This study has been performed in the Poultry Experimental Station, belong to Animal production department, Faculty of Agriculture, Al- Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt during Spring of 2015. A total number of 240 Lohmann Brown-Classic hens (aged 73 wk) were used. Birds were individually weighed and allocated to each treatment group and housed in caged laying metal batteries with one bird per cage (35 x 35 x 35 cm) and 2 weeks were allowed for acclimation. During this period, birds were given vitamins supplementation, and allowed full access to a complete layer ration (Soybean-corn diet contain: 18% CP, 2750 ME/kg and 3.8% calcium) and water via nipple drinkers. The hens were exposed to a 16L:8D h photoperiod daily before the start of the experiment. The mean temperature of the house was 27 - 31 °C. After acclimation, 15 birds were slaughtered (at day 0) to estimate liver and abdominal fat (g or %), digestive tract (intestine and ceca weight and length) and reproductive system (ovary weight, oviduct length and mature follicles). Molting period: Layers were randomly divided to five treatment groups (control and four different molting methods described in Table (1) with three replicates consisting of 45 hens in each treatment (15 layers/replicate). These five treatments were designed as follows; T1: Control, non-molted group, where the hens fed daily 150 g of layer ration without additives. T2: California method (CAL), in this method the feed was withdrawn for 10 days, and hens were fed with cracked corn diet and limestone (1:1) ad-libitum from 11 to 28 day. T3: Conventional method (CONV), the hens in this group were deprived of feed and water for 2 days followed by 8 days of skip-a-day (feed and water) feed restricted to 45 g of feed per hen and they were provided 75 g (50 % of control ration) of a layer diet from day 11 to 28. T4: Standard (STD) method (Recommended in Hisex Commercial Layers, Management Guide, 2008), the hens in this method were fed with 45 g of cracked corn and wheat bran (1:1) from day 1 to 28. T5: High zinc diet method (HZD), the hens in the this group were fed with full feed ration containing high level (3000 mg/kg) of Zn as ZnO for first 10 days and they were provided 75 g ( 50 % of control ration) of a layer diet from day 11 to 28. Three day before the beginning of molt period, layer hens were exposed to 24 hours photoperiod for 3 days and reduced to natural day light (12.15 - 12.30 hrs). During molting period, hens were weighed individually at day 0 (initial live body weight), 10, 20 and at day 28 (final live body weight) to estimate body weight loss. The number of days to cessation of lay of each group of birds and dead birds were also recorded. At the end of molting period (28 d), 30 birds were slaughtered (6 hens / group) to estimate carcass traits, digestive tract and reproductive system organs using an electronic weighing scale. Body weight loss (%) was calculated [(on the basis of body weight at 28 days [(W2) – body weight at 0 days (W1) / (W2)] * 100. The number of days to resumption of lay of each group of birds was also recorded. Statistical analysis: Data were subjected to analysis of variance using SPSS software program package (SPSS, 2005, version 16.0). All data were analyzed by using one way ANOVA and presented as means±SE. Duncan,s multiple range test was applied to identify significant differences among groups, (Duncan, 1955). 656 Middle East J. Agric. Res., 5(4): 655-665, 2016 ISSN 2077-4605 Table 1: Procedure of different force molting methods (Feeding, water and lighting program) for experimental groups: California Conventional Standard High Zinc diet Days of Light (CAL) (CON) (STD) (HZD) procedure hrs. Feed Water Feed Water Feed Water Feed Water 1 × × × 2 × × × 3 × 45 gm/bird libtum 4 × - × × 5 × Ad 45 gm/bird 12.30 hrs.) 6 × × × - 7 × 45 gm/bird (3 gm / kg diet) 8 × × × Natural Day light (12.15 (12.15 9 × Lime stone 45 gm/bird 10 × × × feedFull diet + Zinc oxide 11 45 gm / bird lib. - 12.30 hrs.) - Ad Corn Cracked + wheat barn (1:1) lime stone ( 1:1 ) Natural Day light (12.15 Feed Restricted (75 gm/bird) on layer ration Feed Restricted on 50 % of (75 (75 gm/bird) on layer ration 28 Full feed on cracked Corn + Full feed on layer Full feed on layer Full feed on layer Full feed on layer 14 → 28 - ∞ ration + ration + ration + ration + 16 water water water water hrs.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Us Egg Industry – Not All It's Cracked up to Be for the Welfare Of
