Re: Chicken Lice?

"Jill" <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:45eab9ad$0$8733$ed2619ec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
the people report that
eventually the battery hens begin to exhibit "normal hen" behaviour
based on no experience or observation.

Indeed. But no one has proven that without the ability to do this that the
hens "realise" they are bereft.
It gives birds consciousness that they simply do not have.

hm... what about those (extremely rare, obviously) cases where a human is
brought up in total confinement & never learns to do "human things"? those
people similarly are unlikely to be able to put their finger on exactly what
they're missing, due to lack of _experience_, _despite_ their innate
intelligence. or even, the (sadly, common) cases of animals - even
intelligent ones - in total confinement who experience the same thing.

these people/animals are obviously as intelligent as other people/animals of
their species, but with these things it might be a case of "what the eye
doesn't see, the heart doesn't miss". you _can't_ pine specifically for
something you've never seen, heard of or experienced no matter what species
you are! but to say that means "no stress" might just not be correct.
indeed, i'm not sure how it can be. the creature isn't able to identify
exactly what it is "missing", but must still feel the pull of instinctive
behaviours, otherwise it doesn't make sense that liberated (ahem) creatures
then begin to indulge in "instinctive" behaviours for their kind. does it?

now, i'm not aligning chicken-brains with human brains or the brains of
higher-functioning species, but the fact remains that we are all animals and
there are many more similarities between us than many people would like to
admit. it's easier for a person who keeps birds/animals in less-than-ideal
conditions to justify it by claiming that the animal "doesn't know" any
better because it's not intelligent enough, & doesn't "miss" anything
anyway, and therefore isn't suffering on any level.

Yup - I find it interesting talking to our vet students about this all.
I am concerned how involved the veterinary world is becoming in the
welfare side of things when they get grossly insufficient training in the
subject.
I want my vets to excell at making animals better when they are poorly --
not spend increasing amounts of time getting politically involved in
things that they have no experience in. The former is hard enough - its
just about the hardest profession there is, especially to keep up to date
with all that is new.

it's quite likely that vet practice will start to specialise a bit more i
think. atm there's the problem (?) of vets needing to be involved in (for
e.g.) animal rescue, determining if an animal's living conditions are
psychologically suitable for it, etc. there isn't really anyone else to
bring in instead except vets at this time :-)

they have no sense of reason. they can think to some extent, because
they can be trained by operant conditioning. but my point was they
have the ability to "prefer" one thing over another.

Hmmm- prefer means "To choose or be in the habit of choosing as more
desirable or as having more value"
How is a chicken able to evaluate the cost / benefits of any activity?

choosing, or having preferences, isn't a cost/benefit thing to a lower
species (or even a higher species much of the time). i feel that in this
thread where you are talking about costs & benefits, you are aligning the
chook's cost & benefit to ours. truly, they don't care for our welfare, we
only care for theirs. if they never laid another egg they wouldn't care,
only we do :-)

How can they miss what is not stimulated?

give a chook two choices, and it will pick one, is what i am saying :-) (it
might even choose both, or neither). they cannot specifically miss what
they've never known, but that is not to say that they don't feel the loss on
some level. similarly, they're clearly not all that bright, and yet i must
say i've been surprised at how easily they learn things. in order to learn
anything, they MUST be able to differentiate between two courses of action,
pick one, & observe the result. this, they clearly do.

One example is dustbathing [a popular cry for the anti intensive unit
folks] - this is an activity which helps to keep the feathers in good
order. However if the birds are kept in circumstances where they are not
getting wet, windy, dirty, dusty, there are no mites, etc, then the
feathers are going to need much less care? This is the sort of
behavioural/ physiological work that needs to be done to properly evaluate
the "needs" that we anthropomorphise. The new enhanced intensive units are
going to have dustbathes. However the birds are not outside so will they
produce sufficient oils to enable these to be used effectively?
There are thousands of domestic situations where a dustbath is not
provided yet these birds are outside having all these factors impinging on
their feathers. Which is more "cruel"

ime a chicken just makes a dustbath when she wants one :-) certainly this
can't be done if she lives outside on concrete or something. then again, i'm
not sure how many chooks live in conditions which are free-range, yet
concrete...

mainly, i'd say that it doesn't ever help to underestimate a creature's
intelligence or needs. all experimental science on animal intelligence and
behaviour keeps pointing to more and more animals being more sensate and
more intelligent than we previously thought. (there are _never_ studies
which conclude "species x shown to be as dumb as a rock!") humans are,
overall, impossibly arrogant about this.

As I say -- there are more grey areas than clear ones and I hate the
categoric condemnation of systems when they are so poorly understood.

yes, i understand what you're saying. i do feel on balance though that if a
person is motivated by kindness, they are most of the way there. after all,
someone doing the "wrong" thing who isn't motivated by kindness is probably
doing more harm. it's a hard one, because it's actually a GOOD quality in
(many) humans that leads them to anthropomorphise - they feel empathy and
sympathy. we just need more information. but see, even nasty people need
more information ;-)

i'd say again - don't you think there's something _else_ awry, not
related to imports? something there appears (to a disinterested party
on the other side of the world) to be seriously awry because outbreak
after outbreak in what are _supposed_ to be "good" (biosecure??)
circumstances is a warning that there is something (else) wrong.

