Free-range chickens may be less healthy

[Mousehound]

A free-range label doesn't guarantee your poultry had a worry-free existence, according to Swedish researchers. In an effort to eat compassionately, many people choose free-range chickens and eggs, assuming that the birds lived happy, high-quality lives before they became dinner. But researchers at the National Veterinary Institute in Uppsala, Sweden have discovered that, if farmers aren't extremely careful, bacterial infections like E. coli can run rampant through free-range chicken flocks. The finding, which appears in BioMed Central's open access journal Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica raises questions about what's best for both animals and people. The study began when scientists noticed a sudden spike in dead laying hens submitted for necropsies. The researchers guessed the surge in deaths was linked to the way farmers were housing the birds. More infections, attacks In Sweden, a new law bans the use of small laying cages and instead requires that chickens live more naturally - with access to nests, perches, and piles of dust they can roll around in. This type of living is called a litter-based system. In a free-range litter-based system, the birds are also allowed to go outside. Most Swedish farmers made the switch from cages to litter-based housing between 2001 and 2004. Around the same time, the number of dead hens presented to the Institute increased. To further investigate, veterinary pathologist Dr Oddvar Fossum and colleagues analysed the necropsies of 914 hens from 172 flocks. The researchers found that as many as 10 times more hens were submitted from litter-based and free-range setups than from caged systems during those years. Compared to caged birds, free-ranging hens had more bacterial infections (the most common cause of death), more parasites, and more viruses. They were also more likely to become victims of violent pecking and cannibalistic attacks. Flock size was part of the problem, Fossum says. Cages held a maximum of 10 birds, but free-range flocks sometimes contained as many as 35,000 chickens. Even though these chickens had the freedom to wander outside and roll in the dirt, they were more likely to bump into each other, fight and share diseases. Prone to disease The findings add to a growing body of evidence that free-range chickens are particularly prone to disease and violent behaviour, says veterinarian and poultry pathologist Dr Rob Porter, of the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities. It's hard to evaluate whether a chicken is or can be "happy," Porter adds. But other studies have failed to find a difference in stress hormone levels between chickens that are raised one way or the other. "One of the largest attractions of free-range chickens is that it makes people happy to think about chickens outside pecking at the soil," says Porter. "Although the perception of the general public is that these outdoor chickens must be healthier than others, time and time again this is shown not to be true." Nutritionally, Porter adds, free-range eggs and meat are virtually identical to the same products from caged chickens. Still, Fossum says, there are ways to keep a free-range flock healthy with a combination of breeding, vaccines, and behaviour control. Dimming the lights, for example, can calm a chicken down. Sweden's experience, he says, offers lessons to chicken farmers elsewhere.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articl...m?site=science

[Renegade]

they should have specified that they were talking about "commercial" free range poultry...

[Sonny]

Free Range Chickens don't or should get worms? Is that right?

Did anyone said that? oh? no one did.

OK good, Saves me from going into one of the old stories.

[A.T. Hagan]

As is often the case the devil is in the details.

In Sweden, a new law bans the use of small laying cages and instead requires that chickens live more naturally - with access to nests, perches, and piles of dust they can roll around in.

This type of living is called a litter-based system. In a free-range litter-based system, the birds are also allowed to go outside.

Flock size was part of the problem, Fossum says. Cages held a maximum of 10 birds, but free-range flocks sometimes contained as many as 35,000 chickens.


Sweden's system is pretty much the same as is used all over Western Europe. On the face of it the system sounds good. Hey, 'free range' is natural ain't it?

Well, no not exactly. First of all the first system described in this article isn't free range at all. ...with access to nests, perches, and piles of dust they can roll around in. That is simply 'cage free' meaning they're not confined to small cages, but rather given the run of large barns whose floors are covered with litter of one sort or another pretty much the way modern day broiler chickens are raised. Thousands or tens of thousands of birds all sharing the same floor space in the barn, scratching in the litter, dusting themselves in it, full of manure. Any surprise that they pass diseases on to one another? Any surprise that they are occasionally cannibalistic in such crowded conditions? Especially with the high strung hybrid layers that are preferred for modern day laying operations.

Now the second system they describe really is 'free-range', at least according to the legal definition of it in Europe. Take that same large litter filled barn and put a small pop hole or even several of them at one end leading outside into a fenced in grassy area where they can do what comes natural. Now put the waterers, feeders, and nest boxes at the far end of the barn away from those pop holes. How many birds do you reckon will ever go outside? Not many. Not many at all. You can tell that by looking at how much grassy area is allotted for how many birds and what sort of condition that grass is in. Anyone who has ever kept chickens can tell you that you confine enough of them in a yard and they can turn the Amazon rain forest into the Sahara desert in short order. Now look at the hundreds to thousands of birds in those commercial flocks and the condition of the grassy paddocks they are given access to.

As I said above the devil is in the details. Genuine grass raised birds, what 'free range' is supposed to be, are going to be healthier because they are not over crowded nor forced to spend the day in their own and everyone else's manure. Instead they are either moved frequently to fresh grass, leaving their manure behind, or they are stocked at a density low enough to keep from destroying the grass which also keeps the manure load down to a tolerable level. The birds eat the grass and other plants and the insects that eat them for a part of their diet and their manure fertilizes the grass thus encouraging it to grow and feed the insects.

That's what real free-range is all about.

.....Alan.

[Sonny]

Just wanted to say for those that don't yet know a Sonny from an Alan, that when it comes to food sciences, ok, What Alan says, you can take to the bank.

I say that even before I've read his post. Ok,

eh eh, But Alan, what if the chickens don't have any grass?
uh uh hey, That Free Range has got me freaked. Man I'm sorry.

[A.T. Hagan]

No grass or some other vegetation to pass for it makes the whole 'free range' concept rather empty doesn't it?

.....Alan.

[Sonny]

Originally Posted by A.T. Hagan

No grass or some other vegetation to pass for it makes the whole 'free range' concept rather empty doesn't it?

.....Alan.

Gee Alan I just don't know. I just remember a girl friend who wouldn't eat their own chickens cause she said they had worms? wwhhoo!!

But, You know what? I never actually saw any worms, hmm?

Could it be she just was wanted me to take her to the new Western Sizzler restaurant over out on the highway? hmm?

[free ranger]

I don't know if they are less healthy - but I bet they have more interesting lives.