Legislation to improve lives of egg laying hens

[RHRanch]

Yes they were developed from an original leghorn but the ones the factories use are developed strains for mass egg production in a short amount of time. 300 egg a cycle is not normal. You need improvements to get this. The strains used in egg farming do not adapt well even the ones that are never put in production. I have had them and they do not work out as a rule they are different is all. But they do lay well.

That is problem are they "happier"? how do you measure that? what standard do you use? production? happiness is not a desired result outside egg production. How do you create happiness for a chicken? how do you distuinguish happiness from normal behavior? I have been in and seen these large operations and the birds are aler, eating, clucking and doig all the telltale signs of a content bird so I just do not see the evidence of cruelty or mistreatment unless I compare them to my birds but then again someone keeping their birds in thier living room may think I do not go far enough. It is all relative beyond basic care, food, shelter and water. I do understand that they are limited to a finite amount of space but it does not effect the basics so I think anything beyond that is mere speculation and does not warrant any change. It will never end if they go down this path because happiness is undeterminable in its function.

Well I have kept quite a few production type leghorns and they have all been fine. Faster and more nervous than the duals but no more so than the Spanish and Empordanesas I have also kept. Not only that, by my production layers have layed tremendous quantities for up to age 5 years. My best layers by far and living in free range and light confinement in henhouse/run systems. In production at factories they are burned out and culled by age 2 or so. So based on that, my management produces a longer laying period at high rates for the same type of bird (production leghorn from multiple hatcheries). So how does that square with them being unable to "adapt" well? And also, I never mentioned happiness (except in reference to your position), but it is easy to tell when birds are in an ideal situation, they produce eggs and grow well, maintain body condition, get sick less often or not at all, live longer, engage in natural behaviors and do not cannibalize, pick, etc. All my production leghorns fit that description under my care. Can you say the same for those in large production facilities? Not in my opinion, and I come from a family that has worked in big egg farms.

 

[AquaEyes]

That is very interesting. I would liketo see what the production and feed to egg ratio was then.
I think that the hens that are used in mass production have been developed by man for egg production and it is not really fair to come along after all the advancements and say "Ok now that you have created this artificial breed of bird you have to treat them in a way that they were not intended to be treated by design because I feel they are being mistreated" These birds do exactly what they are made for and that is to produce eggs and they do it better than what any BYCer can claim and now someone wants to tell me they are mistreated. These hens would not lay as well as they do if they are being mistreated and I have yet to see any data showing otherwise. Who here keeps their coop at a constant temperature or provides the best feed available to their birds?

This whole movement is based on a human emotion somehow applied to chicken. Ridiculous!! I have seen worse abuse at the hands of private owners. I have a white leghorn production hen and she is freeranged and is still the wildest wackiest bird I own, it is as if she needs confinement to settle down and she lays an egg almost every day.

And as with any legislation the devil will be in the details. There will be so much junk attached that the intent of the bill will be lost.

The reason the modern egg producers are able to produce cheap eggs is not as much because of higher feed efficiency or production of the individual birds as it is about figuring how to cram as many as possible into as small an area as possible and dance the line between maximum output and total system breakdown. In seeking greater efficiency, a smaller number of people are now needed to oversee a greater number of hens, due to their "state of the art" (as you put it) facilities. That means fewer salaries to pay, and those they do are often minimum-wage low- or no-skill jobs. This outcompetes small farmers. So, if you want to talk about lost jobs and people no longer able to live a family-farm lifestyle, the expansion of the mega-facilities has done more in that area than laws like this will.

 

[GardenerGal]

A living creature is a living creature. Treating an animal like an insensate object is taking the low road, in my opinion. I figure people who will keep a chicken in a tiny wire cage and disregard its discomfort, may not be any more responsible or kinder to their own children. This, whether we're talking about big corporate farms or backyard-chicken keepers.

Sensitivity to the sanctity (for lack of a better word) of life, means feeling gratitude for the ease of life animals provide for us, and treating them with respect and humaneness as best we can in return. That's why Native Americans and other hunter-gatherer peoples, whose lives depended critically on the availability of meat, would say a prayer of thanks to the animal they were about to kill for food, and were bound by tradition to make the kill as clean and swift as possible.
By the same measure, if we are going to keep animals in domesticity, we are bound by that same respect for life to make them as comfortable and keep them as healthy as possible.

This is not being sentimental or romanticizing about animals. It is having a standard of ethics to live by, that takes into consideration the value of life and the comfort and wellbeing of others whose lives we have power over -- human and non-human -- instead of thinking only of ourselves.

 

[GardenerGal]

That's it. I'm through! I came to BYC to learn about chicken ranching, not argue politics. I'm outta here.

