View source for Beak trimming

{{Short description|Trimming of a bird's beak, usually performed on domesticated birds}}[[File:Hen chicken.jpg|thumb|An adult bird which has been beak-trimmed as a chick]]

'''Beak trimming''' (also spelled as '''beak-trimming'''; informally as '''debeaking'''), or '''beak conditioning''', is the partial removal of the [[beak]] of [[poultry]], especially [[chicken|layer hens]] and [[domesticated turkey|turkeys]], although it is also be performed on some [[quail]] and [[ducks]]. When multiple birds are confined in small spaces due to farming practices, they are more likely to hurt each other through pecking. Beak trimming aims to avoid damage done by pecking, although the practice is criticized by animal welfare organizations and banned in several European countries. Beak trimming is most common in egg-laying strains of chickens. In some countries, such as the United States, turkeys routinely have their beaks trimmed. In the UK, only 10% of turkeys are beak trimmed.<ref name="FAWC turkeys">{{Cite web |url=http://www.fawc.org.uk/reports/turkeys/turkr025.htm |title=Beak-trimming |access-date=2011-11-11 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111130154508/http://www.fawc.org.uk/reports/turkeys/turkr025.htm |archive-date=2011-11-30 |url-status=dead }}</ref> 

In close confinement, [[Cannibalism in poultry|cannibalism]], feather pecking and aggression are common among turkeys, [[duck]]s, [[pheasant]]s, [[quail]], and chickens of many breeds (including both heritage breeds and modern [[Sex link|hybrids]]) kept for eggs. The tendency to cannibalism and feather pecking varies among different strains of chickens, but does not manifest itself consistently. Some flocks of the same breed may be entirely free from cannibalism, while others, under the same management, may have a serious outbreak. Mortalities, mainly due to cannibalism, can be up to 15% in egg laying flocks housed in aviaries,<ref name="Hill, (1986)">Hill, J.A., (1986). Egg production in alternative systems - a review of recent research in the UK. Research and Development in Agriculture, 3: 13-18</ref> straw yards,<ref name="Gibson et al., (1988)">Gibson, S.W., Dun, P. and Hughes, B.O., (1988). The performance and behaviour of laying fowls in a covered strawyard system.  Research and Development in Agriculture, 5: 153-163</ref> and free-range systems.<ref name="Keeling et al., (1988)">Keeling, L.J., Hughes, B.O. and Dun P., (1988). Performance of free range laying hens in a polythene house and their behaviour on range. Farm Building Progress, 94: 21-28</ref> Because egg laying strains of chickens can be kept in smaller group sizes in caged systems, cannibalism is reduced<ref name="Appleby and Hughes, (1991)">Appleby, M.C. and Hughes B.O., (1991). Welfare of laying hens in cages and alternative systems: Environmental, physical and behavioural aspects. World's Poultry Science Journal, 47: 109-128</ref><ref name="Abrahamsson and Tauson, (1995)">Abrahamsson, P. and Tauson, R., (1995). Aviary systems and conventional cages for laying hens - effects on production, egg quality, health and bird location in 3 hybrids.  Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section A-Animal Science,  45: 191-203</ref> leading to a lowered trend in mortality as compared to non-cage systems. Cannibalism among flocks is highly variable and when it is not problematic, then mortalities among production systems are similar.<ref name="Appleby and Hughes, (1991)" />

Opponents of beak trimming state that the practice reduces problem pecking by minor amounts compared to the trauma, injury, and harm done to the entire flock by beak trimming. Several countries have banned the practice, including Denmark (2013), Finland (1986), Germany (2017),<ref name="niedr">{{Cite web |title=Ab 2017 bleibt der Schnabel jetzt bundesweit dran! |url=http://www.ml.niedersachsen.de/portal/live.php?navigation_id=1810&article_id=126928&_psmand=7 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150414042623/http://www.ml.niedersachsen.de/portal/live.php?navigation_id=1810&article_id=126928&_psmand=7 |archive-date=2015-04-14 |access-date=2016-02-24}}</ref> the Netherlands (2019),<ref name="Venhuizen" /> Norway (1974) and Sweden (1988); analysts expect other European countries such as the UK to follow in the near future.<ref name="Sandilands" /><ref name="Epp" /> Alternatives to beak trimming include enrichment or providing more space for the birds. 

