Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T13:08:39.830Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Broiler production in Flanders, Belgium: current situation and producers’ opinions about animal welfare

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2014

F. TUYTTENS ,
F. VANHONACKER  and
W. VERBEKE
F. TUYTTENS*
Affiliation:
Animal Sciences Unit, Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO), Scheldeweg 68, 9090 Melle, Belgium Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
F. VANHONACKER
Affiliation:
Dept. of Agricultural Economics, Ghent University, Coupure links 653, 9000, Ghent, Belgium
W. VERBEKE
Affiliation:
Dept. of Agricultural Economics, Ghent University, Coupure links 653, 9000, Ghent, Belgium
*
Corresponding author: frank.tuyttens@ilvo.vlaanderen.be
Get access

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to provide up-to-date information about the status of broiler production in Flanders (the northern region of Belgium) and the opinion of Flemish broiler producers on animal welfare. Our review revealed that intensification of Flemish broiler production has continued, as characterised by a decreasing number of production plants with up-scaled production. Results of a quantitative survey of Flemish broiler producers showed that the typical broiler house is 21 years old and houses 35,000 mixed-sex Ross broilers indoors on wood shavings or straw. The commonly-used modal management implies thinning one-fifth of the flock at the age of 35 days. The remaining broilers are slaughtered when they are 42 days old and weigh an average of 2.4 kg. The median unassisted mortality rate is 2% and another 0.5% are culled. Further scaling-up of production units is not viewed favourably by producers, particularly as related to consumer acceptance. Producers state they place great importance on animal welfare and do not agree that broiler welfare is poor. A small minority of producers plan to invest in improving broiler welfare in the near future. They see few advantages in paying more attention to broiler welfare or providing outdoor access to improve their public image and consumer acceptance. Producers define animal welfare mainly in terms of good health, feeding and housing and consider aspects that relate to the birds’ ability to express appropriate behaviour as less important. We discuss how this concept of ‘animal welfare’ corresponds to that reported by other people with farming backgrounds. Unfortunately this belief contradicts the perception of citizens and consumers and the assumptions underlying the proposed European standards for monitoring farm animal welfare as developed by the Welfare Quality® consortium.

