Controlling aggression in chickens without beak trimming

Beak trimming of laying hens is still a widespread practice in Australia – even in 'free range' flocks of birds. The majority of so-called free range farms are intensive production systems with flocks of many thousands of hens.

Even the Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals - Domestic Poultry, which provides the only widely accepted national definition of the term 'free range' states that every effort should be made to avoid beak trimming by selecting birds which have more docile tendencies.

But the reality is that intensive free range farms beak trim their birds as a matter of course because they want to run large numbers and they chose to use high producing hens developed for the cage industry. These hens have been selectively cross bred for only two traits – maximum egg production and minimum feed intake. This often means they are aggressive and cannibalistic.

It is important to select a strain of bird that is less aggressive, and to get breeders to breed birds that are more docile. Research has shown that breeding for low aggression can have a marked effect in only 4 or 5 generations. Dr Mike Gentle, a U.S. researcher in this area, has concluded:
" In the long term, beak trimming should be phased out and undesirable behaviour controlled by environmental means and by increased effort being devoted to the genetic selection of commercial stocks which do not engage in damaging pecking, either in cages or when floor-housed in large flocks. "

In our view, hens should be kept in groups small enough to be able to recognise each other. At Freeranger Eggs we run maximum flock sizes of 250 – 300 birds.

Hens need to express their natural behaviour, including the strong urge to peck. They must have material in which to forage and dust bathe.

Good husbandry is a major factor in reducing aggression, especially preventing conditions that cause frustration in hens. They must also have an adequate and well-balanced diet, easy access to food and water, enough space, and minimum disturbance.

Egg farmers need to make a much greater effort to control aggression without beak trimming. From our experience talking with consumers at Farmers' Markets, they do not believe that 'free range' production should involve the beak trimming of birds. Aggression and cannibalism is a behavioural problem which is easily solved by effective poultry management and selection of birds.

Beak trimming ban in UK

A ban on beak trimming free range hens in the United Kingdom was due to come into force in 2011 but was put off on the advice of the Farm Animal Welfare Council because of concerns about feather pecking and cannibalism. The British Government has warned that it intends to introduce the ban in 2016.

Considerable work on husbandry methods which can be adopted to control feather pecking and cannib...alism has been carried out by the University of Veterinary Medicine in Vienna.

Trials have also been underway for a couple of years by Professor Christine Nicol and her team at the University of Bristol. She has said that it is possible to manage hens with intact beaks in commercial flocks without problems.

Here in Australia, there are many commercial free range farms operating without the need to beak trim their hens. As long as the chickens are not over-crowded and have plenty of pasture, there is seldom a problem with injurious feather pecking.

NSW Greens introduce their Truth in Labelling Bill

Louise Hall wrote this article in today's Sydney Morning Herald:

THE NSW Greens will introduce legislation into the NSW Parliament this week to create a labelling scheme for caged, barn and free range eggs.

Egg producers will be allowed to label their cartons free range only if there is no more than 750 laying fowl per hectare. Water, shade and shelter must also be provided and beak trimming is prohibited under the Truth in Labelling (Free-Range Eggs) Bill.

Eggs that are not free range or barn must be labelled as cage eggs. The use of advertising or packaging that suggests the laying fowl are not kept in cages would be prohibited.

Corporations would face fines of up to $55,000. Individuals could receive six months’ jail and a $5500 fine.

The Greens MP John Kaye said people were being ripped off by unscrupulous caged egg producers, and legitimate free range producers were unable to compete. He said the absence of legislated definitions and enforceable penalties for false labelling meant in some cases free range "is nothing more than a marketing exercise to boost sales and prices".

The ACT and Tasmania have passed legislation to regulate the production and labelling of eggs.

The industry body, the Australian Egg Corporation, said the cap on stocking densities in the draft bill is "unsustainable and unrealistic".

AECL, dominated by Australia’s three largest egg producers, says it will lobby NSW MPs to vote against the bill.
With the Egg Corporation lobbying hard against it, the Bill will have an uphill battle. Hopefully thee will be a groundswell of support to let the MP's realise that the provisions in the Bill are very sustainable and realistic.

Many commercial free range egg farms are operating with those standards already in place all over Australia. Members of associations affiliated with the Free Range Egg and Poultry Association of Australia  meet those requirements which are recognised by consumers as satisfying their 'free range' expectations.

The Australian Egg Corporation of course wants a plan which allows intensive farming operations to be classified as 'free range' and allow up to 20,000 chickens per hectare and the beak trimming of birds to be accepted as 'normal'.

This is what the Australian Egg Corporation calls 'free range'

The Australian Egg Corporation currently allows beak trimming on all its Egg Corp Assured farms - even if they are called 'free range'. The hens in this photo are on an ECA accredited free range farm and they show the extent of the beak trimming undertaken.
The industry tries to argue that it is now normal practice for a light laser tipping of the upper beak - but this shot, and others, show that claim to be untrue. Consumer research shows clearly that beak trimmng is not acceptable on farms which claim to be 'free range'.
If the Egg Corporation gets away with its plan to change standards for 'free range' egg production, de-beaking will become even more common. Currently, according to the Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals - Domestic Poultry, farms are required to find alternative methods to beak trimming which is designed to limit feather-picking and cannibalism in flocks. But the Egg Corporation does nothing to ensure that the Model Code is enforced and allows beak-trimming of hens as a first option. The hens are usually beak-trimmed at day old or soon after.
Beak trimming is completely unnecessary on a genuine free range farm and is prohibited by the Free Range Farmers Association.

