I’m curious though if there has been any work done on the welfare math of this? Frankenchickens suffer more individually due to their size, but greater size also means less individual chickens are needed to satisfy demand. Furthermore, faster growth means less time spent alive and, presumably, suffering—or maybe more time, if slaughter makes up a large fraction of it?
It seems likely to me that Frankenchickens do entail more suffering and that banning them would mean less regardless, as increasing cost of production also lowers demand; plus the campaign is a good movement building endeavor. However, it would still be good to understand how much of priority this is relative to other policy changes.
In response to your question, this RSPCA report explores the question of fast-growing breeds of broiler chicken. They highlighted the intense suffering that these birds face and the inefficiencies of this system of farming. It is a 36-page report so here are a few key bits of the text:
An RSPCA commissioned trial revealed that, in general, compared to a commercially viable slower growing breed, these three conventional breeds had significantly higher mortality (including culls), poorer leg, hock and plummage health, and more birds affected by breast muscle disease (wooden breast and white striping)*. Further, they were less active – spending less time walking and standing, and more time feeding and sitting – and spent less time engaged in enrichment type behaviours: foraging, perching and dustbathing.
The genetics of these three conventional breeds fail to adequately safeguard their welfare* to such an extent that many birds of these breeds could be considered as having a life not worth living.
The severity of the welfare problems, the huge number of animals involved globally, and the fact that these welfare concerns have not been adequately addressed to date, means this long-standing issue requires urgent attention.
Moreover, it is apparent that the production of chicken meat using conventional breeds is a wasteful and ethically questionable business (e.g. higher mortality, higher culls, and poorer meat quality), bringing into question the sustainability of this enterprise.
There are commercially-viable breeds available that have improved welfare outcomes and these higher welfare breeds should replace the use of conventional breeds.
The Welfare Footprint Project used the Cumulative Pain Framework to investigate how the adoption of the Better Chicken Commitment (BCC) and similar welfare certification programs affect the welfare of broilers. Specifically, they examined concerns that the use of slower-growing breeds may increase suffering by extending the life of chickens for the production of the same amount of meat. From their main findings they stated:
‘Our results strongly support the notion that adoption of BCC standards and slower-growing broiler strains have a net positive effect on the welfare of broiler chickens. Because most welfare offenses endured by broilers are strongly associated with fast growth, adoption of slower-growing breeds not only reduces the incidence of these offenses but also delays their onset. As a consequence, slower-growing birds are expected to experience a shorter, not longer, time in pain before being slaughtered.’
You can also read our own white paper on the welfare of broiler chickens.
Great news!
I’m curious though if there has been any work done on the welfare math of this? Frankenchickens suffer more individually due to their size, but greater size also means less individual chickens are needed to satisfy demand. Furthermore, faster growth means less time spent alive and, presumably, suffering—or maybe more time, if slaughter makes up a large fraction of it?
It seems likely to me that Frankenchickens do entail more suffering and that banning them would mean less regardless, as increasing cost of production also lowers demand; plus the campaign is a good movement building endeavor. However, it would still be good to understand how much of priority this is relative to other policy changes.
Hi Dylan,
In response to your question, this RSPCA report explores the question of fast-growing breeds of broiler chicken. They highlighted the intense suffering that these birds face and the inefficiencies of this system of farming. It is a 36-page report so here are a few key bits of the text:
An RSPCA commissioned trial revealed that, in general, compared to a commercially viable slower growing breed, these three conventional breeds had significantly higher mortality (including culls), poorer leg, hock and plummage health, and more birds affected by breast muscle disease (wooden breast and white striping)*. Further, they were less active – spending less time walking and standing, and more time feeding and sitting – and spent less time engaged in enrichment type behaviours: foraging, perching and dustbathing.
The genetics of these three conventional breeds fail to adequately safeguard their welfare* to such an extent that many birds of these breeds could be considered as having a life not worth living.
The severity of the welfare problems, the huge number of animals involved globally, and the fact that these welfare concerns have not been adequately addressed to date, means this long-standing issue requires urgent attention.
Moreover, it is apparent that the production of chicken meat using conventional breeds is a wasteful and ethically questionable business (e.g. higher mortality, higher culls, and poorer meat quality), bringing into question the sustainability of this enterprise.
There are commercially-viable breeds available that have improved welfare outcomes and these higher welfare breeds should replace the use of conventional breeds.
The Welfare Footprint Project used the Cumulative Pain Framework to investigate how the adoption of the Better Chicken Commitment (BCC) and similar welfare certification programs affect the welfare of broilers. Specifically, they examined concerns that the use of slower-growing breeds may increase suffering by extending the life of chickens for the production of the same amount of meat. From their main findings they stated:
‘Our results strongly support the notion that adoption of BCC standards and slower-growing broiler strains have a net positive effect on the welfare of broiler chickens. Because most welfare offenses endured by broilers are strongly associated with fast growth, adoption of slower-growing breeds not only reduces the incidence of these offenses but also delays their onset. As a consequence, slower-growing birds are expected to experience a shorter, not longer, time in pain before being slaughtered.’
You can also read our own white paper on the welfare of broiler chickens.
I hope that helps answer your question.