Chicken farming is not geared towards the needs of the animals, who suffer from it on a daily basis.
The chicken industry in Germany breeds two different types of chickens, each of which is specifically defined for its area of use. For egg production, chickens are bred to lay many eggs. Fast-growing, heavy chickens are produced for the production of their meat.
This separation in chicken farming is the result of years of intensification and “specialization”. The animals have been subjected to drastic breeding programs in which the focus is on “performance”: either extremely fast and extreme muscle growth or high laying performance. This extreme breeding leads to pain, suffering, damage and behavioral disorders and is therefore also referred to as overbreeding. The negative effects can be seen in the health, behavior and emotions of the animals.
The conditions under which the birds have to live and ultimately die are designed to generate maximum profit. In 2023, over 630 million “broilers” and almost 30 million “laying hens” were slaughtered in Germany (1).
The article provides an overview of relevant issues in farming, including beak trimming, overbreeding and the use of antibiotics, as well as the transportation and slaughter of chickens and their effects on the animals.
Almost 50,000 farms in Germany keep chickens, 5.2 percent of which work according to organic standards (2). The farms house almost 160 million chickens, of which 54.5 million are “laying hens” and 92.5 million are so-called broilers (3).
However, the animal numbers in chicken fattening are only a snapshot in time. As the animals are transported away for slaughter after just a few weeks, a farm goes through several production cycles per year. The number of animals kept in this country each year is therefore significantly higher than the data collected during a specific reference month. The number of chickens kept can be better understood by the number of animals slaughtered.
In 2023, over 630 million “broiler chickens” were slaughtered in Germany. In the same year, almost 30 million “laying hens” were also slaughtered. The total number of chickens slaughtered in Germany is 660.6 million per year (4).
A look at farm sizes shows that chicken farming is no longer in the hands of small-scale farmers. Most “laying hens” live on farms with between 10,000 and 30,000 hens (5).
Even larger operations are common in chicken fattening. The majority of chickens here live on farms with more than 50,000 animals (6).
In Germany, floor housing is common in “broiler” husbandry (7). “Laying hens” are also most frequently kept in barn systems (1,234 farms), followed by free-range systems (814 farms) and furnished cage systems (67 farms) (8).
(1) Federal Statistical Office of Germany (Destatis) (2023). Geflügelstatistik: Erh. in Geflügelschlachtereien. Geflügelschlachtereien, Geschlachtete Tiere, Schlachtmenge: Deutschland, Jahre, Geflügelart. status of: 26.11.2024.
(2) Table 0201.1 + 0201.2 in Federal Statistical Office of Germany (Destatis) (2021). Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Fischerei. Viehhaltung der Betriebe. Landwirtschaftszählung. Fachserie 3 Reihe 2.1.3.
(3) Table 0206.1 in Federal Statistical Office of Germany (Destatis) (2021). Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Fischerei. Viehhaltung der Betriebe. Landwirtschaftszählung. Fachserie 3 Reihe 2.1.3.
(4) Federal Statistical Office of Germany (Destatis) (2023). Geflügelstatistik: Erh. in Geflügelschlachtereien. Geflügelschlachtereien, Geschlachtete Tiere, Schlachtmenge: Deutschland, Jahre, Geflügelart. status of: 26.11.2024.
(5) Federal Statistical Office of Germany (Destatis) (2023). Betriebe mit Legehennenhaltung, Erzeugte Eier, Legeleistung: Deutschland, Jahre, Haltungsformen, Größenklassen der Hennenhaltungsplätze. status of: 10.08.2023.
(6) Federal Statistical Office of Germany (Destatis) (2021). Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Fischerei. Viehhaltung der Betriebe. Landwirtschaftszählung. Fachserie 3 Reihe 2.1.3.
(7) Thobe, P., Chibanda, C., Almadani, M. I. & Koch, S. (2022). Steckbriefe zur Tierhaltung in Deutschland: Mastgeflügel. Braunschweig: Thünen-Institut für Betriebswirtschaft.
(8) Federal Statistical Office of Germany (Destatis) (2023). Betriebe mit Legehennenhaltung, Erzeugte Eier, Legeleistung: Deutschland, Jahre, Haltungsformen, Größenklassen der Hennenhaltungsplätze. status of: 10.08.2023.
