Legislation to improve lives of egg laying hens

[AquaEyes]

So which is better, forced molt or culling a hen after her first egg cycle? If records show that most stress is caused during the second laying cycle or during forced molt industry may opt to cull all hens after 300 or so eggs leading to more hens ran through the system. It is a lose lose situation for the hens in the end which puts us back to my original statement that animal welfare group organizers really do not have the welfare of animals at heart like thier supporters it is more of an industry in and of itself that supports them, lawyers, and others that profit from donation solicitation.

It is becoming more clear to me that this is a long term plan to abolish traditional animal husbandry methods and mass food production so the newer modeling of food creation can take hold like forcing folks to do community gardening, riding thier bike to get there and in the end force people into these small isolated areas to house them and control them. This is the model being used in parts of Detroit in an effort to save that city.

In my opinion, it is more humane to cull than to starve. Humaneness is about reducing suffering, and a swift death is more humane than a slow death from starvation to induce a molt cycle.

It's not very traditional -- it's less than a hundred years old, therefore it's a relatively new method of animal husbandry with respect to the thousands of years chickens have been domesticated. The first battery system was begun in the 1930's on a small scale, then taken and expanded into what we see today. Traditional agriculture was about many smaller producers. Modern agriculture is about fewer but larger producers. Efforts to change how things are done now are in the spirit of returning to aspects of traditional agriculture, not becoming "more modern." I don't understand how you are thinking otherwise, or why you think "saving the farm factories" is somehow "preserving traditional agriculture."

 

[newfoundland]

Quite agree AquaEyes. These are modern farming methods, since agriculture and animal husbandry has been practiced for thousands of years. Humanity is about reducing suffering as you say.

 

[chickened]

I am all ears to a newer more modern way to supply chicken and eggs on the scale needed that will keep the price adequate that even the poor can afford to eat and not have to choose between food and shelter.

I know these farms cut back rations and change lighting but starving birds is a bit of a stretch. That is like telling a fat kid to eat veggies over donuts. It takes weeks if not months to actually starve to death and the practice if done as you say caused permanent damage to the birds it would not make sense in the grand scheme of things to do so. Animals starve in nature all the time but rarely die and then it is in part due to overpopulation on the given habitat when a feeding program can help remedy the situation in hard times. I was referring to modern traditional practices. Nobody really wants to go back over 70 years that is just unrealistic and we do not have the land base.

In my opinion, it is more humane to cull than to starve. Humaneness is about reducing suffering, and a swift death is more humane than a slow death from starvation to induce a molt cycle.

It's not very traditional -- it's less than a hundred years old, therefore it's a relatively new method of animal husbandry with respect to the thousands of years chickens have been domesticated. The first battery system was begun in the 1930's on a small scale, then taken and expanded into what we see today. Traditional agriculture was about many smaller producers. Modern agriculture is about fewer but larger producers. Efforts to change how things are done now are in the spirit of returning to aspects of traditional agriculture, not becoming "more modern." I don't understand how you are thinking otherwise, or why you think "saving the farm factories" is somehow "preserving traditional agriculture."

 

[justuschickens59]

I don't know the answer, but I truly hope that something is done for all animals raised for food to be treated more humanely. I admit it, I'm a bleeding heart when it comes to living creatures. I cannot bear to see animals treated cruelly and inhumanely, and I don't think anybody can argue that animals raised by big business for the food industry are treated cruelly and inhumanely. We, as human beings, need to face some hard truth and make some much needed HUGE changes in the food industry.

I've sent out a few e-mails to large eggs farms within a six hour driving distance of my house. I have asked if I can possibly adopt a few of their battery hens once their "use" is up. I have offered to pay for the hens. I've heard back from only one of the farms - they didn't say yes, but they didn't say no either, so I am hopeful that maybe I can adopt a few of these hens so I can give them a good home for the rest of their lives.

I've read such wonderful things about the battery hen adoption programs in Britain - I wish we could get some similar programs going here in the States.

 

[chickened]

Justuschickens59, I happen to know a person that was a manager at the Willamette egg farm near here. I can tell you from personal knowledge that they are very wary of visitors. They have security there like a bank to keep the vandals and animal rights folks out among other threats. This atmosphere that surrounds them makes them very cautious about well intentioned people like yourself that truly may want to adopt a hen. They have in the past allowed this only to have someone videotape some one time incident ,portray it as common and have to defend themselves from a disgruntled worker or some other unhappy person getting even with them by using a controversial topic. They have found it safer to dispose of hens professionally and justifiably so. Is it best? I do not know.

 

[AquaEyes]

I am all ears to a newer more modern way to supply chicken and eggs on the scale needed that will keep the price adequate that even the poor can afford to eat and not have to choose between food and shelter.