    File: 10.03 drake JBN Macro Final.doc Created on: 4/24/2006 9:38:00 PM Last Printed: 5/8/2006 10:51:00 AM THE U.S. EGG INDUSTRY – NOT ALL IT’S CRACKED UP TO BE FOR THE WELFARE OF THE LAYING HEN: A COMPARATIVE LOOK AT UNITED STATES AND EUROPEAN UNION WELFARE LAWS Jessica Braunschweig-Norris I. Chickens Used for Food and Food Production in the United States Egg Industry: An Overview................................513 II. The Implications for Laying Hens: Plight and Protection...................515 A. Cage Systems.................................................................................515 1. The United States Cage System..............................................517 2. The EU Standards: Out with the Old, In with the New..........518 a. Unenriched Cage Systems: The End of the Traditional Battery Cage..........................518 b. Enriched Cages ................................................................519 c. Alternative Systems: The Free Range or Cage-Free System..............................520 B. Beak Trimming.............................................................................520 C. Forced Molting .............................................................................522 D. Transportation and Slaughter........................................................523 III. The Disparity: United States Welfare Law and Policy and the EU’s Progressive Legislative Vision.......................................525 A. The United States Law & Policy: Falling Behind .......................526 1. Non-Existent Federal Protection
    [Show full text]
  • Prisoned Chickens, Poisoned Eggs
    PRISONED CHICKENS, POISONED EGGS An Inside Look at the Modern Poultry Industry First published 1996. Revised Edition 2009 Book Publishing Company By Karen Davis, PhD Karen Davis, PhD, President United Poultry Concerns PO Box 150 Machipongo, VA 23405 (757) 678-7875 [email protected] 2 Table of Contents Preface to the New Edition Prologue Introduction Chapter 1 History Chapter 2 The Birth and Family Life of Chickens Chapter 3 The Life of the Battery Hen Chapter 4 The Life of the Broiler Chicken Chapter 5 The Death Chapter 6 A New Beginning References Index 3 Preface to the New Edition I wrote Prisoned Chickens, Poisoned Eggs in the mid-1990s in order to bring attention to the billions of chickens buried alive on factory farms. At the time, neither the animal rights movement nor the public at large knew very much about chickens or about how the poultry industry originated and developed in twentieth-century America to become the model for industrialized farmed-animal production around the world. Some informative articles and book chapters had appeared, but the poultry industry’s own detailed and glowing account of its transformation of the chicken, from an active outdoor bird scouring the woods and fields to a sedentary indoor meat and egg “machine,” filled with suffering, diseases, and antibiotics, remained largely unknown. The purpose of Prisoned Chickens, Poisoned Eggs was to bring this story to light in a way that would reveal the tragedy of chickens through the lens of the industry that created their tragedy without pity or guilt. The book became, as I’d hoped it would, a blueprint for people seeking a coherent picture of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Practical Poultry Raising (May 2015 Revised Edition) Peace Corps Publication No
    PRACTICAL POULTRY RAISING (MAY 2015 REVISED EDITION) PEACE CORPS PUBLICATION NO. M0011 Knowledge and Learning Unit The Peace Corps’ Knowledge and Learning Unit (KLU), a department of the Office of Overseas Programming and Training Support, makes the strategies and technologies developed by Peace Corps Volunteers, their co-workers, and their counterparts available to development organizations and workers who might find them useful. KLU works with Peace Corps technical and training specialists to identify and develop information to support Volunteers and overseas staff. KLU also produces and distributes training guides, curricula, lesson plans, project reports, manuals, and other material. Peace Corps-generated materials are also developed in the field. Some materials are reprinted “as is”; others provide a source of field-based information for the production of manuals or for research in particular program areas. Materials submitted to KLU become part of the Peace Corps’ larger contribution to development. This publication was produced by the Peace Corps with funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development’s Bureau of Food Security. It is distributed through KLU. For further information about KLU materials (periodicals, books, videos, etc.) and information services, or for additional copies of this manual, please contact KLU and refer to the KLU catalog number that appears on the publication: Peace Corps Overseas Programming and Training Support Knowledge and Learning Unit 1111 20th Street Washington, DC 20526 Tel: 202.692.2640 Fax: 202.692.2641 Abridged Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) Number: 636.5 Share your experience! Add your experience to the Peace Corps library of resources. Send your materials to us so we can share them with other development workers.