Life in agricultural animal husbandry is very different from life under near-natural conditions. In contrast to animal husbandry, chickens here live in small, mixed-sex groups with conspecifics of different ages. Younger animals can learn from older ones how to find suitable food or suitable sand bathing material. This form of social learning, along with many other aspects, is impossible in factory farming. This is because only chickens of the same age live together in a barn. These husbandry conditions prevent the chickens from developing a species-typical social structure (9).
The chicks of the so-called laying lines are transported from the hatchery to the rearing farm on the very first day of their lives. Transportation over a long period of time is not uncommon (10), (11). After the rearing phase, which lasts around 17 to 18 weeks, shortly before the animals reach sexual maturity, they are transported again. From now on they live in a laying house (12). Here, the hens lay an egg almost every day for about a year (13). Compared to their ancestors, the bankiva-fowl, this number has increased twentyfold (14).
When their “laying performance” drops, they are no longer considered profitable for egg production. At around 16 months, they are transported away, killed in a slaughterhouse and sold as so-called spent hens (15), (16).
For chicken fattening, meat type chicks are transported to the future fattening farm after hatching in the hatchery. Here they spend only a few weeks until they are slaughtered while still young (17). The slaughter age differs depending on the fattening method. The fattening methods include short fattening, medium-length fattening, long fattening/heavy fattening and the splitting method (18):
The parent animals of “laying hens” and “broilers” are often pushed into the background of the debate. Figures on how many animals are kept for breeding and reproduction are not officially collected. This makes it difficult to track developments in chicken breeding, which is particularly problematic as animal welfare issues also arise in the breeding and parent stock management. To this day, there are no concrete husbandry guidelines.
The breeding forces an increased appetite and changes the hunger mechanisms and the feeling of satiety of the “broilers” so that they eat more food and therefore grow faster. This rapid growth is not desirable in the parent animals, which must also have this characteristic in order to pass it on to the future “broilers”. The reason for this is the negative impact on laying performance. In order for the parent birds to lay as many eggs as possible with future “broilers”, they are fed restrictively, i.e. only to a limited extent, and thus suffer from hunger throughout their lives (19).
There is no such contradiction with the parent animals of “laying hens”. Here it is desirable that the animals lay many eggs both for breeding purposes and in egg production (20).
(9) Ekesbo, I., & Gunnarsson, S. (2018). Farm animal behaviour: characteristics for assessment of health and welfare. CABI. p. 179-182.
(10) Helmer, F. L. (2017). Der Einfluss verschiedener Besatzdichten und Enrichmentmaßnahmen auf die Verhaltensentwicklung von Junghennen während der Haltung im Volierenblock. (Doctoral dissertation, LMU München). p. 23.
(11) Lohmann Tierzucht (2005). Managementempfehlungen zur Junghennenaufzucht. Merbitzer Geflügeltagung 2005. p. 5.
(12) Lohmann Tierzucht (2005). Managementempfehlungen zur Junghennenaufzucht. Merbitzer Geflügeltagung 2005. p. 1.
(13) Preisinger, R. (2017). Aktuelles zur Zucht von Legehennen und dem Zweinutzungshuhn. Veterinärmedizinische Fakultät der Universität Leipzig (Hg.): LBH, 9, 312-314. p. 312.
(14) Damme, D. K., & Hildebrand, R. A. (2015). Legehennenhaltung und Eierproduktion. Verlag Eugen Ulmer. p. 7
(15) Weiß, J., Pabst, W. & Granz, S. (2011). Tierproduktion: 14. Auflage. Enke Verlag. p. 483 f.
(16) Bundesinformationszentrum Landwirtschaft (2022, 27.01.). Wie lange leben Rind, Schwein, Schaf und Huhn?
(17) Weiß, J., Pabst, W. & Granz, S. (2011). Tierproduktion: 14. Auflage. Enke Verlag. p. 494.
(18) Thobe, P., Chibanda, C., Almadani, M. I. & Koch, S. (2022). Steckbriefe zur Tierhaltung in Deutschland: Mastgeflügel. Braunschweig: Thünen-Institut für Betriebswirtschaft.
