Jump to content

Beak trimming

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 207.38.214.63 (talk) at 18:12, 8 January 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Debeaking, also known as "beak trimming" is a process by which parts of the beak of a chicken, turkey or duck are removed, usually by removing the top half and the bottom 1/3 of the beak. Everything else in this article is ridiculously slanted.

Debeaking takes place as a welfare measure to reduce excessive feather pecking and cannibalism in a stressed bird population. Where advocated, it is as a last resort where alternatives are considered not to be possible or appropriate. For example, Dr Phillip C. Glatz made a study from 2000 called Review of Beak Trimming Methods for the Australian Rural Industries Research & Development Corporation government branch and highly emphasized the advantages of debeaking as a measure to control the problems that stress would otherwise cause.

Controversy over debeaking tends to focus around the question of whether and to what extent such intrusive methods are necessary, and whether environmental measures alone will realistically prevent the problems caused by stress in birds.

Reasons for stress

Chickens in particular can peck for many reasons. They can be too hot, too crowded, not have enough fresh air, not have enough space around the water and feeder, or an insufficiently enriched environment or they can be establishing the leadership of the flock.

Pain of debeaking

The pain is comparable to having a human fingernail removed by the quick of the nail; it is acute, yet brief and after a few minutes the bird behaves normally. It is essentially an amputation and carries many of the same symptoms that happen in human amputations. No amputation is 100% successful and chronic pain can occur as well as phantom pains.

Neuromas can occur if the procedure is not done correctly; the temperature of the blade, the angle of the cut and the age of the bird especially, are all factors in a successful debeaking. Research from 1996 showed that micro-neuromas were present in all beaks of a moderately trimmed population after 10 weeks, but after 70 weeks all neuromas had disappeared. After several weeks the nerve fibers of the beak simply regrow and the neuroma regresses. These neuromas had been assumed to indicate chronic pain in early studies, but the fact that these neuromas resolve over time means that the pain is not chronic (by definition).

Best practice

Where debeaking of chickens takes place, it is recommended that it is done when they are between 1-10 days old, although this age range may vary with other birds. There is some indication from a study done in 1997 that trimmed birds lay larger eggs with more mass and do so at an increased rate, but consume more food. The study warns that despite these apparent advantages, debeaking should be performed with caution and careful consideration of the consequences. Debeaking birds older than this can result in complications and non-permanent trimming so the birds will have to be re-trimmed.

A robotic debeaking machine was developed in France that could also do vaccination, but it was largely unsuccessful due to the variation in weight and size of the birds.

There are many ways to debeak: chemical, hot, cold, laser, soldering, gas, electric, and freeze drying.

Cauterising time is also a factor to consider and this depends on the age of the bird.

Alternatives to debeaking

A range of options have been proposed as possible alternatives to debeaking. Some of these generate significant controversy themselves:

  • Implanting hormones.
  • Blind chickens. Hereditary blindness from an autosomal recessive gene causes chickens to be full feathered, produce more eggs and eat less. This method is far superior to any other method of controlling feather picking.
  • The fitting of 'bits' (a plastic ring that attaches in the nostrils and circles through the beak) to deter pecking by making it painful.
  • The fitting of 'spectacles' to reduce each bird's field of vision much like blinders.
  • Enrichment devices. Introduced at an early age, simple objects hung in a habitat can reduce aggressive behavior.

Others are less contentious, but carry cost implications which deter some owners:

  • Dividing the population into smaller groups, and/or removing some of the males.
  • Changing light intensity, because reducing light also reduces social interaction.
  • Adding straw, grain and whey blocks to direct pecking desires away from flockmates and onto food instead. Fresh grass clippings, weeds and lettuce may also work.
  • Anti-pick compounds. Grease, anti-pick, or pine tar applied to wounded areas.
  • Selective breeding, choosing birds with lower tendency to peck.

In contrast, rearing under red light has little direct evidence to be effective. (Fairfull and Gowe, 1987)

Animal activist version of debeaking

The following section is what is most frequently cited on websites that are against animal cruelty. It is used by many animal rights groups including the Animal Liberation Front, United Poultry Concerns & PETA and is even prevalent as the entry on debeaking on many other online encyclopedic websites and dictionaries.

Studies claiming chronic pain in birds from debeaking are generally from 1992 and earlier. Later studies have concluded that the initial pain is brief and that the chronic problems have not been studied thoroughly. The neuromas relating to the pain have been found to go away after 10 weeks or more.

There are still cruel alternatives to debeaking such as using plastic prongs to prevent the beak from closing entirely. These are inserted into the sinuses of the bird and if aimed improperly they enter the brain and the bird dies instantly. This method is illegal in many countries.

Despite the 'several scientific studies' in the following section, all the references are from a 1991 study by Dr. Michael C. Appleby of the Edinburgh University, and as described above in the 2000 study, most of the issues (especially the pain aspect of it) have been studied more carefully now.

The 1991 study does not mention any form of depression either.

This procedure is sometimes used on large farms, usually battery farms, to prevent cannibalism amongst the chickens or turkeys, which results from excessively crowded confinement. Advocates of the process argue that the side effects of debeaking should be considered collateral damage, since they consider it necessary for mass production of meat. It is sometimes compared to the trimming of human fingernails, although clipping fingernails does not result in the damage of tissue or nerves, as debeaking does. Debeaking is almost always done without any form of pain relief. The end of the beak is sliced off with a red hot blade, and the process reduces the ability of the chickens to eat, drink, or preen. Several scientific studies, including a study in 1991 conducted by Dr. Michael C. Appleby, indicated that the beak is sensitive, and that much pain results from the process of debeaking. When the beak heals, tumors are often formed. Chickens who undergo debeaking show symptoms of chronic pain and depression, according to some behavioral studies.

Conscientious consumers often avoid supporting farms that practice debeaking. The animal rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has had great success in convincing restaurants such as Burger King to utilize suppliers who do not follow the practices of debeaking or forced molting.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Beak_trimming&oldid=99364472"