Lessons learned from past experience with intensive livestock management systems.

The main impetus for 'modern' intensive animal production occurred after the Second World War, when Western governments developed policies to increase the availability of cheap, safe food for their populations. Livestock benefit under intensive husbandry by protection from environmental extremes and predators, and better nutritional and health management. Nevertheless, there are costs to the animal, such as impaired social behaviour, limited choice of living environment or pen mates, poor environmental stimulation and behavioural restrictions. The rapid progress in genetic selection of production traits has also, in some cases, adversely affected welfare by creating anatomical and metabolic problems. Above all, the intensively housed animal is heavily reliant on the stockperson and, therefore, inadequate care and husbandry practices by the stockperson may be the largest welfare risk. In a future in which the food supply may be limited as the world's population grows and land availability shrinks, intensive animal production is likely to expand. At the same time, ethical considerations surrounding intensive farming practices may also become more prominent. Novel technologies provide the opportunity to enhance both the productivity and welfare of intensively kept animals. Developing countries are also establishing more intensive commercial systems to meet their growing need for animal protein. Intensive livestock production in such countries has the potential for major expansion, particularly if such developments address the key constraints of poor welfare, inadequate nutrition, poor reproduction, poor housing, and high mortality often seen with traditional systems, and if farmer access to emerging market opportunities is improved. However, as shown by previous experience, inadequate regulation and staff who lack the appropriate training to care for the welfare of intensively housed livestock can be major challenges to overcome.

Free range hens use the range more when the outdoor environment is enriched.

To evaluate the role of using forage, shade and shelterbelts in attracting birds into the range, three trials were undertaken with free range layers both on a research facility and on commercial farms. Each of the trials on the free range research facility in South Australia used a total of 120 laying hens (Hyline Brown). Birds were housed in an eco-shelter which had 6 internal pens of equal size with a free range area adjoining the shelter. The on-farm trials were undertaken on commercial free range layer farms in the Darling Downs in Southeast Queensland with bird numbers on farms ranging from 2,000-6,800 hens. The first research trial examined the role of shaded areas in the range; the second trial examined the role of forage and the third trial examined the influence of shelterbelts in the range. These treatments were compared to a free range area with no enrichment. Aggressive feather pecking was only observed on a few occasions in all of the trials due to the low bird numbers housed. Enriching the free range environment attracted more birds into the range. Shaded areas were used by 18% of the hens with a tendency (p = 0.07) for more hens to be in the paddock. When forage was provided in paddocks more control birds (55%) were observed in the range in morning than in the afternoon (30%) while for the forage treatments 45% of the birds were in the range both during the morning and afternoon. When shelterbelts were provided there was a significantly (p<0.05) higher % of birds in the range (43% vs. 24%) and greater numbers of birds were observed in areas further away from the poultry house. The results from the on-farm trials mirrored the research trials. Overall 3 times more hens used the shaded areas than the non shaded areas, with slightly more using the shade in the morning than in the afternoon. As the environmental temperature increased the number of birds using the outdoor shade also increased. Overall 17 times more hens used the shelterbelt areas than the control areas, with slightly more using the shelterbelts in the afternoon than in the morning. Approximately 17 times more birds used the forage areas compared to the control area in the corresponding range. There were 8 times more birds using a hay bale enriched area compared to the area with no hay bales. The use of forage sources (including hay bales) were the most successful method on-farm to attract birds into the range followed by shelterbelts and artificial shade. Free range egg farmers are encouraged to provide pasture, shaded areas and shelterbelts to attract birds into the free range.

A survey of village poultry production in the Solomon Islands.

A total of 84 farmers in 31 villages of Guadalcanal, Western, Malaita and Central Provinces of the Solomon Islands were surveyed to obtain baseline information on the current feeding practices and farmer attitudes to village poultry production. Farming of village chickens in the Solomon Islands is conducted on a small scale. Most surveyed farmers thought chickens were easy to care for, provide food for the family and was a good cash income enterprise. Some farmers were interested in keeping local chickens, but found it difficult to obtain the birds. The main feed sources are fresh coconut, copra meal, fish meal, mill run, food scraps and forage sources from the range. Some villagers believe that chickens only need to eat household scraps and did not provide drinking water. Many villagers lacked the knowledge of managing a village poultry enterprise. Some chicken houses were built by using bush materials or by purchasing construction materials. Farmers indicated they would like the government to provide funds for establishing a smallholder poultry enterprise and to provide information on feeding and management of birds.

The absence of neuromas in beaks of adult hens after conservative trimming at hatch.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of the amount of break removed and cauterisation time on neuroma formation in hens. DESIGN: A pathology study with controls. ANIMALS: Twenty domestic fowl were beak-trimmed. Three non-beak-trimmed domestic fowl were used as controls. PROCEDURE: Beaks of two age groups with two levels of beak removal and either 2 s or 4 s cauterisation, were investigated macroscopically and microscopically for deformities. RESULTS: Scattered trauma-associated neuromas were present in the beaks of pullets 10 weeks after moderate trimming at hatch. Neuromas were not present in beaks of adult hens that had been similarly trimmed. Sensory corpuscles were present 10 and 70 weeks after moderate trimming, though fewer in number than in intact control hens. In contrast, trauma-associated neuromas persisted in beaks of 70-week-old hens that had been severely trimmed at hatch. A range of deformities that were absent in moderately trimmed hens, were observed in hens with severely trimmed beaks. Receptors were not seen in severely trimmed beaks. CONCLUSION: Beak-trimming at hatch induces the formation of neuromas, regardless of the amount of tissue removed. There is a critical amount of beak tissue that can be removed, beyond which trauma-associated neuromas will not resolve, but will persist in mature hens.

Effects of beak trimming and restraint on heart rate, food intake, body weight and egg production in hens.

1. Heart rate (measured on restrained hens in two experiments) was used as an indicator of short term fear and pain responses of light and heavy strains of hens subjected to beak trimming. 2. In the first experiment 3 mm of the upper and lower mandibles was trimmed, while in the second 0, 2, 4, 6 and 8 mm of upper and lower mandibles were removed. 3. Production responses to beak trimming were measured after trimming, for 4 weeks in experiment 1 and for 10 weeks in experiment 2. 4. In the first experiment the recovery of beak trimmed hens to normal heart rate took significantly longer than that of control hens subjected only to catching and restraint, suggesting that there was short term pain associated with beak trimming. 5. The heavier strain took about 4 min longer to return to a normal heart rate than the lighter strain, indicating a strain difference in responsiveness to beak trimming. 6. Trimming the hens' beak by 3 mm had no significant effect on rate of lay or body weight, but their mean egg weight was depressed and food intake took 9 to 10 d to recover to pre-trimming values. 7. In the second experiment a plateau was reached in recovery time of the heart rate once 4 mm of beak was removed. Removal of 4, 6 and 8 mm of beak depressed normal feeding and resulted in variable effects on production and body weight.