== History ==

=== 20th century ===

Beak trimming was developed at the [[Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center|Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station]] in the 1930s.<ref name="Kennard, (1937)">Kennard, D.C. (1937). ''Chicken Vices''. 184. Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station. 22: 33-39.</ref> The original technique was temporary, cutting approximately 6&nbsp;mm (1/4 inch) off the beak. It was thought that the tip of the beak had no blood supply and presumably no sensation. The procedure was performed by hand with a sharp knife, either when deaths due to cannibalism became excessive, or when the problem was anticipated because of a history of cannibalism in the particular strain of chicken.{{Citation needed|date=May 2020}}

Cannibalism is a serious management problem dating back to the periods before intensive housing of poultry became popular. Poultry books written before [[corporate farming|vertical integration of the poultry industry]] describe the abnormal pecking of poultry:
<blockquote>
Chicks and adult birds' picking at each other until blood shows and then destroying one another by further picking is a source of great loss in many flocks, especially when kept in confinement .... The recommendation of the Ohio Experiment Station of cutting back the tip of the upper beak has been found to be effective until the beak grows out again.<ref name="Jull, (1938)">Jull, M.A., (1938). ''Poultry Husbandry'', 2nd Edition. McGraw Hill, New York., page 346.</ref>
</blockquote>

Cannibalism has two peaks in the life of a chicken; during the brooding period and at the onset of egg laying. The point-of-lay cannibalism is generally the most damaging and gets most of the attention. The temporary beak trimming developed at the Ohio Experiment Station assumed that cannibalism was a phase, and that blunting the beak temporarily would be adequate.{{Citation needed|date=May 2020}}

=== 21st century ===

In the 21st century, the aim has been to develop more permanent beak trimming (although repeat trimming may be required), using electrically heated blades in a beak trimming machine, to provide a self-cauterizing cut. By 2012 there were four widely used methods of beak trimming: hot blade, cold blade (including [[scissors]] or [[secateurs]]), electrical (the Bio-beaker) and [[infrared]]. The latter two methods usually remove only the tip of the beak and do not leave an open wound; therefore they may offer improvements in welfare. Other approaches such as the use of lasers, freeze drying and chemical retardation have been investigated but are not in widespread use.<ref name="AVMA2010">{{cite web|url=https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/LiteratureReviews/Documents/beak_trimming_bgnd.pdf|title=AVMA Literature review on the welfare implications of beaktrimming|year=2010|author=AVMA|access-date=November 23, 2015}}</ref> The infrared method directs a strong source of heat into the inner tissue of the beak and after a few weeks, the tip of the upper and lower beak dies and drops off making the beak shorter with blunt tips. The Bio-beaker, which uses an electric current to burn a small hole in the upper beak, is the preferred method for trimming the beaks of turkeys.<ref name="Glatz, (2005)">Glatz, P.C., (2005). ''Poultry Welfare Issues: Beak Trimming.'' Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, United Kingdom.</ref> The Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) wrote regarding beak trimming of turkeys that cold cutting was the most accurate method, but that substantial re-growth of the beak occurred; although the Bio-beaker limited beak re-growth, it was less accurate. It was considered that the hot cut was the most distressing procedure for turkeys.<ref name="FAWC turkeys"/>

In the UK, beak trimming of layer hens normally occurs at 1-day of age at the same time as the chick is being sexed and vaccinated.{{Citation needed|date=May 2020}}

USA's [[United Egg Producers|UEP]] guidelines suggest that in egg laying strains of chickens, the length of the upper beak distal from the nostrils that remains following trimming, should be 2 to 3&nbsp;mm.<ref>United Egg Producers Animal Husbandry Guidelines for U.S. Egg Laying Flocks, 2008</ref> In the UK, the [[Farm Animal Welfare Council]] stated: "The accepted procedure is to remove not more than one third of the upper and lower beaks or not more than one third of the upper beak only" but went on to recommend: "Where beak trimming is carried out, it should, wherever possible, be restricted to beak tipping; that is the blunting of the beak to remove the sharp point which can be the cause of the most severe damage to other birds."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fawc.org.uk/pdf/beak-trimming.pdf|title=FAWC opinion on beak trimming, 2007|access-date=11 November 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110927031123/http://www.fawc.org.uk/pdf/beak-trimming.pdf|archive-date=27 September 2011|url-status=dead}}</ref>