(19) Bessei, W. (2014). Über den Einfluss der rationierten Fütterung auf das Wohlbefinden von Mastelterntieren-Eine Literaturstudie. European Poultry Science/Archiv für Geflügelkunde, 78. p. 14 ff.
(20) Brade, F., Flachowsky, G. & Schrader, L. (2008). Legehuhnzucht und Eiererzeugung Empfehlungen für die Praxis, Landbauforschung, Agriculture and Forest, Sonderheft 322.
The general requirements of the German Animal Welfare Act apply to all chickens. Despite the established responsibility of humans for the animals, the very first paragraph allows their welfare and interests to be curtailed. Undefined “reasonable” reasons legitimize pain, suffering and harm (21).
The German Animal Welfare-Farm Animal Husbandry Ordinance specifies the minimum requirements for the keeping of “laying hens” and “broilers” (22). These are inadequate from an animal welfare perspective and disregard essential aspects of welfare.
There are no detailed guidelines on the keeping of parent animals at either European or federal level (23). A draft ordinance on binding husbandry requirements for parent animals has been available since 2016 (24).
(21) § 1 German Animal Welfare Act in the version published on May 18, 2006 last modified on December 20, 2022.
(22) Sections 3 and 4 German Animal Welfare-Farm Animal Husbandry Ordinance in the version published on August 22, 2006, last modified on January 29, 2021.
(23) Brandes, A., Giersberg, M. F., Kemper, N., & Spindler, B. (2017). Gegenwärtiger Einsatz von Sitzstangen in der Masthühnerelterntierhaltung sowie deren Eignung hinsichtlich Nutzung und Tiergesundheit (Status quo Erhebung). Institut für Tierhygiene, Tierschutz und Nutztierethologie (ITTN), Stiftung Tierärztliche Hochschule Hannover. Download here: https://www.ml.niedersachsen.de/startseite/themen/tiergesundheit_tierschutz/tierschutzplan_niedersachsen_2011_2018/masthuhner/masthuehner-110606.html.
(24) Bundesrat (2016). Verordnungsentwurf des Bundesrates. Entwurf einer … Verordnung zur Änderung der Tierschutz-Nutztierhaltungsverordnung. 04.11.2016. Drucksache 403/16.
Hens in the egg industry live in different housing systems:
● Furnished cages
● Floor housing
● Aviary housing
● Free range
● Organic farming
Despite the ban on battery cages, cage farming for “laying hens” has not ended (25). The German Animal Welfare-Farm Animal Husbandry Ordinance still allows farmers to keep hens in furnished cages until 2025 (26). In battery cages, the hens lived in a very small area and without any structure or material to keep them occupied (27). However, the furnished cages, in which groups of up to 60 birds live, also have bars and little space (28), (29). The hens cannot (sufficiently) fulfill their basic needs, such as resting, scratching and personal hygiene (30).
Floor rearing is the most widespread method of egg production (31). It is characterized by large barns in which up to 6,000 “laying hens” live without separation from each other (32). If the groups of animals are separated from each other by wire mesh, for example, even more hens can be kept in one barn. In floor housing, the animals live without or only in an insufficiently structured environment. There are hardly any opportunities for activity. The “laying hens” only find perches, nests and dust baths in the barns. External environmental stimuli and other elements for exploring and hiding are almost completely absent (33).
Housing in aviaries is a variation of the floor housing. The barn is basically similar to floor housing. Additional racks with several levels, which resemble shelves, offer the animals elevated places to fly to and rest. However, it also represents an opportunity for farms to increase the number of animals per square meter of barn space (34).
Free-range systems provide more environmental stimuli, but are relatively rarely used in egg production. In free-range systems, a run is attached to a floor or aviary house (35), (36). Chickens originally live at the edge of the forest and are therefore reluctant to move around in unprotected areas (37). In most cases, however, there is a lack of sufficient protection, such as shelters and hiding places, for the animals to make extensive use of the run. As a result, the hens mainly stay close to the barn, which means that the area actually used is even smaller and more cramped than it already is (38).