    [Show full text]
  • We're So Glad You Are Participating in the Real Organic Project
    We’re so glad you are participating in the Real Organic Project certification program. We are a grassroots, farmer-led movement created to distinguish soil-grown and pasture-raised products under USDA organic. This application will help us learn more about your crop and livestock systems. It shouldn't take you long to fill out right now behind your computer. Certification is free and inspection is based on a farm tour, rather than paperwork. There are 9 Sections in the application, but you only have to fill out the sections that apply to your farm. SECTIONS: 1. Farm Information (All Farmers Must Complete) 2. Crops (All Farmers Must Complete) 3. Split Farm (All Farmers Must Complete) 4. Greenhouse/High Tunnel 5. Livestock 6. Ruminants 7. Poultry 8. Pigs 9. Review and Submit (All Farmers Must Complete) If you prefer, you can also print and complete it on paper and mail it to us at the address below. If there are questions that don't apply to your farm, simply type NA (Not Applicable). Please submit the form even if it is incomplete, and your inspector will get any missing answers with you in person. Questions? Call Linley at (970) 317-0309 or email her at [email protected] Optional—mail completed printed form to: Linley Dixon 31417 Highway 550 Durango, CO 81301 The full Real Organic Project Standards: https://www.realorganicproject.org/provisional-standards 1 SECTION 1: FARM INFORMATION. Farm Name: Organic Since: Certifier + Certification Number: Full Mailing Address: Farm Physical Address(es): Primary Contact First and Last Name: Primary Email: Phone (mobile or best number to arrange visit): Website: Total Stewarded Acreage: Acres in Organic Crops Production: Acres in Organic Pasture: Acres in Trees/Conservation: Acres of Non-Certified Production: Please list the crops you grow, including pasture, and approximate acreage of each (Note: If you grow more than 10 crops, OK to answer "mixed vegetables" for example.
    [Show full text]
  • UPC Winter/Spring 1998 Poultry Press
    Please Hold a Vigil for Chickens This Spring UNITED POULTRY CONCERNS WILL PROVIDE LITERATURE Please volunteer to coordinate a Release to all local media is faxed, mailed, Spring Vigil for Chickens in your neighbor­ or e-mailed a week prior to the event and hood this April or May. UPC will provide should be followed up with phone calls a you with handout literature, a sample day or two ahead. News Release, Public Service Shape your announcements to suit Announcement (PSA) and Ca1Rndar of your own Vigil and contact UPC with any Events Announcement. Calendar and PSA questions you have. UPC thanks you for announcements inform the public of the helping to make a better life for chickens in event and invite them to participate. 1998. Calendar Announcements are sent to local newspapers and PSA's to local TV and radio stations 2 to 3 weeks in advance. A News Sample Banner & Poster Slogans Stick Up For Chickens! Sick Chickens Cooped in Poop Bacterial Streams of Fecal Soup Misery Is Not a Health Food Don't Just Switch from Beef to Chicken Get the Slaughterhouse Illustration by Nigel Burroughs Out of Your Kitchen Starving Hens Has Got to Stop What You Can Do: Ban Forced Molting of Laying Hens The Cruelty & Contamination Are DSeta date Linked D Invite Participants Forced Molting Causes Salmonella D Enlarge Graphic Photos at Copy Center Debeaking Causes Pain D Hold a Poster-Making Party Respect Chickens - Don't Eat Them D Contact Local News Media MlllEUJIDD1i]I lttp=A11il~li!l~i!i1!!!![1[1111•1WB"·""· .
    [Show full text]
  • The Anticruelty Statute: a Study in Animal Welfare Darian M
    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications Faculty and Deans 2006 The Anticruelty Statute: A Study in Animal Welfare Darian M. Ibrahim William & Mary Law School, [email protected] Repository Citation Ibrahim, Darian M., "The Anticruelty Statute: A Study in Animal Welfare" (2006). Faculty Publications. 1680. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/1680 Copyright c 2006 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs THE ANTICRUELTY STATUTE: A STUDY IN ANIMAL WELFARE DARIAN M. IBRAHIM* IN TRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 175 I. ANIMAL RIGHTS, ANIMAL WELFARE, AND THE CONCEPT OF HUMANE EXPLOITATION ................................................................. 177 II. LEGISLATURES, SOCIETAL TENSION, AND THE INEFFECTIVE ANTICRUELTY STATUTE .................................................................. 179 A . The A nticruelty Statute ............................................................. 179 B. Understanding Anticruelty Statute Exemptions ........................ 182 1. Societal Preference ............................................................. 182 2. Legislative C apture ............................................................ 184 3. Animals as Legal Property ................................................. 187 4. Efficiency and Competency ............................................... 187 C.