== Legislation ==

[[File:Beak trimming laws world map.svg|400px|thumb|Laws regarding beak trimming around the world:
{{Legend|#0000FF|Nationwide ban on beak trimming}}
{{Legend|#800080|Some subnational bans on beak trimming}}
{{Legend|#FF0000|Beak trimming legal}}
{{Legend|#CCCCCC|No data}}]]

There is a trend towards prohibition of beak trimming in Europe over the course of decades. Analysts expect the practice to be gradually banned across the continent.<ref name="Sandilands">{{Cite book |last1=Sandilands |first1=Victoria |last2=Hocking |first2=Paul M. |date=2012 |title=Alternative Systems for Poultry: Health, Welfare and Productivity |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=unpjbBV9ErAC&pg=PA213 |location=London |publisher=CABI |page=213 |isbn=9781845938246 |access-date=19 May 2020}}</ref><ref name="Epp">{{Cite news |url=https://www.canadianpoultrymag.com/beak-trimming-trends-30945/ |title=Beak trimming trends |author=Melanie Epp |work=Canadian Poultry Magazine |date=5 April 2019 |access-date=19 May 2020}}</ref> 

[[European Union law|EU law]] allows member states to debeak poultry according to two regulations: Directive 1999/74/EC for laying hens allows beak trimming, while Directive 2007/43/EC for broilers permits beak trimming only in certain cases.<ref name="Epp"/> As of April 2019, 80% of laying hens in the EU were estimated to be beak-trimmed.<ref name="Epp"/>

{| class="sortable wikitable"
! Country
! Legal?
! Since
! ! class="unsortable"| Notes
|-
| {{flag|Australia}} || {{partial}} ||  || Illegal in [[Australian Capital Territory|ACT]]; [[Victoria (Australia)|Vic]] and [[New South Wales|NSW]] considering a ban<ref name="Vic"/><ref name="NSW"/>
|-
| {{flag|Austria}} || {{no}} || 2000 ||<ref name="Laravoire"/>
|-
| {{flag|Belgium}} || {{yes}} || – || Regulated, considering a ban<ref name="Sandilands"/>
|-
| {{flag|Canada}} || {{yes}} || – || Regulated<ref name="NFACC"/>
|-
| {{flag|China}} || {{yes}} || – || Unregulated<ref name="VoA China"/>
|-
| {{flag|Denmark}} || {{no}} || 2013–4<ref name="Laravoire"/> ||
|-
| {{flag|Finland}} || {{no}} || 1986<ref name="Laravoire"/> ||
|-
| {{flag|France}} || {{yes}} || – || Regulated<ref name="Legifrance"/>
|- 
| {{flag|Germany}} || {{no}} || 2017<ref name="niedr"/> ||
|-
| {{flag|Luxembourg}} || {{yes}} || – || Regulated, considering a ban<ref name="Sandilands"/>
|-
| {{flag|Netherlands}} || {{no}} || 2019<ref name="Venhuizen"/> || Banned since 1 January 2019.<ref name="Venhuizen"/>
|-
| {{flag|New Zealand}} || {{yes}} || – || Regulated<ref name="Layer Hens Code of Welfare"/>{{rp|24}}
|-
| {{flag|Norway}} || {{no}} || 1974<ref name="Laravoire"/> ||
|-
| {{flag|Sweden}} || {{no}} || 1988<ref name="Laravoire"/> ||
|-
| {{flag|Switzerland}} || {{yes}} || – || Regulated, considering a ban<ref name="Sandilands"/>
|-
| {{flag|United Kingdom}} || {{yes}} || – || Regulated, considering a ban<ref name="Sandilands"/><ref name="Epp"/><ref name="Laravoire"/>
|-
| {{flag|United States}} || {{yes}} || – || Regulated<ref name="Philpott"/>
|}