Shame on you Australian Egg Corporation

"This is outrageous and should never be allowed. I thought this type of mentality was on it's way out. It's a sad day when this amount of chickens could be termed 'free range'. Shame on you Australian Egg Corporation."

This is just one of the comments by the more than 3000 respondents to our consumer survey following the Egg Corporation's draft standards designed to allow a massive increase in the number of chickens on 'free range' farms.

The AECL wants to approve an increase from 1500 birds per hectare to 20,000.

The Free Range Farmers Association has approached the Federal Minister for Agriculture and the Shadow Minister seeking a commitment to properly define the term 'free range' once a new Government has been elected.

The only response so far has been from the Greens who support a clear national definition and truth in labelling legislation.

De-beaked and full beaked chickens

On the left is an example of a beak-trimmed or de-beaked hen and on the right is a hen with a full beak. In many cases the 'trimming' is much more severe.

It's obviously easier for a hen with a full beak to pick up worms, spiders and grubs etc than for a young one with some of her beak cut off. To see more click here

Some in the industry claim that nowadays birds just have a light 'trim' with a laser. But that sort of comment ignores reality. Most of the 'beak-trimmed' birds I have seen in cage, barn or so-called 'free range' farms (other than members of the Free Range Farmers Association)  have been severely 'trimmed'. There is only one 'quasi free range' farm I have inspected where it was difficult to tell that the hens' beaks had been 'trimmed'.

The dumb thing is that there is no need for this mutilation of birds that are genuinely free range. Some operators choose to inflict this on their hens because it is regarded as industry practice and they think it will improve their bottom line. But if the hens have plenty of room and they are kept in relatively small flocks, they can escape from their aggressive bretheren and cannibalism is not a significant issue.

However, the farms which are chasing big dollars don't want the work and costs associated with doing the job properly. They want to run many thousands of birds and they choose to de-beak their birds 'just in case' there is a cannibalism problem. To see some of the alternatives to de-beaking click here

Controlling aggression in hens without de-beaking

Beak trimming or de-beaking of laying hens is still a widespread practice in Australia – even in 'free range' birds. The majority of so-called free range farms are intensive production systems with flocks of many thousands of hens.

The Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals (Domestic Poultry), provides the only national definition of the term 'free range' which is accepted by the big players in the industry. But it states that every effort should be made to avoid beak trimming by selecting birds which have more docile tendencies.

The reality is that intensive free range farms de-beak their birds as a matter of course because they want to run large numbers and they chose to use high producing hens developed for the cage industry. These hens have been selectively cross bred for only two traits – maximum egg production and minimum feed intake. This often means they are aggressive and cannibalistic.

It is important to select a strain of bird that is less aggressive, and to get breeders to breed birds that are more docile. Research has shown that breeding for low aggression can have a marked effect in only 4 or 5 generations. Dr Mike Gentle, a U.S. poultry researcher, has concluded:
" In the long term, beak trimming should be phased out and undesirable behaviour controlled by environmental means and by increased effort being devoted to the genetic selection of commercial stocks which do not engage in damaging pecking, either in cages or when floor-housed in large flocks. "

Hens need to be in groups small enough to be able to recognise each other. At Freeranger Eggs we run maximum flock sizes of 250 birds.

Hens must be able to express their natural behaviour, including the strong urge to peck. They must have material in which to forage and dust bathe.

Good husbandry is a major factor in reducing aggression, especially preventing conditions that cause frustration in hens. They also need an adequate and well-balanced diet, easy access to food and water, enough space, and minimum disturbance.

Customers should push egg farmers into making greater efforts to control aggression without de-beaking. From our experience, talking with consumers at Farmers' Markets, the public does not believe that 'free range' production should involve the de-beaking of birds. Aggression and cannibalism is a behavioural problem which is easily solved by effective poultry management and selection of birds.

In Victoria, the easiest way to ensure that you are buying genuine free range eggs from hens who have not been de-beaked is to only buy from a farm accredited by the Free Range Farmers Association. All member farms carry the logo on their cartons. If your egg producer doesn't have the FRFA logo its probably not because he or she doesn't want to  -  they can't get it because they don't meet the standards.

We are hoping that when a review is undertaken of the Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals (Domestic Poultry) and of labelling laws that a real definition of the term 'free range' will emerge. Many buyers of 'free range' eggs are currently being mislead by cartons which depict birds on lush green pasture and show hens with full beaks. It may be that two definitions of free range are needed - traditional free range such as practiced by Freeranger Eggs and other members of the Free Range Farmers Association and intensive free range which is the large-scale factory farming approach.