Among the criticisms that the poultry farming sector receives in recent times are those about ‘leg burns’ or ‘foot injuries’.
With this in-depth article of ours, we believe we are doing something useful for both consumers and those who raise these criticisms without obviously being sufficiently informed.
This link https://ilfattoalimentare.it/polli-zampe-ustionate-naturasi-altre-catene.html leads to one of the articles that inspired our in-depth study, which we felt was necessary to compensate for the misinformation that a certain way of reaching conclusions might generate.
In fact, the contents of that article, like those of many others constantly circulated by several anti-breeding associations, risk casting a bad light not only on the whole of Italian poultry farming, but also on the controls that the National Health System carries out on it, throwing discredit on two sectors in which we can instead boast of excellence at world level.
We will now explain ourselves better… but a premise is nevertheless necessary:
Animal welfare in intensive and extensive livestock farming is regulated by precise European laws, to the drafting of which more than twenty Associations and Stakeholders who care about animal welfare and environmental protection have contributed, including Animal Welfare Foundation, Compassion in World Farming EU, Eurogroup for Animals, European Vegetarian Union, Four Paws International and others.
These laws have been transposed into national legislation and their implementation is regularly monitored by state officials throughout Italy.
Evidently, the extremist fringes of the animal-rights universe are those that ideologically inspire the authors of the various articles criticising the sector, while demonstrating that they misunderstand, disregard, misrepresent, misinterpret, … what is decided and approved by the leaders of their own Associations.
In the legislative context we are dealing with, the inspection of breech lesions of chickens is foreseen and is carried out by the veterinarians of the ASLs on consignments sent to slaughter, as it is one of the main parameters for assessing the welfare of the chickens reared.
The inspection is carried out by means of a precise calculation of the type of lesions (from simple depigmentation to the presence of crusty lesions) and their frequency. In this way it is possible to make an objective judgement on the quality of litter in each Italian herd, based on statistically significant numbers.
The article whose link is given states that ’60 per cent of chickens on intensive farms have severe and very serious leg burns’.
If this were indeed the case, we would have to conclude that most veterinary inspectors do not do their duty, as very few sanctions are imposed annually for this problem.
Therefore, the Health Authorities throughout Italy would have deliberately hidden data on the breech lesions of a very high number of animals (300 million to be exact, which would correspond to 60% of the 500 million chickens bred annually in Italy), failing to impose the relevant penalties, thus being complicit in a breeding system that, illegally, would have systematically violated the laws and mistreated animals for years.
It is therefore evident that articles such as the one we have taken as an example tend to observe reality with a distorted view, as typically happens in contexts where ideological considerations prevail.
The cases of violation, when there are any, are in fact very small. Why? Because welfare laws were designed to regulate and incentivise a virtuous circle that was already present in poultry farming. Farmers have always been rewarded only by their own virtuous behaviour … that is, only if they respect the welfare of the animals, since the productivity and yield of animals are higher if they are reared under high welfare conditions.
In the article quoted you will find references to ‘suffering and lame chickens’, ‘caustic soda in the litter’, ‘existence in disastrous conditions’, ‘urine from chickens‘ … obvious exaggerations, when not also falsehoods or statements without scientific correspondence. One for all is inferred by considering that chickens do not emit urine … so what has caustic soda got to do with it? Chickens do not emit caustic soda and therefore there is none in the litter. Disputing statements such as those listed is not worth too much attention.
However, it is worth remembering and emphasising other aspects: poultry meat is one of the cheapest and most sustainable protein sources in the world, with a very high biological quality, far superior to that of vegetable proteins.
FAO considers them one of the best food sources to feed the planet in the coming decades.
The sustainability of poultry production is above all based on the favourable conversion rate of the raw materials used. It is now well established that with fast-growing breeds it is possible to produce one kilo of meat using only one and a half kilograms of raw materials on a regular basis, thus minimising the use of soil and reducing the environmental impact accordingly.
It is easy to see that these very important and, in some respects, almost unbelievable results could not be achieved if the chickens on the farm were mistreated, suffering or even lame, as assumed by the above-mentioned article and many others you will find on the web and in activist documentaries.
A further distortion, which we mention last, is the contrast between chickens reared in intensive and organic/extensive farming.
It is neither sustainable nor plausible that the health, management problems and all the cases of mistreatment that activists ‘denounce’ are only found in intensive livestock farms while organic farms seem to imply only positive aspects.
In reality, both farming systems, intensive and extensive, are appreciable, valuable and above all complementary. Intensive livestock farming is more sustainable, its product is more affordable, it is adapted to meet the needs of less affluent social strata, and it is a candidate to be one of the foods that will help solve the problems of world hunger in the coming decades.
Extensive livestock farms are less environmentally sustainable and produce meat whose final price is only accessible to wealthier social strata. On the other hand, animals reared ‘in the wild’ do not allow the control of proper nutrition, are subject to climatic events (heat or cold) and may fall ill from parasites and/or fall victim to other hunting animals.
In conclusion
It must be clear that farmers play one of the most important roles in food safety by protecting chickens from disease, predators and parasites. On a farm, for example, every person entering is required to wear biosecurity suits and personal protective equipment to ensure that no bacteria or other foreign material enters the poultry house.
Attention is not only during breeding, but also preventive. In fact, before a new group of chicks is introduced to the breeding farm, breeders carry out intensive cleaning and preventive work.
Taking care of chickens has now become a prerequisite and every farmer has access to manuals and updates that constantly help to ensure welfare on their farms. These are guidelines on the welfare of broiler chickens and laying hens, which provide regularly updated scientific recommendations for proper care at every stage of the animal’s life so that it grows up healthy and strong.
Consumers today obviously want to be sure that all animals raised for food are treated with respect and are properly cared for during their lives.
People, families and companies involved in broiler farming are fully aware of this and share the public’s concern and feel an ethical obligation to ensure that the animals on their farms are well cared for. This commitment stems from the well-present awareness in the industry that healthy, high quality chickens are needed for food for people, for which proper care is not only an ethical obligation but also makes obvious business sense. Animal welfare also translates into health and commercial welfare for the world that feeds on chickens and eggs.
