 |
Our newest inhabitants on the smallholding - 'rescue' hens
Read on and you may be surprised I've got these
|
Some of the practices which go on sadden me. Overworking of laying hens. Genetic obesity in meat birds. High losses accepted as collateral. Routine drugging.
Here is an excerpt from an article I found entitled UK Government Rejects 2016 Beak Trimming Ban.
It (BTAG, Beak Trimming Action Group) found that although other countries such as Austria and Sweden have implemented bans on beak trimming, the UK's larger flocks and different breeds mean lessons learned from these countries are not easily transferred over.
BTAG concluded that an imminent ban on beak trimming could result in significant welfare problems through outbreaks of feather pecking and cannibalism.
It goes on to say
The NFU supports and is actively involved in ongoing industry work to better understand what the trigger points are that cause injurious feather pecking.
Those 'trigger points' would not take a genius to work out. What they really mean is:
We are making a fortune from an incredibly inhumane industry which puts zero value on the welfare of birds. We will continue to strongly influence government through lobbying and will make a few right noises about having good intentions.
The chickens which make it out of the system are often in an awful state and need nurturing back to good health. I don't mean that they are hatching and executing elaborate plans of escape. These are the chickens which well-meaning individuals, often smallholders though more often people with very little experience of keeping any birds, purchase as ex-commercial layers.
At least one of the charities involved in the rescue hen trade really pulls at the heartstrings.
Now the intentions of such charities may be good and I may seem harsh to say that I would rather the chickens' lives were ended at 72 weeks, when their production starts to dip, rather than go on to live a long and happy life in someone's garden.
However, hear me out.
The normal fate of the chickens, whether from caged, barn or free range systems, is for their carcasses to be sold off (presumably very, very cheaply) at the end of the most productive period of their lives. The meat would go for dog food, baby food or cheap processed food.
But now there is an alternative. For around £2.50 you can save one of these chickens. Nice idea.
But here's the rub as I see it.
The chicken-saving charities pay the chicken factory owners for the birds. By doing this you are propping up a cruel and inhumane industry which exists because there is a demand for unethical cheap meat and eggs by a public who prefer to close their eyes to the situation. If you pointed out how the chickens were kept, they would block their ears and go LALALALALA. Or just shrug their shoulders.
And before you say "That's ok for you. You're not poor and can afford to pay a premium." I get that argument, but cheap meat is not a dietary necessity. In many countries meat is an occasional treat and it is valued. There are plenty of cheap, healthy alternatives, there is a different balance that can be struck.
The 'farmers' must be rubbing their hands in glee. Here are the people who know that their industry is cruel coming along offering to pay them to take the birds away which they would otherwise sell for pennies. They probably wish they themselves had come up with the idea for the scheme in the first place...
"It's worth it to save a bird", I hear some say. Well, do you really think that no-one is going to step into the breach and provide low grade meat for unidentifiable food? It just means it won't be your particular chicken that won't end up in that part of the food chain.
So there you have it. My probably very controversial view.
I guess the thing is I get that when the birds' production drops it makes economic sense to replace them and to use the carcasses for something. We cannot expect to have a bounteous supply of eggs available and for the farmers to look after the birds into their unproductive old age. Even I am not that unrealistic.
But there is a point where cost-cutting becomes unacceptable. I would argue it is about how the chicken lives rather than how long it lives.
Having said all this, yesterday I picked up 8 laying hens from a big poultry shed. Hear me out.
The birds are equally 72 weeks old and I plan to give them one extra year of life, during which they will be productive enough for my needs. Next year I will replace them with birds from the same source and they will make nice chicken soup, pies or treats for the dogs.
But the place I acquired them from, for I did pay £1 each which probably helps out the lady who keeps them, came recommended by others. The chickens were kept in a large shed. I didn't see inside, but what I did see was lots of chickens coming and going freely and wandering over a large area. There were trees for them to gather under, dusty ground (probably moreso than usual with the drought) for them to scratch at and roll around in and space for them to stretch their wings and legs.
This I guess would count as a small scale commercial enterprise and seemed to be a system which I could accept as a means of producing fairly large quantities of eggs without compromising the welfare of the hens too much. I'll be honest, I wouldn't say everything was perfect. The chickens' feathers were not in great condition and they looked like they needed a bit of a rest. They were nowhere near as bad as those which come from more intensive systems.
In the back of the car the chickens clucked to reassure each other and when we introduced them to their new pen they entered confidently. They quickly found their food and water and started scratching around. They clearly knew how to behave naturally.