I know these farms cut back rations and change lighting but starving birds is a bit of a stretch. That is like telling a fat kid to eat veggies over donuts. It takes weeks if not months to actually starve to death and the practice if done as you say caused permanent damage to the birds it would not make sense in the grand scheme of things to do so. Animals starve in nature all the time but rarely die and then it is in part due to overpopulation on the given habitat when a feeding program can help remedy the situation in hard times. I was referring to modern traditional practices. Nobody really wants to go back over 70 years that is just unrealistic and we do not have the land base.

The process of inducing a forced-molt in battery hens involves removal of food for 6 to 14 days. It first became popular in the 1960's -- hardly a form of "traditional agriculture" as you paint it. I don't think that calling that "starving the birds" is a stretch. The only reason it has remained legal is because the "humane laws" are continually pressured to exempt poultry from the list of regulated species.

From Michigan State University's Animal Legal and Historical Society:

"To increase egg production, most farmers use a technique known as forced molting where in the hens are not given food for up to two weeks and are not given water for up to three days. This process is stressful to the hens and causes them to lose up to 25% of their body weight and shed their feathers (“molting.”) When food and water are restored, however, egg production increases dramatically, with bigger eggs in greater numbers. A laying hen will lay about 300 eggs during her economic lifespan of about one year, after which she will usually be slaughtered. (The natural lifespan of a chicken is 5-7 years.)"

Why is this legal? Read on (from the link above, sections italicized by me for emphasis relative to this discussion):

"Over 90% of the 10 billion animals used in animal agriculture in the United States each year are chickens. Over 8.7 billion broiler chickens are killed each year for food, and over 337 million battery-hens are used for laying eggs. Despite these numbers, the use of animals in agriculture is the most lightly regulated area of animal use in the Untied States, and of the regulations that do exist, chickens and other poultry are typically excluded."

"From an animal welfare perspective, there are no federal regulations regarding the breeding, rearing, sale, transportation, or slaughter of chickens. For example, in 2003 in San Diego County, California, an egg producer slaughtered 40,000 spent hens by throwing them alive into a wood chipper, and in Florida the egg-producing Cypress Foods abandoned more than 200,000 laying hens after declaring bankruptcy in 2002. Over 2000 of the hens starved to death and the rest were euthanized by the State. Neither producer’s actions violated any federal or state law, and neither was charged with animal-cruelty under state anti-cruelty laws."

Poultry is also excluded from the following federal laws:
The Animal Welfare Act,7 U.S.C. SEC. 2131-2159
The Humane Slaughter Act, 7 U.S.C. Secs. 1901-1906, and
The Twenty-Eight Hour Law, 49 U.S.C Section 80502

And, again from the link above, some discussion about this method of production (sections italicized by me for emphasis relevant to this discussion):

"Many commentators believe that the fault lies with the intensive factory farming system that has all but replaced the family farm in the United States. When, in the past, a small farmer raised only a few animals for his own direct benefit, it was only reasonable that the farmer give each animal the best care that he or she could provide. Each animal was individually valuable, and the loss of even one hen would mean the loss of future eggs, chicks, and meat. But on today’s factory farms, the sheer number of animals involved in each operation allows for a much larger margin of error. Chickens especially are of such little individual value, that chicken producers plan to lose millions of chickens each year to disease and injury, and still return a profit."

"Factory farming is big business, even if the end product is small. In 2002, the U.S. exported over $114 million worth of eggs and egg products, and the increasingly consolidated nature of the animal product industry meant that the top 11% of the country’s egg producers supplied over 40% of the nation’s eggs. In 1987 an estimated 2,500 producers were in the egg business, while today that number has shrunk to only 650 producers."

How is this legislation attacking traditional farming?

 

[rufus]

Justuschickens59, I happen to know a person that was a manager at the Willamette egg farm near here. I can tell you from personal knowledge that they are very wary of visitors. They have security there like a bank to keep the vandals and animal rights folks out among other threats. This atmosphere that surrounds them makes them very cautious about well intentioned people like yourself that truly may want to adopt a hen. They have in the past allowed this only to have someone videotape some one time incident ,portray it as common and have to defend themselves from a disgruntled worker or some other unhappy person getting even with them by using a controversial topic. They have found it safer to dispose of hens professionally and justifiably so. Is it best? I do not know.

I think that most spent hens end up in canned soup or the national school lunch program.

Rufus

 

[deerman]

untill the people buying the meat and eggs wake up ...to where their food come from......all the new laws are not going to help.

the old saying they don't know a hole in the ground from a butt *** never so true most people eating those eggs may very well believe they come out of the ground......as long as Wal Mart, Kroger and other big food chains keep selling egg for under a dollar a dozen..

people will have to hold down cost to live.


I look into raising meat chicken....its not the farmer fault ,but the company they raise them for.....without any loses the farmer is lucky to make 20 cent per chicken......reason they have to raise 40,000 at a time....avg cost of one of those chicken house is $150,000....takes alot of chicken to pay for one. bet cost alot more for laying house.