=== Australia ===
As of July 2019, beak trimming is only banned in the [[Australian Capital Territory]] by means of the Animal Welfare Act 1992 (ACT) s 9C.<ref name="2019 Voiceless report">{{Cite web |url=https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/submissions/64094/0384%20Voiceless%20-%20the%20animal%20protection%20institute%20ORIGINAL.pdf |title=Inquiry into use of battery cages for hens in the egg production industry |work=Submission No 384 to the Parliament of New South Wales |publisher=[[Parliament of New South Wales]] |date=22 July 2019 |access-date=19 May 2020}}</ref> It is currently debated in parliament whether debeaking should be banned in [[Victoria (Australia)|Victoria]] and [[New South Wales]].<ref name="Vic">{{cite web|title=Animal law in the spotlight: Victoria's factory farming bill|url=https://www.voiceless.org.au/content/animal-law-spotlight-victorias-factory-farming-bill|access-date=2015-08-09|archive-date=2019-03-31|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190331090657/https://www.voiceless.org.au/content/animal-law-spotlight-victorias-factory-farming-bill|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name="NSW">{{cite web|title=Animal law in the spotlight: NSW battery hen bill|url=https://www.voiceless.org.au/content/animal-law-spotlight-nsw-battery-hen-bill|access-date=2015-08-09|archive-date=2019-03-28|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190328135002/https://www.voiceless.org.au/content/animal-law-spotlight-nsw-battery-hen-bill|url-status=dead}}</ref> A 2019 [[Voiceless (animal rights group)|Voiceless]] report recommended the [[Parliament of New South Wales|NSW Parliament]] to prohibit debeaking and instead '[introduce] enriched environmental conditions, such as litter and suitable range areas [to] encourage interaction and mental stimulation for hens. Better nutrition, lighting and parasite management may also help reduce injurious pecking.'<ref name="2019 Voiceless report"/> In a 2015 survey conducted by the [[Humane Society International Australia]], 91% of respondents stated that free range egg boxes should display whether the hens had undergone beak trimming.<ref>Humane Society International, Submission to the Australian Treasury, ''Inquiry into Free Range Egg Labelling'', 29 October 2015, 6.</ref>

=== Canada ===
Beak trimming is legal but regulated in Canada. The National Farm Animal Care Council's 2016 Poultry Code of Practice urges to 'make every effort to manage breeders so that physical alterations, such as beak trimming, are not necessary'; should it prove necessary, however, infrared treatment is recommended over hot blade treatment.<ref name="NFACC">{{Cite web |url=https://www.nfacc.ca/poultry-code-of-practice |title=Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Hatching Eggs, Breeders, Chicken and Turkeys |publisher=National Farm Animal Care Council |date=2016 |access-date=19 May 2020}}</ref>

=== China ===
There are no regulations on beak trimming in the [[China|People's Republic of China]]. Some companies have decided to voluntarily phase out debeaking, such as Ningxia Xiaoming Farming and Animal Husbandry Co. Ltd.<ref name="VoA China">{{Cite news |url=https://www.voanews.com/east-asia-pacific/how-chinas-chickens-are-going-lay-billion-eggs-day |title=How China's Chickens are Going to Lay a Billion Eggs a Day |work=[[Voice of America]] |date=9 July 2018 |access-date=19 May 2020}}</ref> 

=== France ===
In France, clipping beaks of poultry chickens is authorised only when it preserves the health and wellbeing of animals, meaning to limit the risks of cannibalism and pecking.<ref name="Legifrance">{{Cite web|title=Arrêté du 1er février 2002 établissant les normes minimales relatives à la protection des poules pondeuses |publisher=Legifrance |url=https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/eli/arrete/2002/2/1/AGRG0200019A/jo/texte |website=www.legifrance.gouv.fr|access-date=24 April 2019|language=fr}}</ref> It is only authorised on chicks less than 10 days old intended for laying eggs and must be carried out by qualified personnel. It can therefore be carried out by breeders and agricultural workers.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Arrêté du 5 octobre 2011 fixant la liste des actes de médecine ou de chirurgie des animaux que peuvent réaliser certaines personnes n'ayant pas la qualité de vétérinaire|url=https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do;jsessionid=2C3C361BFCAF194BFBDA2FCA09BBC3FF.tplgfr28s_1?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000024642908&dateTexte=&oldAction=rechJO&categorieLien=id&idJO=JORFCONT000024642502|access-date=24 April 2019|language=fr}}</ref>