Keywords

animal welfareBelgiumbroiler chickenfarmer attitudeproduction systemquestionnairesurveywelfare quality
Type
Review Article
Information
World's Poultry Science Journal , Volume 70 , Issue 2 , June 2014 , pp. 343 - 354
Copyright
Copyright © World's Poultry Science Association 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BOCK, B.B. and VAN HUIK, M.M. (2007) Animal welfare: The attitudes and behaviour of European pig farmers. British Food Journal 109: 931-944.Google Scholar
BOCK, B.B., VAN HUIK, M.M., PRUTZER, M., KLING-EVEILLARD, F. and DOCKES, A.C. (2007) Farmers relationship with different animals: the importance of getting close to animals - case studies of French, Swedish and Dutch cattle, pig and poultry farmers. International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food 15: 108-125.Google Scholar
BOTREAU, R., VEISSIER, I. and PERNY, P. (2009) Overall assessment of cow welfare: strategy adopted in Welfare Quality®. Animal Welfare 18: 363-370.Google Scholar
BROOM, D.M. (1991) Animal-welfare - concepts and measurement. Journal of Animal Science 69: 4167-4175.Google Scholar
BROOM, D.M. (2001) Coping, stress and welfare, in: BROOM, D.M. (Ed) Coping with Challenge: Welfare in Animals Including Humans, pp. 1-9 (Berlin, Dahlem University Press).Google Scholar
CASTELLINI, C., BERRI, C., LE BIHAN-DUVAL, E. and MARTINO, G. (2008) Qualitative attributes and consumer perception of organic and free-range poultry meat. World's Poultry Science Journal 64: 500-512.Google Scholar
DAGEVOS, H. and STERRENBERG, L. (2003) Burgers en consumenten: tussen tweedeling en twee-eenheid. (Wageningen,Wageningen Academic Publishers).Google Scholar
DE JONG, I.C., BERG, C., BUTTERWORTH, A. and ESTEVEZ, I. (2012) Scientific report updating the EFSA opinions on the welfare of broilers and broiler breeders. EFSA Supporting Publications 2012:EN-295 (http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/publications.htm).Google Scholar
DOCKES, A.C. and KLING-EVEILLARD, F. (2006) Farmers’ and advisers’ representations of animals and animal welfare. Livestock Science 103: 243-249.Google Scholar
EFSA - EUROPEAN FOOD SAFETY AUTHORITY (2010) Scientific opinion on the influence of genetic parameters on the welfare and the resistance to stress of commercial broilers. EFSA Journal 8: 1666 (82 pp.).Google Scholar
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2005) Attitudes of consumers towards the welfare of farmed animals. Spec Eur 229, http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/welfare/euro_barometer25_en.pdf.Google Scholar
FAO - FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANISATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS (2011) World Livestock 2011 - Livestock in food security. Rome, FAOGoogle Scholar
HARPER, G. and HENSON, S. (2001) Consumer Concerns about Animal Welfare and the Impact on Food Choice. Centre for Food Economics Research (CeFER). EU FAIR CT98-3678.Google Scholar
KIELLAND, C., SKJERVE, E., ØSTERÅS, O. and ZANELLA, A.J. (2010) Dairy farmer attitudes and empathy toward animals are associated with animal welfare indicators. Journal of Dairy Science 93: 2998-3006.Google Scholar
KLING-EVEILLARD, F., DOCKES, A.-C. And SOUQUET and C. (2007) Attitudes of French pig farmers towards animal welfare. British Food Journal 109: 859-869.Google Scholar
LAING, P.M. (1988) Diseases of free range birds. World's Poultry Science Journal 44: 72-75.Google Scholar
LASSEN, J., SANDOE, P. and FORKMAN, B. (2006) Happy pigs are dirty! Conflicting perspectives on animal welfare. Livestock Science 103: 221-230.Google Scholar
LEACH, K.A., WHAY, H.R., MAGGS, C.M., BARKER, Z.E., PAUL, E.S., BELL, A.K. and MAIN, D.C.J. (2010) Working towards a reduction in cattle lameness: 1. Understanding barriers to lameness control on dairy farms. Research in Veterinary Science 89: 311-317.Google Scholar
SAROVA, R., STEHULOVA, I., KRATINOVA, P., FIRLA, P. and SPINKA, M. (2011) Farm managers underestimate lameness prevalence in Czech dairy herds. Animal Welfare 20: 201-204.Google Scholar
SCAHAW (2000) The welfare of chickens kept for meat production (broilers). http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scah/out39_en.pdf.Google Scholar
SIMONEIT, C., BENDER, S. and KOOPMANN, R. (2012) Quantitative and qualitative overview and assessment of literature on animal health in organic farming between 1991 and 2011-Part II: pigs, poultry, others. Landbauforschung 62: 105-110.Google Scholar
SKOMORUCHA, I., SOSNOWKA-CZAJKA, E., HERBUT, E. and MUCHACKA, R. (2007) Effect of management system on the productivity and welfare of broiler chickens from different commercial lines. Annals of Animal Science 7: 141-151.Google Scholar
TE VELDE, H.T., AARTS, N. and VAN WOERKUM, C. (2002) Dealing with ambivalence: Farmers' and consumers' perceptions of animal welfare in livestock breeding. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15: 203-219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TUYTTENS, F.A.M., SONCK, B., STAES, M., VAN GANSBEKE, S., VAN DEN BOGAERT, T. and AMPE, B. (2011a) Survey of egg producers on the introduction of alternative housing systems for laying hens in Flanders, Belgium. Poultry Science 90: 941-950.Google Scholar
TUYTTENS, F.A.M., VAN GANSBEKE, S. and AMPE, B. (2011b) Survey among Belgian pig producers about the introduction of group housing systems for gestating sows. Journal of Animal Science 89: 845-855.Google Scholar
TUYTTENS, F.A.M., VANHONACKER, F., VAN POUCKE, E. and VERBEKE, W. (2010) Quantitative verification of the correspondence between the Welfare Quality® operational definition of farm animal welfare and the opinion of Flemish farmers, citizens and vegetarians. Livestock Science 131: 108-114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VANHONACKER, F. and VERBEKE, W. (2009) Buying higher welfare poultry products? Profiling Flemish consumers who do and do not. Poultry Science 88: 2702-2711.Google Scholar
VANHONACKER, F., VERBEKE, W., VAN POUCKE, E. and TUYTTENS, F.A.M. (2007) Segmentation based on consumers’ perceived importance and attitude toward farm animal welfare. International Journal of Sociology of Food and Agriculture 15: 91-107.Google Scholar
VANHONACKER, F., VERBEKE, W., VAN POUCKE, E. and TUYTTENS, F.A.M. (2008) Do citizens and farmers interpret the concept of farm animal welfare differently? Livestock Science 116: 126-136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VEISSIER, I. and EVANS, A. (2007) Rationale behind the Welfare Quality® assessment of animal welfare. Proceedings of the2nd Welfare Quality® Stakeholder Conference 'Assuring Animal Welfare: From Societal Concerns to Implementation', Berlin, pp. 19-22.Google Scholar
VERBEKE, W. (2009) Stakeholder, citizen and consumer interests in farm animal welfare. Animal Welfare 18: 325-333.Google Scholar
VERMEIR, I. and VERBEKE, W. (2006) Sustainable food consumption: exploring the consumer ‘attitude-behavioural intention’ gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19: 169-194.Google Scholar
VIAENE, J. (2012) Overzicht van de Belgische pluimvee - en konijnenhouderij in 2010-2011 (Ghent, VEPEK).Google Scholar
WEBSTER, A.J.F., TUDDENHAM, A., SAVILLE, C.A. and SCOTT, T.T. (1993) Thermal stress on chickens in transit. British Poultry Science 34: 267-277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
WEEKS, C.A., NICOL, C. J., SHERWIN, C.M. and KESTIN, S.C. (1994) Comparison of the behaviour of broiler chickens in indoor and free-ranging environments. Animal Welfare 3: 179-192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WELFARE QUALITY® (2009) The Welfare Quality® assessment protocol for poultry (broilers, laying hens). The Welfare Quality® Consortium. Lelystad, Nederland.Google Scholar