 

[newfoundland]

You make a good point here deerman. I am astonished that it is possible to buy a dozen eggs for as little as $1. Eggs here cost between $3 to $5 dollars a dozen, and let's face it that is extremely cheap, nurtitious food.

Where farmers have had the price they get for commodities driven down, it is the big supermarkets that do this. What we have discovered here is that after so called factory farming has been in place for many years, there occurs a backlash against it. Some farmers see the opportunity of rearing 'old fashioned' animals, and a niche market is created.
Fancy restuarants with Michelin stars seek to source their meat from these farms, and everyone decides it tastes so much better. Then, after a few more years, everybody wants to buy in to the idea of eating meat that has been compassionately raised on pasture and allowed to mature longer before slaughter. This is the stage we are at now. There is huge demand for ethically raised products. Of course the same thing applies to eggs. Many people keep a few hens and many more buy their eggs from these small hen keepers. Hen keeping apparently is the biggest hobby in the UK now.

 

[chickened]

http://www.capitalpress.com/content/djw-eggbillintro-REVISED-012712

Livestock is livestock and pets are pets you eat livestock you do not eat pets. Can it be any clearer?

The first thing any lawyer will argue is the what is the intent of a law when diciding its meaning and legality.

There are drugs that can be given to chickens that accomplish the same thing, would that be better? The practice you cite is no longer used most houses control light which does the same thing. New strains of hens also helps.

The US exports eggs where the UK does not in comparison to volume. We provide cheap eggs to poor people the UK eggs are not affordable in other countries they export to as proven by prices in the countries they sell to.

The process of inducing a forced-molt in battery hens involves removal of food for 6 to 14 days. It first became popular in the 1960's -- hardly a form of "traditional agriculture" as you paint it. I don't think that calling that "starving the birds" is a stretch. The only reason it has remained legal is because the "humane laws" are continually pressured to exempt poultry from the list of regulated species.

From Michigan State University's Animal Legal and Historical Society:

"To increase egg production, most farmers use a technique known as forced molting where in the hens are not given food for up to two weeks and are not given water for up to three days. This process is stressful to the hens and causes them to lose up to 25% of their body weight and shed their feathers (“molting.”) When food and water are restored, however, egg production increases dramatically, with bigger eggs in greater numbers. A laying hen will lay about 300 eggs during her economic lifespan of about one year, after which she will usually be slaughtered. (The natural lifespan of a chicken is 5-7 years.)"

Why is this legal? Read on (from the link above, sections italicized by me for emphasis relative to this discussion):

"Over 90% of the 10 billion animals used in animal agriculture in the United States each year are chickens. Over 8.7 billion broiler chickens are killed each year for food, and over 337 million battery-hens are used for laying eggs. Despite these numbers, the use of animals in agriculture is the most lightly regulated area of animal use in the Untied States, and of the regulations that do exist, chickens and other poultry are typically excluded."

"From an animal welfare perspective, there are no federal regulations regarding the breeding, rearing, sale, transportation, or slaughter of chickens. For example, in 2003 in San Diego County, California, an egg producer slaughtered 40,000 spent hens by throwing them alive into a wood chipper, and in Florida the egg-producing Cypress Foods abandoned more than 200,000 laying hens after declaring bankruptcy in 2002. Over 2000 of the hens starved to death and the rest were euthanized by the State. Neither producer’s actions violated any federal or state law, and neither was charged with animal-cruelty under state anti-cruelty laws."

Poultry is also excluded from the following federal laws:
The Animal Welfare Act,7 U.S.C. SEC. 2131-2159
The Humane Slaughter Act, 7 U.S.C. Secs. 1901-1906, and
The Twenty-Eight Hour Law, 49 U.S.C Section 80502

And, again from the link above, some discussion about this method of production (sections italicized by me for emphasis relevant to this discussion):

"Many commentators believe that the fault lies with the intensive factory farming system that has all but replaced the family farm in the United States. When, in the past, a small farmer raised only a few animals for his own direct benefit, it was only reasonable that the farmer give each animal the best care that he or she could provide. Each animal was individually valuable, and the loss of even one hen would mean the loss of future eggs, chicks, and meat. But on today’s factory farms, the sheer number of animals involved in each operation allows for a much larger margin of error. Chickens especially are of such little individual value, that chicken producers plan to lose millions of chickens each year to disease and injury, and still return a profit."

"Factory farming is big business, even if the end product is small. In 2002, the U.S. exported over $114 million worth of eggs and egg products, and the increasingly consolidated nature of the animal product industry meant that the top 11% of the country’s egg producers supplied over 40% of the nation’s eggs. In 1987 an estimated 2,500 producers were in the egg business, while today that number has shrunk to only 650 producers."

How is this legislation attacking traditional farming?