=== Germany ===
Agriculture Minister [[Christian Meyer (politician)|Christian Meyer]] announced that Germany would phase out beak trimming by 2017 due to animal welfare concerns.<ref name="niedr"/>

=== Netherlands ===
A ban on beak trimming in the Netherlands was first announced in 1996, but due to objections from the poultry sector it was delayed for years.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nieuws/nederland/artikel/2564596/als-kippen-bloed-zien-worden-ze-gek |title='Als kippen bloed zien, worden ze gek' |work=[[RTL Nieuws]] |date=9 June 2013 |access-date=19 May 2020 |language=nl}}</ref> In June 2013, the government struck an agreement between poultry farmers and animal welfare groups to phase out debeaking and prohibit it in 2018.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://nos.nl/artikel/515936-knippen-kipsnavel-in-2018-verboden.html |title=Knippen kipsnavel in 2018 verboden |work=[[Nederlandse Omroep Stichting|NOS]] |date=9 June 2013 |access-date=19 May 2020 |language=nl}}</ref> The prohibition on trimming eventually went into effect on 1 January 2019.<ref name="Venhuizen">{{Cite news |url=https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2018/12/07/hoe-gevoelig-is-de-snavel-van-een-vogel-a3059866 |title=Hoe gevoelig is de snavel van een vogel? |author=Gemma Venhuizen |work=[[NRC Handelsblad]] |date=7 December 2018 |access-date=18 May 2020 |language=nl}}</ref> 

=== New Zealand ===
Beak trimming, officially known as 'beak tipping' in law, is legal but regulated in New Zealand. The Layer Hens Code of Welfare (last updated 1 October 2018) notes that the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) "encourages the industry to develop management systems to protect against all forms of injurious pecking without the need for beak tipping". The Code recommends that "[a]lternative strategies for managing injurious (feather) pecking that minimise the need for beak tipping should be employed e.g. use and availability of different foraging resources." In case that beak tipping is deemed necessary, however, it requires competent trained operators, must be carried out within 3 days of hatching (except in emergencies under veterinary supervision) and may not remove more than one-quarter of the upper or lower beaks.<ref name="Layer Hens Code of Welfare">{{Cite web |url=https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/1438/direct |title=Layer Hens Code of Welfare |work=[[Ministry for Primary Industries (New Zealand)|Ministry for Primary Industries]] website |publisher=New Zealand Government |date=1 October 2018 |access-date=19 May 2020 |archive-date=18 February 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210218131355/https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/1438/direct |url-status=dead }}</ref>{{rp|24}}

=== Nordic countries ===
Norway was the first country in the world to outlaw beak trimming in 1974, followed by Finland in 1986 and Sweden in 1988.<ref name="Laravoire">{{Cite web |url=http://www.barnhealth.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/BeakTrimming_status.pdf |title=Status of beak trimming in EU |author=Anaëlle Laravoire |work=Danish Poultry Congress 2016 |publisher=Barn Health |date=2016 |access-date=18 May 2020 |archive-date=3 May 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190503131035/http://www.barnhealth.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/BeakTrimming_status.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref>{{rp|3}} Beak trimming was subsequently phased out in Denmark in two stages: in 2013 for the enriched cage system and in 2014 for aviary and free range systems.<ref name="Laravoire"/>{{rp|21}}

=== Switzerland ===
Beak trimming in Switzerland is legal but regulated; it is expected that the practice will be prohibited in the near future.<ref name="Sandilands"/> Although the use of cages for layer hens was prohibited in 1992, by 2000 still 59% of flocks (61% of hens) was still debeaked.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Grandin |first=Temple |date=2015 |title=Improving Animal Welfare, 2nd Edition: A Practical Approach |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=fzc7CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA118 |location=London |publisher=CABI |page=118 |isbn=9781780644677 |access-date=19 May 2020}}</ref>

