In free-range and organic production systems, hens can make choices according to their needs and desires, which is in accordance with welfare definitions. Nonetheless, health and behavioural problems are also encountered in these systems. The aim of this article was to identify welfare challenges observed in these production systems in the EU and the most promising solutions to overcome these challenges.
It is based on a review of published literature and research projects complemented by interviews with experts. We selected EU specific information for welfare problems, however, the selected literature regarding solutions is global.
Free range use may increase the risk of infection by some bacteria, viruses and parasites. Preventive methods include avoiding contamination thanks to biosecurity measures and strengthening animals’ natural defences against these diseases which can be based on nutritional means with new diet components such as insect-derived products, probiotics and prebiotics. Phytotherapy and aromatherapy can be used as preventive and curative medicine and vaccines as alternatives to antibiotics and pesticides.
Bone quality in pullets and hens prevents keel deviations and is favoured by exercise in the outdoor range. Free range use also leads to higher exposure to variable weather conditions and predators; therefore shadow, fences and guard animals can be used to prevent heat stress and predation respectively.
Granting a free range provides opportunities for the expression of many behaviours and yet many hens usually stay close to the house. Providing the birds with trees, shelters or attractive plants can increase range use. Small flock sizes, early experiences of enrichment and personality traits have also been found to enhance range use. Severe feather pecking can occur in free range production systems, although flocks using the outdoor area have better plumage than indoors.
While many prevention strategies are facilitated in free range systems, the influence of genetics, prenatal and nutritional factors in free range hens still need to be investigated. This review provides information about practices that have been tested or still need to be explored and this information can be used by stakeholders and researchers to help them evaluate the applicability of these solutions for welfare improvement.
Claire Bonnefous 1, Anne Collin 1, Laurence A Guilloteau 1, Vanessa Guesdon 2, Christine Filliat 3, Sophie Réhault-Godbert 1, T Bas Rodenburg 4, Frank A M Tuyttens 5 6, Laura Warin 7, Sanna Steenfeldt8, Lisa Baldinger 9, Martina Re 10, Raffaella Ponzio 11, Anna Zuliani 12, Pietro Venezia 12, Minna Väre 13, Patricia Parrott 14, Keith Walley 14, Jarkko K Niemi 15, Christine Leterrier 16
Front Vet Sci. 2022 Aug 5;9:952922. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.952922. eCollection 2022.
1INRAE, Université de Tours, BOA, Nouzilly, France.
2JUNIA, Comportement Animal et Systèmes d’Elevage, Lille, France.
3VETOPOLE 26, Châteauneuf-sur-Isère, France.
4Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
5ILVO, Instituut voor Landbouw-, Visserij- en Voedingsonderzoek, Melle, Belgium.
6Department of Veterinary and Biosciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
7ITAVI, Nouzilly, France.
8Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
9Thuenen Institute of Organic Farming, Westerau, Germany.
10AIAB, Associazone Italiana per l’Agricultura Biologica, Rome, Italy.
11Slow Food, Bra, Italy.
12Veterinari Senza Frontiere Italia, Sede c/o Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale delle Venezie viale dell’Università, Padova, Italy.
13Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Bioeconomy and Environment, Helsinki, Finland.
14Harper Adams University, Newport, United Kingdom.
15Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Bioeconomy and Environment, Seinäjoki, Finland.
16CNRS, IFCE, INRAE, Université de Tours, PRC, Nouzilly, France.
Free PMC article