A comparison of the behaviour and production of laying hens in experimental and conventional battery cages

Abstract

There is some experimental evidence that the behaviour of laying hens in conventional battery cages is restricted. The absence of litter in particular may account in part for the higher level of feather pecking in cages as opposed to pens, and for the tendency of one strain to develop stereotyped pacing, indicative of frustration, in the pre-laying period. In the present small-scale study an experimental cage was tested for its effects on the behaviour, production, and feather and foot damage of groups of six birds per cage. The experimental cages, when compared with conventional types, had an horizontal floor, were extended in height, had food and water provided at two levels, two perches and nesting boxes containing litter. Egg collection was automated; eggs and litter travelled to a collecting point and the litter was recycled to the cages. Forty-eight birds of a White Leghorn laying strain (Shaver 288) were housed at six per cage in a bank of experimental cages. Forty-eight sister birds were grouped in sixes in conventional caging for comparison. Details are given of the space allowances in each cage on various criteria, since a simple floor area comparison was not relevant. Observations lasted over a 6-month period from point-of-lay. The experimentally caged birds laid nearly all their eggs in the nest boxes, and showed more movement, reflex activity, preening and sitting but less feeding, drinking, pecking, pushing and stereotyped behaviour. The specific variables causing these behavioural differences are speculated upon, although in this type of study they cannot be identified with certainty. The experimental birds showed less feather and foot damage compared with controls in conventional cages. Egg production in the two groups was similar but samples of eggs from the experimental cages were of a higher mean weight. As yet no economic assessment of the viability of the experimental cage has been undertaken, but reference is made to comparable studies where this has been attempted. On welfare grounds there is some evidence that the experimental cage is nearer to the criteria of an “ideal” cage (Hughes, 1973) than conventional cages.