Shadrach's Ex Battery and Rescued chickens thread.

[rolohman]

Four hours today. Had a bit of rain this morning.

Am up in Leeds for a conference and was thinking of you when we got rain here! Hope it stays cool for you.

 

[Perris]

I would disagree. I disagree with a lot of what she writes. Some of it is just plain wrong and provably so. What I like is she's trying and studying. I know chicken keepers who are streets ahead of Nicol in chicken behaviour knowledge. They just don't happen to be academics with research students and a university department.

Most academics particularly those who study other species behaviour may spend a few weeks in the field and not much longer in the labs on a particular field of study. Academics don't have any special insight on behaviour and a layperson often spends far more time on the subject and with the species in question.

I can return to this now, having finished the book and followed up the paper on which she was basing that comment. So, further on, page 117-8, she deals specifically with affiliation. She ends the section with the remark that “The suggestion from this paper is that hens do not have specific friends. However, hens clearly form tolerant relationships within small groups of familiar birds, and stable non-aggressive relationships in very large flocks”.

The paper in question is Do hens have friends? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 143 (2013) 61–66. The abstract of that is:
“We investigated in detail the existence of dyadic preferential associations in small groups of domestic laying hens. Spatial and temporal associations were examined in two contexts (day activity and evening roosting), within 8 identical pens of 15 laying hens over 8 weeks. Little aggression was observed. Social network analysis was performed to investigate correlations in who associated with whom using weighted degree (number) and binary (presence or absence) data for shared resource areas and proximity to other individuals. No consistent evidence was found for hens actively preferring others in their choice of resource area, or in companion proximity. Perch-roosting positions chosen by the hens were compared with data generated from a random-choice model. Hens showed no position preferences. Most dyads were never observed roosting together and, although some apparently perched together frequently, the low number of nights perching and pro[1]portion of nights spent together indicates these findings should be interpreted with caution. Overall, we found no convincing evidence of dyadic preferential relationships expressed by close active and resting proximities. Further work is required to confirm whether these findings hold true in other experimental contexts, are affected by social experience and if they hold in common with the progenitor sub-species.”

Alternative explanations are possible, e.g. friendship circles > 2 individuals, and hens deliberately avoiding the formation of subgroups/cliques in what is a normal flock size (15; normal range 3-30), besides the limitation of the study to hens rather than a mixed flock, and the short time frame (8 weeks, +2 familiarisation weeks before monitoring began). I venture to suggest that friendships take more than 2 weeks to form.

Taken together, I think Nicol was reporting the study faithfully but was unconvinced, and the language she used on p.71 shows it, if read carefully ('do not appear to form social bonds', followed by her observations after 'However').

I have mentioned before that individuals in my flock use the coops inconsistently, and that it has not split into subgroups around each roo, though there are enough coops for one each, and enough hens to go round. Sometimes two roos even choose to roost together while another coop is roo-less. Maybe they roost variously because the social group is bigger than dyads of besties (which was the only thing that study was looking for), and it helps whole flock cohesion that they mix and match, as the mood takes them.

 

[ManueB]

Something I have found interesting and would like to report. I am wondering if others have observed the same.

Light was hatched mid March 2021, a commercial production layer (unfortunately I did not know better about their reproductive issues at the time). She was sick for a little over a month (around July 2023) from impacted crop until she went to see a vet.

Before she was sick, she was laying very big eggs with kinda thin shells. She lays her eggs a lot inside the house so we were able to observe her laying frequently and sometimes she even made a hard push sound. I felt bad for her.

After she got recovered, she started laying again sometime this August. Her eggs have since been smaller, the perfect size, and with stronger shell!! She is laying a bit more frequently than before. It's like she has transformed! I am very happy with the "no more hard push sound" and her stronger egg shell.

View attachment 3633201

I haven't seen anything like it. What I have seen is egg shell quality getting better after a molt and a long pause from laying.
After they turned two, five of my six ex-batts always had poor quality egg shell. The eggs themselves were nice I thought (yolks and white well formed, vibrant colour, and lot of taste).

 

[Perris]

first glimpse

 

[ManueB]

first glimpse
View attachment 3633830

Your chickens sure have been making good use of that additional second hand coop!
"Nestera. We bring more chicks to the world".

 

[My Very First 6 Chickens]

Short day today as I'm still under unaviodable (if I want any of my friends and relatives to speak to me again) social pressure. Split shift of five hours, two and a half either side of tea break.
There isn't much to write and I'm not expecting any drama now until Fret stops being broody and goes back to laying eggs. I am slightly concerend that Fret isn't eating enough but I found this fairly common with broodies with chicks for the first couple of weeks. I did feel her crop this evening (I get the usual why are you always feeling my chest at bedtime look) and there was stuff in it, not much but stuff. She looks and acts fine and I can't help wondering where she finds the energy to cope with the chicks even though there are only two of them. For those of you who have kept puppies, the chicks activity behaviour is markedely similar. Flat out activity for a while and then they fall asleep for a while and the cycle starts all over again.

