» Articles » PMID: 26479523

Towards a 'Good Life' for Farm Animals: Development of a Resource Tier Framework to Achieve Positive Welfare for Laying Hens

Overview
Journal Animals (Basel)
Date 2015 Oct 20
PMID 26479523
Citations 38
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The concept of a 'good life' recognises the distinction that an animal's quality of life is beyond that of a 'life worth living', representing a standard of welfare substantially higher than the legal minimum (FAWC, 2009). We propose that the opportunities required for a 'good life' could be used to structure resource tiers that lead to positive welfare and are compatible with higher welfare farm assurance schemes. Published evidence and expert opinion was used to define three tiers of resource provision (Welfare +, Welfare ++ and Welfare +++) above those stipulated in UK legislation and codes of practice, which should lead to positive welfare outcomes. In this paper we describe the principles underpinning the framework and the process of developing the resource tiers for laying hens. In doing so, we summarise expert opinion on resources required to achieve a 'good life' in laying hens and discuss the philosophical and practical challenges of developing the framework. We present the results of a pilot study to establish the validity, reliability and feasibility of the draft laying hen tiers on laying hen production systems. Finally, we propose a generic welfare assessment framework for farm animals and suggest directions for implementation, alongside outcome parameters, that can help define and promote a future 'good life' for farm animals.

Citing Articles

Discourses on Positive Animal Welfare by Sheep Farmers and Industry Actors: Implications for Science and Communication.

Muhammad M, Stokes J, Manning L, Huang I Vet Sci. 2024; 11(10).

PMID: 39453044 PMC: 11511421. DOI: 10.3390/vetsci11100452.


Effect of Milk-Feeding Frequency and Calcium Gluconate Supplementation on Growth, Health, and Reproductive and Metabolic Features of Holstein Heifers at a Rearing Farm.

Revilla-Ruiz A, Carulla P, Fernandez-Novo A, de Mercado E, Perez-Navarro A, Patron-Collantes R Animals (Basel). 2024; 14(9).

PMID: 38731339 PMC: 11083690. DOI: 10.3390/ani14091336.


The Long Road from Religious and Ethical Traditions to Welfare of Invertebrates.

Mather J Animals (Basel). 2024; 14(7).

PMID: 38612244 PMC: 11010806. DOI: 10.3390/ani14071005.


An effective environmental enrichment framework for the continual improvement of production animal welfare.

Taylor P, Schrobback P, Verdon M, Lee C Anim Welf. 2024; 32:e14.

PMID: 38487434 PMC: 10936304. DOI: 10.1017/awf.2023.5.


Stakeholder Challenges and Opportunities of GPS Shock Collars to Achieve Optimum Welfare in a Conservation or Farm Setting.

McCormick I, Stokes J Animals (Basel). 2023; 13(19).

PMID: 37835690 PMC: 10572034. DOI: 10.3390/ani13193084.


References
1.
Mendl M, Burman O, Paul E . An integrative and functional framework for the study of animal emotion and mood. Proc Biol Sci. 2010; 277(1696):2895-904. PMC: 2982018. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2010.0303. View

2.
Yeates J, Main D . Assessment of positive welfare: a review. Vet J. 2007; 175(3):293-300. DOI: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2007.05.009. View

3.
Bracke M, Edwards S, Metz J, Noordhuizen J, Algers B . Synthesis of semantic modelling and risk analysis methodology applied to animal welfare. Animal. 2012; 2(7):1061-72. DOI: 10.1017/S1751731108002139. View

4.
Rushen J, Butterworth A, Swanson J . Animal behavior and well-being symposium: Farm animal welfare assurance: science and application. J Anim Sci. 2011; 89(4):1219-28. DOI: 10.2527/jas.2010-3589. View

5.
Burgdorf J, Panksepp J . The neurobiology of positive emotions. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2005; 30(2):173-87. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2005.06.001. View