Tasty straw pellets - Exploration of flavoured rooting material by pigs

The Relationship between Animal Welfare and Farm Profitability in Cage and Free-Range Housing Systems for Laying Hens in China

Several countries and regions have regulations in place to provide standards for the welfare of production animals, which have implications for breeding, management and trade. In the chicken egg production industry, the welfare impacts of this are not well understood. In the past decades, free-range systems were widely used for local chicken breeds in poultry industry in China, but their use has gradually declined due to the lower competitiveness compared to commercial cage systems. However, the practices of free-range systems for hens raising have gradually increased again over the past decade, as consumer individualized demand for higher food quality and animal welfare has increased. We recruited 14 free-range farms and 45 cage farms from Beijing, Shandong, Hebei, Anhui, Yunnan, Gansu and Jiangsu provinces in China, for an evaluation of hen welfare, production and economic outcomes from farm operations. This study provides data for the welfare outcomes of laying hens in China and preliminarily explored the relationship between welfare level and economic income within farming system types. The researchers visited the farms and used Welfare Quality measures to investigate the welfare, and farm self-reported profits. Nonparametric Mann−Whitney U tests were used to compare the welfare scores between cage and free-range rearing farms. Correlation and regression are used for the analysis of the animal welfare scores, economic data, and production metrics. The general income from free-range farms was linearly correlated with red mite score and stocking density (p < 0.001 and p < 0.05, respectively). The results showed less centimeters of feeder and drinker space per animal in the free-range system than in cage systems (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). Welfare scores for both the stocking density and beak condition were significantly better in the free-range systems than the cage systems (p < 0.001), as were qualitative behavior assessment scores (p < 0.05). The total egg production and peak egg production in cage farms were much higher than in free-range farms (p < 0.001), and egg loss rate was significantly lower (p < 0.001). While the production efficiency of free-range farms was lower than that of cage farms, general income per 10,000 hens was actually higher. Our results provide some evidence that some welfare indicators and general income (per 10,000 hens) in free-range farms in China were better than those of cage farms. The results indicate that better parasite control and lower stocking densities may result in improved hen welfare on free-range farms and potentially improve profitability. The level of welfare and economic benefits of free-range farms vary widely, and there was potential room for improvement in feeding space, drinking water space and human−animal relationship.

The Effects of Refilling Additional Rooting Material on Exploration Duration and Tail Damages in Rearing and Fattening Pigs

Pigs housed in commercial barns with slatted floors cannot fully perform their natural behavioral needs such as rooting or exploring. Enrichment materials can stimulate these behaviors in pigs. Here, we investigated whether exploration can be stimulated by offering additional enrichment material, i.e., chopped straw, once compared to four times daily. In two replicates each with four rearing and eight fattening pens, a total of 192 pigs with undocked tails continuously received chopped straw from a dispenser, while a stimulus to explore was given by filling the rooting area of the dispenser either once (R1) or four times (R4) daily with additional chopped straw. The dispensers were equipped with an ultra-high-frequency radio-frequency-identification (UHF-RFID) system in order to record the exploration durations of each individual pig at the dispenser. At four times throughout rearing and fattening, pigs were weighted and tail injuries and length losses were assessed. This resulted in three temporal sections within each replicate, for each of which the difference in tail length to the previous section (Δ-tail length) was calculated. Exploration durations did not change in long-term but increased from rearing throughout fattening. The refillings in which additional chopped straw was offered (R1 vs. R4) did not affect the overall exploration duration during rearing (linear mixed effects model (LME), P = 0.85) or fattening (LME, P = 0.66). However, descriptive evaluations showed that exploration durations decreased within the first 10-min sequences within the hour after refilling the rooting area with additional chopped straw in both treatments (R1 and R4). Exploration durations were affected by week, day, and hour within day during rearing (LME, all factors, P &lt; 0.0001) and fattening (LME, all factors, P &lt; 0.0001). Neither tail injuries nor length losses were affected by the refilling treatment (R1 vs. R4) during rearing (GLMM, both P &gt; 0.1) or fattening (GLMM, both P &gt; 0.1). Offering additional straw four times compared to once a day had no advantage in the present setting with regard to exploration duration and tail damages of pigs. However, refilling the rooting area with additional chopped straw triggered a short-term increase of exploration that decreased within 1 h, thus, exploration was more spread over the day.