I've adjusted my weeding time to try and coincide with their natural forage an hour or so before going to roost time. They all join me, even Henry who has a look what a wonderfull dad and provider I am five minutes, shifting an amazing amount of ground in his burst of enthusiasm only to wander off for a bit of a rest once he thinks we are all suitably impressed. Truth is I am impressed. When he gets going he does shift an incredibel amount of foliage and soil. It's rather like standing behind a wood chipper when he gets going. The chicks hide under Fret. There is far too much stuff flying everywhere for them to feel safe.
The chick without the dark head patch has become very bold and gets in front of my hand to the point that unless I'm carefull I'll pull a chick along with a bunch of weeds. I've had to give it a few bum taps now just so I can get on with the job.

Henry has adopted the habit of sitting down when I sit down. I'm not sure it's fair and he may just be laying the blame on his lack of productive fathering on my sitting habits.

View attachment 3623692View attachment 3623694View attachment 3623696View attachment 3623697

I giggle at the sitting part. I've spend entirely wayyyy too much time with my hens in these first couple years. I'm inexperienced, but obsessed with animal behavior and starting gardens has me outdoors with the hens always with me. If I'm working an area, they are all right there helping. This has gone on 3 years this spring. We've got a lot done and I find this fall I can sit and enjoy more. And the hens, are sitting right with me. When i get up, they get up too. They LOVE to work. Gettin' up there in age they dont dig with the same strength and vigor, but they'll work any area that I show them. We live on the side of a mountain and have tons to do. These girls are little work machines!

 

[Ladies-Eight]

Ex Batts good morning one and all!

The pictures of all the chickens are so good.

Temperature is in the 70s.

Have a great day!

 

[MrsNorthie]

We've got a lot done and I find this fall I can sit and enjoy more. And the hens, are sitting right with me. When i get up, they get up too. They LOVE to work.

Chickens are amazing! I have observed the same behaviour, even the cockerels like to follow me around and "supervise". When I finish puttering and sit, they come sit with me or go relax and forage. Today, I am taking care of things neglected around the house, but I much prefer being out with my feathered friends.

 

[RoyalChick]

I can return to this now, having finished the book and followed up the paper on which she was basing that comment. So, further on, page 117-8, she deals specifically with affiliation. She ends the section with the remark that “The suggestion from this paper is that hens do not have specific friends. However, hens clearly form tolerant relationships within small groups of familiar birds, and stable non-aggressive relationships in very large flocks”.

The paper in question is Do hens have friends? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 143 (2013) 61–66. The abstract of that is:
“We investigated in detail the existence of dyadic preferential associations in small groups of domestic laying hens. Spatial and temporal associations were examined in two contexts (day activity and evening roosting), within 8 identical pens of 15 laying hens over 8 weeks. Little aggression was observed. Social network analysis was performed to investigate correlations in who associated with whom using weighted degree (number) and binary (presence or absence) data for shared resource areas and proximity to other individuals. No consistent evidence was found for hens actively preferring others in their choice of resource area, or in companion proximity. Perch-roosting positions chosen by the hens were compared with data generated from a random-choice model. Hens showed no position preferences. Most dyads were never observed roosting together and, although some apparently perched together frequently, the low number of nights perching and pro[1]portion of nights spent together indicates these findings should be interpreted with caution. Overall, we found no convincing evidence of dyadic preferential relationships expressed by close active and resting proximities. Further work is required to confirm whether these findings hold true in other experimental contexts, are affected by social experience and if they hold in common with the progenitor sub-species.”

Alternative explanations are possible, e.g. friendship circles > 2 individuals, and hens deliberately avoiding the formation of subgroups/cliques in what is a normal flock size (15; normal range 3-30), besides the limitation of the study to hens rather than a mixed flock, and the short time frame (8 weeks, +2 familiarisation weeks before monitoring began). I venture to suggest that friendships take more than 2 weeks to form.

Taken together, I think Nicol was reporting the study faithfully but was unconvinced, and the language she used on p.71 shows it, if read carefully ('do not appear to form social bonds', followed by her observations after 'However').

I have mentioned before that individuals in my flock use the coops inconsistently, and that it has not split into subgroups around each roo, though there are enough coops for one each, and enough hens to go round. Sometimes two roos even choose to roost together while another coop is roo-less. Maybe they roost variously because the social group is bigger than dyads of besties (which was the only thing that study was looking for), and it helps whole flock cohesion that they mix and match, as the mood takes them.

And if I understood what you said correctly they only studied over 8 weeks. Maybe not long enough to get a true view?

 

[Perris]

And if I understood what you said correctly they only studied over 8 weeks. Maybe not long enough to get a true view?

yes, and I'm sure you're right on that.