=== United Kingdom ===
Beak trimming is legal but regulated in the UK; it is expected that the practice will be prohibited in the near future.<ref name="Sandilands"/><ref name="Epp"/> In 2011, the British government set up the Beak Trimming Action Group (BTAG) to review the matter with representatives from different stakeholders, including the industry, the government, animal welfare groups and veterinarians. A late 2015 BTAG report endorsed by [[Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs|Farming Minister]] [[George Eustice]] concluded that banning it in January 2016 would be too early as the sector needed more time to change its management techniques in order to avoid feather pecking, but that beak trimming should be phased out in the future.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://thepoultrysite.com/news/2015/11/uk-government-rejects-2016-beak-trimming-ban |title=UK Government Rejects 2016 Beak Trimming Ban |author=Alice Mitchell |work=The Poulty Site |date=26 November 2015 |access-date=19 May 2020}}</ref> Laying Hen Welfare Forum chairman Andrew Joret stated in March 2020: 'A ban is coming. In my opinion, we have five years at most to prepare for this. We need to work out ways of keeping birds well-feathered, and if we can, eventually do that without beak trimming.'<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.fwi.co.uk/livestock/poultry/layers/8-management-tips-to-help-prevent-severe-feather-pecking |title=8 management tips to help prevent severe feather pecking |author=Debbie James |work=[[Farmers Weekly]] |publisher=Mark Allen Group |date=28 March 2020 |access-date=19 May 2020}}</ref>

=== United States ===
Beak trimming is legal in the United States, but there are some regulations: producers need to have a beak-trimming policy, it may not be employed to improve feed efficiency, but may be used to prevent cannibalism.<ref name="Philpott">{{Cite news |url=https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/09/butterball-goes-humane-thanksgiving-really/ |title=Butterball Goes "Humane" for Thanksgiving. Really? |author=Tom Philpott |work=[[Mother Jones (magazine)|Mother Jones]] |date=27 September 2014 |access-date=19 May 2020}}</ref> [[Humane Society of the United States|Humane Society]] vice president Paul Shapiro claimed that birds only resort to cannibalism when they are confined and have nothing to do.<ref name="Philpott"/>

== Welfare implications ==
Beak trimming can cause acute stress, and possibly chronic [[pain]] following the trimming. A bird's ability to consume food is impaired following beak trimming because of the new beak shape and pain. Most studies report reduced body weights and feed intake following beak trimming; however, by sexual maturity or peak egg production, growth rates are usually normal.<ref name="Hester and Shea-Moore, (2003)">Hester, P.Y. and Shea-Moore, M., (2003). Beak trimming egg-laying strains of chickens. World’s Poultry Science Journal, 59: 458-474</ref><ref name="Gustafson et al., (2007)" /><ref name="Lagana et al., (2011)" /> Weight losses were reduced in chicks that were beak trimmed by infrared compared with chicks trimmed by a hot-blade.<ref name="Marchant-Forde and Cheng, (2011)">Marchant-Forde, R.M. and Cheng, H.W., (2011). Different effects of infrared and one-half hot blade beak trimming on beak topography and growth.  Poultry Science, 89: 2559-2564. {{doi|10.3382/ps.2010-00890}}</ref>{{Multiple image
| direction = horizontal
| align = top
| header = [[White Leghorn]] pullets showing the results of beak trimming
| width1 = 200
| image1 = White Leghorn-untrimmed beak.jpg
| caption1 = Non-beak trimmed
| width2 = 207
| image2 = White Leghorn trimmed beak.jpg
| caption2 = Beak trimmed
}} 
Pain caused by beak trimming depends on the age it is performed, the method of trimming and the length of beak that is removed.<ref>{{Cite news |author=Zoe Williams |date=9 March 2020 |title=Beak-trimming and brutality: is it time to stop buying brown eggs? |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/shortcuts/2020/mar/09/beak-trimming-and-brutality-is-it-time-to-stop-buying-brown-eggs |access-date=19 May 2020 |work=The Guardian}}</ref> Beak trimming in the poultry industry usually occurs without [[anaesthetic]] at 1-day of age or when the chicks are very young, but can occur at a later age if an outbreak of feather pecking occurs, and in some cases, birds may be beak trimmed on repeated occasions. Beak trimming is not permitted in the UK on meat chickens that are aged over 10 days.<ref>{{cite web|last=Defra|title=Guidance on keeping of Chickens|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69382/pb13545-meat-chickens.pdf}}</ref>