Organic farming differs from conventional hen husbandry only in nuances. The animals are given a little more space and access to outdoor areas (39). Instead of 9 hens, only 6 hens per square meter may be kept in organic hen husbandry (40). Despite the lower stocking density and further requirements for perches and nests, these are not sufficient to meet the animals' needs.
Two husbandry systems are common in chicken fattening:
● Floor housing
● Free range and organic farming
“Broiler chickens” live almost exclusively in barns with floor housing. As with “laying hens”, these are large barns at ground level. Furnishings or environmental enrichment are largely absent (41). The large barns are littered once at the beginning of the fattening period.
Although the German Animal Welfare-Farm Animal Husbandry Ordinance prescribes dry and loose bedding, no new bedding is used during the fattening period (42). Apart from feeding and drinking facilities, the stalls are empty. The animals only have access to the floor without additional raised perches or levels. The animals live isolated from the outside world (43). Their lives are characterized by a lack of activity and a lack of external environmental stimuli.
Very few chickens raised for fattening have access to an outdoor run (free-range farming). The small proportion of them that do is almost exclusively organic livestock farming. Here, the green run is adjacent to the barn (44), (45). For conventional chicken fattening, the design and access to the outdoor run are not specified (46).
Organic production specifies certain requirements, such as plant growth in the outdoor area. Overall, however, the specifications remain vague. Only a “sufficient number” of hiding places and the structuring of the outdoor area are prescribed, without any detailed information being provided (47).
Chickens originally inhabit forest edges and are reluctant to move around in unprotected areas (48). They only make extensive use of outdoor areas if they are offered shelter. Otherwise, the animals mainly stay close to barns, i.e. in smaller areas.
(25) Thobe, P., Alamadani, I. & Gunarathne, A. (2022). Steckbriefe zur Tierhaltung in Deutschland: Legehennen. Braunschweig: Thünen-Institut für Betriebswirtschaft. p. 2.
(26) Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (2023, 25.05.). Mehr Tierschutz in der Legehennenhaltung.
(27) Vits, A. (2005). Evaluierung von Kleingruppenhaltung und ausgestalteten Käfigen für Legehennen hinsichtlich wirtschaftlicher und gesundheitlicher Parameter mit besonderer Berücksichtigung von Legeleistung, Eiqualität und Knochenfestigkeit (Doctoral dissertation, TiHo Hannover). p. 2.
(28) Vits, A. (2005). Evaluierung von Kleingruppenhaltung und ausgestalteten Käfigen für Legehennen hinsichtlich wirtschaftlicher und gesundheitlicher Parameter mit besonderer Berücksichtigung von Legeleistung, Eiqualität und Knochenfestigkeit (Doctoral dissertation, TiHo Hannover). p. 7 ff.
(29) Hergt, F. (2007). Vergleichende Untersuchung zum Verhalten von Legehennen in Klein-und Großvolierenhaltung. (Doctoral dissertation, LMU München). p. 5.
(30) Hirt, A., Maisack, C., Moritz, J. & Felde, B. (2023). Tierschutzgesetz. Kommentar. 4. Auflage.Verlag Franz Vahlen, München. p. 976.
(31) Thobe, P., Alamadani, I. & Gunarathne, A. (2022). Steckbriefe zur Tierhaltung in Deutschland: Legehennen. Braunschweig: Thünen-Institut für Betriebswirtschaft. p. 11.
(32) Weiß, J., Pabst, W. & Granz, S. (2011). Tierproduktion: 14. Auflage. Enke Verlag. p. 485.
(33) German Agricultural Society (DLG). (2020). Legehennenhaltung. DLG-Merkblatt 405. p. 9.
(34) Lohmann Tierzucht (n.d.). Managementempfehlungen für die Aufzucht und Haltung von Legehennen in Boden-, Volieren und Freilandhaltung. p. 29.
(35) Lohmann Tierzucht (n.d.). Managementempfehlungen für die Aufzucht und Haltung von Legehennen in Boden-, Volieren und Freilandhaltung. p. 30.
(36) Thobe, P., Alamadani, I. & Gunarathne, A. (2022). Steckbriefe zur Tierhaltung in Deutschland: Legehennen. Braunschweig: Thünen-Institut für Betriebswirtschaft. p. 11.
