No abstract

European duck meat production is based on the use of Pekin, Muscovy and Mule duck genotypes that vary in their behavioural and physiological characteristics. Furthermore, large differences exist in their housing and management conditions. The aim of this review is to discuss the welfare of these different genotypes in typical husbandry systems, focusing on ducks kept for meat production. Firstly, factors that can affect duck welfare, such as stocking density and group size, access to straw, an outdoor run, or open water, are described. Secondly, welfare problems such as feather pecking, fear and stress, and health problems are assessed. Thirdly, the various systems used in Europe are described for these aspects. Giving ducks access to straw, an outdoor run, or open water increases the behavioural opportunities of the ducks (foraging, preening, bathing, and swimming), but can also lead to poor hygiene and increased health-and food safety risks. Therefore, practical solutions that allow expression of natural behaviour, but do not lead to hygiene or health problems have to be found and some practical suggestions are provided.

No abstract

1. Conventional cages are to be replaced by furnished cages or aviary systems to improve the welfare of hens. We compared the performance and egg quality of hens reared in two designs of furnished cages and of two standard cages. We also explored the consequences of the absence of beak trimming when using these designs. 2. Hens (2028) were housed from 18 to 70 weeks of age in 108 standard cages at 6 per cage (60 cmx63.5 cm), in 96 cages at 5 per cage (59.5 cmx55.5 cm) or in two designs of furnished cage at 15 per cage (24 F15M cages and 36 F15P cages made by two manufacturers) which contained equipment varying in size and location (nests, dust baths and perches). Half of the hens were beak-trimmed in each design. 3. Mortality was low in beak-trimmed hens (<5%) but was unacceptably high in non-beak-trimmed hens due to cannibalism (>40%, 516 hens). Mortality was worse in standard cages than in furnished cages. Consequently, hen-housed egg production was significantly lowered in non-beak-trimmed hens. 4. Egg laying in beak-trimmed hens reared in furnished cages occurred mainly in the nest (80 and 84.8% in F15M and F15P) but also in the dust bath (13.3 and 9.4% in F15M and F15P) and in other parts of the cage (6.7 and 5.8% in F15M and F15P). 5. The total percentage of broken (visual observation) and hair-cracked eggs (candling) was high in the furnished cage designs (15.4 and 19.6% in F15M and F15P, respectively) compared with standard cage designs (8.1 and 12.2% in S6 and S5). This was mainly due to hair-cracked eggs, the highest percentages occurring in the nests, especially in the design with a narrow nest and no egg saver (11.1% in F15M compared to 17.6% in F15P) as a consequence of egg accumulation in the cradle and relatively low frequency of manual egg collection. 6. Eggshell quality (index and breaking strength) was only slightly influenced by cage effects so differences in egg breakage were attributable to impacts related to cage design. 7. It is concluded that beak trimming remains the most effective way to prevent cannibalism, although furnished cages with a large group of hens slightly reduced the incidence, and that further development and optimisation of furnished cages is needed to reach egg quality similar to standard cages.

No abstract