    [Show full text]
  • High Fiber Low Energy Diet for Molt Induction in Laying
    HIGH FIBER LOW ENERGY DIET FOR MOLT INDUCTION IN LAYING HENS: THE IMPACT OF ALFALFA ON PHYSIOLOGY, IMMUNOLOGY AND BEHAVIOR A Dissertation by CLAUDIA SHARENE DUNKLEY Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY December 2006 Major Subject: Poultry Science HIGH FIBER LOW ENERGY DIET FOR MOLT INDUCTION IN LAYING HENS: THE IMPACT OF ALFALFA ON PHYSIOLOGY, IMMUNOLOGY AND BEHAVIOR A Dissertation by CLAUDIA SHARENE DUNKLEY Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Approved by: Co-Chairs of Committee, Steve C. Ricke Luc R. Berghman Committee Members, Ted Friend Leon F. Kubena Jackson L. McReynolds Head of Department, Alan Sams December 2006 Major Subject: Poultry Science iii ABSTRACT High Fiber Low Energy Diet for Molt Induction in Laying Hens: The Impact of Alfalfa on Physiology, Immunology and Behavior. (December 2006) Claudia Sharene Dunkley, B.S. Prairie View A&M University; M.S., Prairie View A&M University Co-Chairs of Advisory Committee: Dr. Steven C. Ricke Dr. Luc R. Berghman Feed withdrawal is commonly used by commercial egg producers to induce molt and stimulate multiple egg-laying cycles in their flocks. However, the practice can compromise the welfare of the birds by elevating stress, suppressing the immune response and causing abnormal behavior. An alternate molt diet was examined using alfalfa diets, and a series of experiments were conducted to evaluate the physiological, immunological and behavioral responses of laying hens fed these diets.
    [Show full text]
  • Issue 2 2007 Cover.Qxd
    Cool, Crisp Salads · A Cinco de Mayo Fiesta 2 O N , I V X X E M U L O V VEGETARIAN J O U R N A L HEALTH ECOLOGY ETHICS Fabulous Making Egg and Fantastic Replacers at Home Falafel Chickpea Falafel (page 24) $4.50 USA/$5.50 CANADA g r So, what do those o . g r v . w ‘humane’ labels on egg w w cartons really mean? NUTRITION HOTLINE QUESTION: “Are the omega-3 benefits compared to Ensure’s 9 grams of REED MANGELS, PhD, RD from flaxseeds or their oil destroyed protein per serving. by heat from baking or cooking?” Another alternative is to make P.L., via e-mail a super-smoothie by blending one of these products with some ANSWER: According to the Flax frozen fruit and either soy yogurt, Council of Canada (<www.flax soy frozen dessert, or silken tofu. council.ca/english/pdf/stor.pdf>), A little flaxseed oil can also be whole and ground flaxseed can be added to increase calories and used for baking without any signif- provide some omega-3 fatty acids. icant loss of omega-3 fatty acids. Flax oil generally should not PRODUCT WEBSITES: be used for cooking, as it is not z Whole Soy Smoothies – <www. stable at high temperatures. It is wholesoyco.com/product_ often added to foods after they smoothie.html> have been cooked. For example, z SilkLive Smoothies – <www. you can toss it with steamed veg- silksoymilk.com/Products/ etables or cooked pasta. Some SilkLive.aspx> research suggests that flaxseed oil can be used in baking without z Westsoy Shakes – <www.westsoy.
    [Show full text]
  • In Laying Hens
    antibiotics Article Effects on Intestinal Mucosal Morphology, Productive Parameters and Microbiota Composition after Supplementation with Fermented Defatted Alperujo (FDA) in Laying Hens Agustín Rebollada-Merino 1 , Carmen Bárcena 1 , María Ugarte-Ruiz 1,*, Néstor Porras 1, Francisco J. Mayoral-Alegre 1, Irene Tomé-Sánchez 1, Lucas Domínguez 1,2 and Antonio Rodríguez-Bertos 1,3 1 VISAVET Health Surveillance Centre, Complutense University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain; [email protected] (A.R.-M.); [email protected] (C.B.); [email protected] (N.P.); [email protected] (F.J.M.-A.); [email protected] (I.T.-S.); [email protected] (L.D.); [email protected] (A.R.-B.) 2 Department of Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Complutense University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain 3 Department of Internal Medicine and Animal Surgery, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Complutense University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +34-913944097 Received: 15 October 2019; Accepted: 7 November 2019; Published: 9 November 2019 Abstract: The olive oil sector is currently adapting its traditional function to also become a supplier of high-value by-products that possess antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial properties. In this study, we evaluated the effect of the fermented defatted alperujo (FDA) on the intestinal health of laying hens. The morphology of the duodenal and cecal mucosa, the composition of the intestinal microbiota and the productivity of a batch of laying hens were evaluated after FDA supplementation. At early life stages, significant differences (p < 0.001) were observed in duodenal villi height and in crypt depth of both the duodenum and the cecum in the FDA-supplemented group, indicating improved intestinal health in this group.
