Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:05:24.641Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

What causes crowding? Effects of space, facilities and group size on behaviour, with particular reference to furnished cages for hens

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

MC Appleby*
Affiliation:
The Humane Society of the United States, 2100 L Street NW, Washington, DC 20037, USA
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.

Theoretical models are presented of the effects of space, facilities and group size on the behaviour of chickens at high stocking densities, with relevance for all animals. The appropriateness of each model is supported by published data, although such data are scant for some important variables. Freedom of movement is analysed by taking the area of a hen as 475 cm2 and finding the number of free bird spaces left at different space allowances. This provides support for current recommendations of a maximum of seven laying hens per m2 on deep litter, but suggests that a maximum for broilers of 34 kg/m2 unacceptably restricts freedom of movement. In cages, freedom of movement increases with space allowance per hen, and, for a given space allowance, with cage and group size. Nesting behaviour is analysed for synchrony, which decreases with group size. Perching and feeding are often synchronous and the space needed for these is determined by body width. Recommendations are derived for hens in furnished cages. The main part of the cage should be as large as possible; an absolute minimum of 600 cm2 per bird is suggested, but 675 cm2 per bird is probably the minimum practical. Perch and feeder space should be provided at 14 cm or more per bird, with a possible derogation for light hybrids to 12 cm. The number of nest spaces needed varies with the number of birds, with nest spaces being 300 cm2 each. These recommendations sum to a minimum of 800 cm2 per bird for groups of eight or more, 850 cm2 for groups of four to seven, and 900 cm2 for groups of three or fewer, plus litter area. Crowding is primarily caused by limited space allowance, but for a given space allowance it is worse in small enclosures and groups.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2004 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Albentosa, MJ and Cooper, JJ 2002 Effects of cage height and stocking density on the behaviour, perch use and distribution of laying hens in furnished cages. In: Proceedings of the World Poultry Science Association's United Kingdom Branch Spring Meeting, 9–10th April 2002, York, UK, pp 36-37Google Scholar
Appleby, MC 1995 Perch length in cages for medium hybrid laying hens. British Poultry Science 36: 2331CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Appleby, MC 1998 The Edinburgh Modified Cage: effects of group size and space allowance on brown laying hens. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 7: 152161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appleby, MC, Hogarth, GS, Anderson, JA, Hughes, BO and Whittemore, CT 1988 Performance of a deep litter system for egg production. British Poultry Science 29: 735751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appleby, MC, Hughes, BO and Elson, HA 1992 Poultry Production Systems: Behaviour, Management and Welfare. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Appleby, MC, Hughes, BO and Hogarth, GS 1989 Behaviour of laying hens in a deep litter house. British Poultry Science 30: 545553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appleby, MC, Walker, AW, Nicol, CJ, Lindberg, AC, Freire, R, Hughes, BO and Elson, HA 2002 Development of furnished cages for laying hens. British Poultry Science 43: 489500CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
CEC (Commission of the European Communities) 1985 Amendment 1943/85 to regulation 95/69, also amended by 927/69 and 2502171. Official Journal of the European Communities 13th JulyGoogle Scholar
CEC (Commission of the European Communities) 1986 Council Directive 86/113/EEC welfare of battery hens. Official Journal of the European Communities L095: 45-49Google Scholar
CEC (Commission of the European Communities) 1999 Council Directive 1999/74/EC laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens. Official Journal of the European Communities L203: 53-57Google Scholar
Dawkins, MS and Hardie, S 1989 Space needs of laying hens. British Poultry Science 30: 413416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) 2002 Code of Recommendations for the Welfare of Livestock: Meat Chickens and Breeding Chickens. DEFRA Publications: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Elson, HA 1996 Update on the effects of the cage regulations (quoting MAFF guidelines). ADAS Poultry Progress 25(Nov): 89Google Scholar
FAWC (Farm Animal Welfare Council) 1992 Report on the Welfare of Broiler Chickens. Farm Animal Welfare Council: Tolworth, UKGoogle Scholar
FAWC (Farm Animal Welfare Council) 1997 Report on the Welfare of Laying Hens. Farm Animal Welfare Council: Tolworth, UKGoogle Scholar
Gibson, SW, Dun, P and Hughes, BO 1988 The performance and behaviour of laying fowls in a covered strawyard system. Research and Development in Agriculture 5: 153163Google Scholar
Hughes, BO 1983 Conventional and shallow cages: a summary of research from welfare and production aspects. World's Poultry Science Journal 39: 218228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, BO 1985 Feather loss as a problem: how does it occur? In: Wegner RM (ed) Proceedings of the Second European Symposium on Poultry Welfare pp 177188. World's Poultry Science Association: Celle, GermanyGoogle Scholar
Hughes, BO and Appleby, MC 1988 Behaviour and welfare of hens in alternative systems. In: Proceedings of the Commission of the European Communities Seminar on Alternative Systems for Poultry, May 1988, Spelderholt, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Jenner, TD 1995 Environmental effects on the behaviour of hens: spacing and space restriction. PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh, UKGoogle Scholar
Lill, A 1968 Spatial organisation in small flocks of domestic fowl. Behaviour 32: 258290CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food) 1987 Code of Recommendations for the Welfare of Livestock: Domestic Fowls. MAFF Publications: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Roush, WB, Bock, RG and Marszalek, MA 1989 Evaluation of crowding of caged laying hens (Gallus domesticus) using fuzzy set decision analysis. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 23: 155163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tauson, R 1984 Effects of a perch in conventional cages for laying hens. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 34: 193209CrossRefGoogle Scholar