Yes -- the populations value on food ;) -- that is not going to change in
a hurry. ;(

no :-) but i would think that with rolling outbreaks, it is more helpful to
sit back & take a broader view of the whole system than to shut down and
over-regulate and compartmentalise farming - because _that_ may well be what
is going wrong.

The response was to the suggestions that "EVERYONE"

well, every _other_ one ;-)

should have them so as
to negate the requirement for intenisve units
Very different from people choosing to enjoy having birds in their gardens
or smallholdings etc. These are the ones who, as you rightly say, will
bring to the table some clue as to what they are letting themsevles in for
and inform themselves

not pammyT so i don't know - but all she suggested (by my reading) was that
things can be how they were (more people responsible for their own food) but
along with that we(you u.k. peeps?) have the benefit of knowledge moving on
since that was a very common practice. and it WAS a common practice. and
it's not a practice that is particularly difficult. also, if intensive farms
are having continual problems with infection it is an odd response to
conflate that to "and so that means FEWER people should have backyard
animals (in a more diverse microecology), because intensive farms keep
having problems!" i'm sure that with consideration, you can see the lack of
logic there. clearly if every second household doesn't _want_ backyard
chooks it's not going to happen, but, there are _humungous_ problems with
imports of food as you well know. some of these relate to disease, some are
environmental, some are purely about the loss of local knowledge, and so on.
food importation is something to be avoided in every possible instance,
frankly. whether one does that by producing oneself, or by learning to be
less greedy & going without food which is difficult to produce in a
particular location, it works out the same way. you can't, as my mum might
say, put windscreen wipers on a cow. sometimes things just aren't meant to
be & pursuing them is too harmful. <shrug>

See above -- my response was to the ideas that all should have - whomever
and whereever.
A VERY different scenario.

yep.

i'm just not understanding you. i very much doubt anything like 50% of
households in australia have hens any more, but we don't import eggs
whatsoever.

We have been importing eggs since the early 1800's

in the early 1800's, almost everything was imported from england, including
white people <g>


[just to be really picky and cos I picked this up researching AI along the
way

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/wcms/Publishing.nsf/Content/health-avian_influenza-faq.htm
Q: Do we import eggs for consumption into Australia?
Answer: Australia does permit the importation of cooked, retorted (ie
commercially sterilised) eggs as well as a number of other products
containing egg. Only eggs and egg products that do not pose a risk of
introducing exotic diseases, including avian influenza, are permitted
entry into Australia. All imported and domestic egg products must be
pasteurised. ]

in other words, we do NOT import fresh eggs for human consumption, which is
what i was saying. :-) not only is it an unnecessary "risk" (you'd be into
that ;-) but it's not necessary. they are locally plentiful. that's a bit of
a different matter than importing dutch biscuits which have been cooked with
eggs. or whatever.

;)
But - yes - you have a seriously commendable system of protecting your
borders in Australia. It drives a lot of breeders nuts, mind <grin>

of course. but that means don't be so rigid about the "right" way,

What right way ? :) There are many ways to solve every problem, and many
more do deal with teh consequences of our choices !!

i think modern people are discouraged from experiencing the consequences of
their choices. this is the root of many problems.

btw - i'm pretty sure amy b. is american - some of your references might be
a bit irrelevent to her :-)
kylie


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: From Shell to Hell: the modern egg industry
    ... the hens would lay 5-6 eggs in a clutch ... >this with modern breeds of domestic hen, which lay more than 300 eggs ... >conjured up to disguise the cruelty involved in egg production. ... >Keeping animals in such confined, ...
    (sci.agriculture.poultry)
  • Re: From Shell to Hell: the modern egg industry
    ... the hens would lay 5-6 eggs in a clutch ... >this with modern breeds of domestic hen, which lay more than 300 eggs ... >conjured up to disguise the cruelty involved in egg production. ... >Keeping animals in such confined, ...
    (sci.agriculture.poultry)
  • Re: Big lessons for a healthy future
    ... only way to get high Omega-3 content in eggs is to supply them with ... I do know animals rased on pasture have a lot more omega3s ... so sort of assume that works for the eggs too. ... Watching hens chase other hens with a big ...
    (alt.support.diabetes)
  • From Shell to Hell: the modern egg industry
    ... the hens would lay 5-6 eggs in a clutch ... production and meat production. ... laying hens retain the natural ...
    (sci.agriculture.poultry)
  • Re: Need advice on breeding/raising chicks
    ... We have two golf balls in our nest. ... If your hen wants to go broody she will - golf balls are not going to entice ... How long is it likely for one of the hens to get broody? ... Continue to collect your eggs daily and eat them as you go ...
    (sci.agriculture.poultry)