    [Show full text]
  • Small Flock Poultry Health Manual Has Been Funded by Growing Forward, a Federal, Provincial, Territorial Initiative
    Small Flock Poultry Health Disease Prevention and Good Management Small Flock Poultry Health Acknowledgements: The Small Flock Poultry Health manual has been funded by Growing Forward, a federal, provincial, territorial initiative. Articles for this manual have been contributed by authors from universities, government agencies, and companies across North America and have been included here with their permission. These authors and their respective institutions are gratefully acknowledged. Legal disclaimer: This document provides a general description of management and health for keeping poultry, especially for small producers and hobby flock owners. It should not be viewed as a substitute for legal advice. All legislation identified in this guide refers to British Columbia or Canada legislation. This publication should not be viewed as a substitute for legal advice. An individual or farming operation that requires legal advice as to legal requirements or potential liability should retain a lawyer who has examined the current state of the applicable law and has acquired an understanding of the operation’s particular circumstances. Certain examples and references are provided for illustrative purposes and may not constitute a complete statement of the law. The law with respect to Animal Health and Disease Control is changing and information contained in this publication may be outdated; it was current as of January 1, 2011. British Columbia legislation can be viewed at: http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/00_96014_01 Federal legislation can be viewed at: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/H-3.3 The materials presented in the guide, except for law, were current at the time of publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Egg Production About Chickens Scientists Have Discovered That
    Egg Production About Chickens Scientists have discovered that chickens have memory and emotions, and a keenly developed consciousness of one another and of their surroundings. Researchers are publishing findings on chicken intelligence that have challenged old notions about avian cognitive abilities. For instance, chickens clearly understand cause-and-effect relationships, an advanced comprehension skill that puts their intellect beyond that of dogs. In the book The Development of Brain and Behavior in the Chicken, Dr. Lesley Rogers, a professor of neuroscience and animal behavior, concludes, “It is now clear that birds have cognitive capacities equivalent to those of mammals, even primates.” Egg Factories Egg factory farms typically consist of a series of warehouse-like sheds, some the length of football fields, that can house 200,000 or more birds in each windowless building. Inside, hens are crammed into thousands of barren wire cages, known as battery cages, stacked several tiers high and extending in rows down the length of the building. Multiple birds are crammed into each small cage, allowing each hen about 67 square inches of space, less area than a sheet of paper. The cages, stacked one on top of another, force the chickens in lower rows to live in the excrement of those above them. The excessive manure causes ammonia burn to the chicken's eyes and sometimes leads to blindness. Manure fumes and rotting carcasses are so severe that poultry workers are forced to wear gas masks. Battery Cages Perhaps the most abused of all farm animals, nearly 280 million laying hens in the United States are confined in barren wire battery cages so restrictive the birds can't even spread their wings.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Welfare Approved Standards for Beef Cattle and Calves©
    Animal Welfare Approved Standards for Meat Chickens The Animal Welfare Approved seal is a hard earned badge of difference and demonstrates the farmer’s commitment to the care of their animals, the land and the local community. Farmers in this program will be distinguished by a humane and conscientious attitude towards the animals in their care as evidenced by physical audit and development of detailed plans and records of farm practices. Farmers in the program agree to a minimum of one visit a year from Animal Welfare Approved staff or agents, with the possibility of additional visits if deemed necessary, to confirm compliance with the standards during various seasons and to allow observation of animals in different phases of life. Participation in the program is on an annual basis and must be renewed each year. The premise of the Animal Welfare Approved standards is that animals must be allowed to behave naturally. The following standards allow animals the opportunity to perform natural and instinctive behaviors essential to their health and well- being. Provisions are made to ensure social interaction, comfort, and physical and psychological well-being. The Animal Welfare Approved program is voluntary. The standards do not supersede national government or state legislation. Animal Welfare Approved recommends that farmers have the Guide to Understanding Our Standards and Standards and Program Definitions documents at hand while reading these standards. 1.0 OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION 1.0.1 The individual or entity seeking Animal Welfare Approved status for their livestock must own and have management control of the birds. 1.0.2 The individual or entity seeking Animal Welfare Approved status must produce a livestock product for sale or trade that is eligible to carry the Animal Welfare Approved seal.
    [Show full text]