An entire website devoted to chickens, their care, and every dingin-dongin' thing about chickens --- even "chicken ranching" -- and you crawl through the ENTIRE list of gazillion forums and topics about chickens and poultry, and in all that great stuff you find one thread with a political theme on the "random topics" forum (dedicated to any kind of topic that isn't specifically about chicken/poultry ranching...), so you can rant and rave and stomp out? Sheesh.

 

[Attila the Hen]

Beautifully said.

 

[Attila the Hen]

A living creature is a living creature. Treating an animal like an insensate object is taking the low road, in my opinion. I figure people who will keep a chicken in a tiny wire cage and disregard its discomfort, may not be any more responsible or kinder to their own children. This, whether we're talking about big corporate farms or backyard-chicken keepers.

Sensitivity to the sanctity (for lack of a better word) of life, means feeling gratitude for the ease of life animals provide for us, and treating them with respect and humaneness as best we can in return. That's why Native Americans and other hunter-gatherer peoples, whose lives depended critically on the availability of meat, would say a prayer of thanks to the animal they were about to kill for food, and were bound by tradition to make the kill as clean and swift as possible.
By the same measure, if we are going to keep animals in domesticity, we are bound by that same respect for life to make them as comfortable and keep them as healthy as possible.

This is not being sentimental or romanticizing about animals. It is having a standard of ethics to live by, that takes into consideration the value of life and the comfort and wellbeing of others whose lives we have power over -- human and non-human -- instead of thinking only of ourselves.

 

[chickened]

Like I said it is all relative beyond basic care. Interesting you mention Native Americans some tribes diets consisted of dog meat as it was a relatively cheap animal to house, feed, reproduce and keep in general and alerted them to approaching danger. Much the same ways as chickens are used in factory farms.

A living creature is a living creature. Treating an animal like an insensate object is taking the low road, in my opinion. I figure people who will keep a chicken in a tiny wire cage and disregard its discomfort, may not be any more responsible or kinder to their own children. This, whether we're talking about big corporate farms or backyard-chicken keepers.

Sensitivity to the sanctity (for lack of a better word) of life, means feeling gratitude for the ease of life animals provide for us, and treating them with respect and humaneness as best we can in return. That's why Native Americans and other hunter-gatherer peoples, whose lives depended critically on the availability of meat, would say a prayer of thanks to the animal they were about to kill for food, and were bound by tradition to make the kill as clean and swift as possible.
By the same measure, if we are going to keep animals in domesticity, we are bound by that same respect for life to make them as comfortable and keep them as healthy as possible.

This is not being sentimental or romanticizing about animals. It is having a standard of ethics to live by, that takes into consideration the value of life and the comfort and wellbeing of others whose lives we have power over -- human and non-human -- instead of thinking only of ourselves.

 

[chickened]

Automation has killed more jobs than anything else as far as I know including my line of work.

The reason the modern egg producers are able to produce cheap eggs is not as much because of higher feed efficiency or production of the individual birds as it is about figuring how to cram as many as possible into as small an area as possible and dance the line between maximum output and total system breakdown. In seeking greater efficiency, a smaller number of people are now needed to oversee a greater number of hens, due to their "state of the art" (as you put it) facilities. That means fewer salaries to pay, and those they do are often minimum-wage low- or no-skill jobs. This outcompetes small farmers. So, if you want to talk about lost jobs and people no longer able to live a family-farm lifestyle, the expansion of the mega-facilities has done more in that area than laws like this will.

 

[GardenerGal]

Not many American Indian tribes ate dog meat, chickened. Mainly those who were practicing some form of agriculture. The fully hunter-gatherer tribes did not keep animals for food; they hunted wild game, fish and fowl and were on the move seasonally to follow the meat.

My reference was to the "career" hunter-gatherer Native Americans, not the tribes that heavily practiced horticulture, agriculture and/or pastoral food raising for the bulk of their food. There is a different mindset and ethos between peoples who grow/raise their food, and those who are completely dependent on the availability of game and the necessity of truly knowing its nature.

Like I said it is all relative beyond basic care. Interesting you mention Native Americans some tribes diets consisted of dog meat as it was a relatively cheap animal to house, feed, reproduce and keep in general and alerted them to approaching danger. Much the same ways as chickens are used in factory farms.

 

[RHRanch]

Like I said it is all relative beyond basic care. Interesting you mention Native Americans some tribes diets consisted of dog meat as it was a relatively cheap animal to house, feed, reproduce and keep in general and alerted them to approaching danger. Much the same ways as chickens are used in factory farms.

Um, no - nothing about Native American food production even remotely resembles factory farming. In fact, factory farming is in direct opposition to most Native American value/belief systems.