=== Acute pain ===
The beak is a complex, functional organ with an extensive nervous supply including [[nociceptors]] that sense pain and noxious stimuli.<ref name="Breward, (1984)">Breward, J., (1984).  Cutaneous nociceptors in the chicken beak. Proceedings of the Journal of Physiology, London 346: 56</ref><ref name="Gentle, (1992)">Gentle, M.J., (1992). Pain in birds. Animal Welfare, 1: 235-247</ref> These would almost certainly be stimulated during beak trimming, indicating strongly that acute pain would be experienced. Behavioural evidence of pain after beak trimming in layer hen chicks has been based on the observed reduction in pecking behavior, reduced activity and social behavior, and increased sleep duration.<ref name="Gentle et al., (1982)">Gentle M.J., Hughes B.O. and Hubrecht R.C., (1982). The effect of beak-trimming on food-intake, feeding behaviour and body weight in adult hens. Applied Animal Ethology, 8: 147–157</ref><ref name="Duncan et al., (1989)">Duncan I.J.H., Slee G.S., Seawright E. and Breward J., (1989). Behavioural consequences of partial beak amputation (beak trimming) in poultry. British Poultry Science, 30: 479–488</ref><ref name="Gentle et al., (1991)">Gentle M.J., Hunter L.N. and Waddington D., (1991). The onset of pain related behaviours following partial beak amputation in the chicken. Neuroscience Letters, 128: 113–116</ref><ref name ="Gentle et al., (1997)">Gentle, M.J., Hughes, B.O., Fox, A. and Waddington, D., (1997). Behavioural and anatomical consequences of two beak trimming methods in 1- and 10-d-old domestic chicks. British Poultry Science, 38: 453-463</ref>

In [[Japanese quail]], beak-trimming by cauterization caused lower body weights and feed intake in the period just after beak trimming.<ref name="Lagana et al., (2011)">Lagana, C., Pizzolante, C.C., Togashi, C.K., Kakimoto, S.K., Saldanha, E.S.P.B. and Alvares, V., (2011).  Beak trimming method and drinking system and their effect on the performance and egg quality of Japanese quails. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia-Brazilian Journal of Animal Science, 40: 1217-1221</ref> Beak trimmed [[Muscovy duck]]s spent less time engaging in beak-related behaviours (preening, feeding, drinking, exploratory pecking) and more time resting than non-trimmed ducks in the days immediately post-trim. These differences disappeared by 1 week post-trim. At 1 week post-trim the trimmed ducks weighed less than non-trimmed ducks, but this difference disappeared by 2 weeks post-trim.<ref name="Gustafson et al., (2007)">Gustafson, L.A., Cheng, H.W., Garner, J.P., Pajor, E.A. and Mench, J.A., (2007). Effects of bill-trimming Muscovy ducks on behavior, body weight gain, and bill morphopathology.  Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 103: 59-74</ref> It is, however, unclear if the above changes in behaviour arise from pain or from a loss of sensitivity in the beak.<ref name="Hughes and Gentle, (1995)">Hughes, B.O. and Gentle, M.J., (1995). Beak trimming in poultry: Its implications for welfare. World’s Poultry Science Journal, 51: 51–61</ref>

Pecking force has been found to decrease after beak trimming in adult hens,<ref name="Freire et al., (2008)">Freire, R., Glatz, P. and Hinch, G., (2008). Self-administration of an analgesic does not alleviate pain in beak trimmed chickens. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science, 21: 443–448</ref> possibly indicating that hens are protecting a painful area from further stimulation. However, pecking force did not differ between chicks with or without minor beak-trims at 2 to 9 days of age, suggesting that chicks with minor beak-trims do not experience pain from the beak.<ref name="Friere et al., (2011)">Freire, R., Eastwood, M.A. and Joyce, M., (2011).  Minor beak trimming in chickens leads to loss of mechanoreception and magnetoreception.  Journal Animal Science, 89: 1201-1206</ref>

