Animal Welfare Assessment: Quantifying Differences Among Commercial Medium and Fast Growth Broiler Flocks

Abstract

A combined welfare assessment protocol, including indicators from the Welfare Quality® and AWIN® EU funded projects, was tested on commercial fast and medium growth commercial broiler flocks to determine differences in their assessments as measured with the used of animal welfare indicators. Ten commercial fast (Ross 308, Cobb 500, or a mix of both) and 10 medium growth (Hubbard JA × Ross 308), mixed sex commercial flocks were assessed at 32 and 48 days of age, respectively. Two observers simultaneously collected data on each flock. Observations included transect walks on central and wall areas to assess the AWIN® welfare indicators, bedding quality, environmental parameters and positive behaviors, all of them collected with the i-WatchBroiler app. According to the WQ protocol, welfare assessment indicators including the human avoidance tests, gait score, body weight and hock burns were also measured on each flock. Novel object tests were also carried out. The results of the study show that fast growth flocks had a higher incidence of welfare issues shown by the higher percentage of immobile, lame, sick, featherless, and tail wounded birds. Positive behaviors such as play fighting, wing flapping and running were more frequently observed in medium growth flocks on central locations, while fast growth flocks had a more limited expression of such behaviors. Fast growth flocks also had worse gait scores. Medium growth flocks expressed a different response to behavioral tests depending on the house location, likely attributable to their better mobility and welfare state, and also to the smaller stocking densities at which they were housed, while on the other hand the behavior of fast growth broilers during tests was similar regardless house location, being likely affected by mobility problems and the higher stocking density specific to their management. These results provide quantitative evidences on the differences in animal welfare assessment outcomes in fast and medium growth broilers. Nevertheless, results also suggest that some of the test responses were associated with the physical state and movement ability of the birds and house location that limit their response capacity. Such limitations should be considered when interpreting animal welfare assessment outcomes. These results add to previously published scientific evidences showing the potential of the method and app technology for practical on-farm broiler welfare assessment, including positive indicators, with farmers, technical personnel, certification bodies or scientist as potential end-users.