=== Chronic pain ===
Severe beak trimming or beak trimming birds at an older age is thought to cause chronic pain. Following beak trimming of older or adult hens, the nociceptors in the beak stump show abnormal patterns of neural discharge, which indicate acute pain.<ref name="Breward, (1984)" /><ref name="Breward, (1985)">Breward, J., (1985). ''An Electrophysiological Investigation of the Effects of Beak Trimming in the Domestic Fowl (''Gallus gallus domesticus'')''. Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh.</ref><ref name="Gentle, (1986)">Gentle, M.J., (1986).  Beak trimming in poultry. World’s Poultry Science Journal', 42: 268-275</ref><ref name="Breward and Gentle, (1985)">Breward, L. and Gentle, M.J., (1985). Neuroma formation and abnormal afferent nerve discharges after partial break amputation (beak trimming) in poultry.  Experientia, 41: 1132-1134. {{doi|10.1007/BF01951693}}</ref> [[Neuromas]], tangled masses of swollen regenerating axon sprouts,<ref name="Devor and Rappaport, (1990)">Devor, M. and Rappaport, Z.H., (1990). ''Pain Syndromes in Neurology''., edited by H.L. Fields, Butterworths, London, p.&nbsp;47.</ref> are found in the healed stumps of birds beak trimmed at 5 weeks of age or older and in severely beak trimmed birds.<ref name="Lunam et al., (1996)">Lunam, C.A., Glatz, P.C. and Hsu, Y-J., (1996). The absence of neuromas in beaks of adult hens after conservative trimming at hatch. Australian Veterinary Journal, 74: 46-49</ref> Neuromas have been associated with [[phantom pain]] in human amputees and have therefore been linked to chronic pain in beak trimmed birds. If beak trimming is severe because of improper procedure or done in older birds, the neuromas will persist which suggests that beak trimmed older birds experience [[chronic pain]], although this has been debated.<ref name="Kuenzel, (2007)">Kuenzel, W.J. (2001).  Neurobiological basis of sensory perception: welfare implications of beak trimming. Poultry Science, 86: 1273-1282</ref>

=== Benefits ===
{{Main|Feather pecking}}
The benefits of beak trimming are mainly welfare advantages for birds kept in close confinement, some of which directly relate to increases (or reduced decreases) in production. These include reduced feather pecking and cannibalism, better feathering (though they find it hard to preen with shortened beaks, which means they are not cleaning themselves well), less fearfulness and nervousness, less chronic stress, and decreased mortality.<ref name="Hester and Shea-Moore, (2003)" /><ref name="Lambton et al., (2010)">Lambton, S.L., Knowles, T.G., Yorke, C. and Nicol, C.J., (2010).  The risk factors affecting the development of gentle and severe feather pecking in loose housed laying hens.  Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 123: 32–42</ref>

== Alternatives ==
A range of options have been proposed as possible alternatives to beak trimming including modifying the genetics of domesticated poultry to reduce cannibalistic tendencies. For confined housing where light control is possible, lowering light intensity so that birds cannot see each other as easily reduces antagonistic encounters and aggressive behaviour. Enrichment devices, introduced at an early age, such as simple objects hung in a habitat, can reduce aggressive behavior. Dividing the population into smaller group sizes reduces cannibalism. Proper body [[weight management]] that avoids underweight pullets reduces the probability of underweight pullets with uterine prolapse that leads to [[Vent pecking|cloacal cannibalism]].<ref name="Glatz, (2005)" />

== See also ==
* [[Livestock dehorning]]
* [[Overview of discretionary invasive procedures on animals]]
*[[Veterinary ethics]]

== References ==

{{reflist}}

{{Commons category}}

{{Chicken}}
[[Category:Cruelty to animals]]
[[Category:Ethically disputed business practices towards animals]]
[[Category:Poultry farming]]