(37) Collias, N. E., & Collias, E. C. (1967). A field study of the red jungle fowl in north-central India. The Condor, 69(4), 360-386. p. 376.
(38) Keppler, C. Fetscher, S., Hilmes, N. & Knierim, U. (2017). Basiswissen MTool. Eine Managementhilfe für Legehennnenaufzucht und -haltung.
(39) Ökolandbau (2024). Legehennenhaltung - Was ändert sich durch die Umstellung? (last accessed on 28.03.2024).
(40) Annex I Part IV Durchführungsverordnung (EU) 2020/464 der Kommission vom 26. März 2020.
(41) Thobe, P., Chibanda, C., Almadani, M. I. & Koch, S. (2022). Steckbriefe zur Tierhaltung in Deutschland: Mastgeflügel. Braunschweig: Thünen-Institut für Betriebswirtschaft. p. 12.
(42) Lower Saxory State Office for Consumer Protection and Food Safety. (2010, 14.10). Tierschutz - Aktuelle Probleme in der Haltung von Masthühnern. last updated on 16.12.2016.
(43) German Agricultural Society (DLG). (2021). Haltung von Masthühnern. Haltungsansprüche - Fütterung - Tiergesundheit. DLG-Merkblatt 406. DLG-Ausschuss Geflügel. p. 7 f.
(44) German Agricultural Society (DLG). (2021). Haltung von Masthühnern. Haltungsansprüche - Fütterung - Tiergesundheit. DLG-Merkblatt 406. DLG-Ausschuss Geflügel. p. 8.
(45) Thobe, P., Chibanda, C., Almadani, M. I. & Koch, S. (2022). Steckbriefe zur Tierhaltung in Deutschland: Mastgeflügel. Braunschweig: Thünen-Institut für Betriebswirtschaft. p. 12.
(46) § 13a No. 8 German Animal Welfare-Farm Animal Husbandry Ordinance in the version published on August 22, 2006, last modified on January 29, 2021.
(47) Section 4 Article 16 Durchführungsverordnung (EU) 2020/464 der Kommission vom 26. März 2020.
(48) Collias, N. E., & Collias, E. C. (1967). A field study of the red jungle fowl in north-central India. The Condor, 69(4), 360-386.
Breeding plays a major role in the economically oriented egg industry and chicken fattening. The aim for “laying hens” is to achieve a high “laying performance” (49). The hens should lay an egg almost every day (50).
With “broiler chickens”, the focus is on the rapid weight gain of the animals (51). In 1957, chickens still needed 101 days to grow to 1.82 kilograms during fattening. In 2001, it took only around a third of the time, namely 32 days (52). The growth rate of animals rose to over 400 percent between 1957 and 2005. In the middle of the last century, chickens weighed 0.9 kilograms after 56 days. In 2005, they reached 4.2 kilograms in the same time (53).
Overbreeding in egg production as well as in chicken fattening has considerable negative effects on the animals. Many “laying hens” suffer from bone loss (osteoporosis) and diseases of the laying organs due to extreme breeding. The high-performance genetics also influence the development of behavioral disorders such as feather pecking and cannibalism (54). The intensively bred laying lines exhibit almost no broodiness today, which represents a significant change compared to the original chickens (55).
“Broiler chickens” often suffer from cardiovascular diseases such as sudden cardiac death and musculoskeletal disorders. The body structure and center of gravity have changed due to the enormous increase in breast muscle, so that the chickens are restricted in their movement. The bodies of young animals succumb to rapid and high growth (56).
The German Animal Welfare Act contains a general ban on amputation. However, a legal exception allows beak trimming to be carried out on “laying hens” (57). This exception led to the establishment of routine beak trimming (58). In 2015, the German Federal Ministry of Agriculture concluded a voluntary agreement with the poultry industry, according to which the beaks of hens for German egg production may no longer be trimmed from 2017 onwards. Chickens for export, on the other hand, are excluded (59).
Further information on beak trimming and other zootechnical procedures can be found in our article on “Mutilations”.
The focus on productivity and cost reduction is intensifying animal husbandry. High animal numbers, indoor housing and stress due to a lack of activity are just a few of the characteristic living conditions to which the chickens are exposed. As a result, animal health suffers, so the administration of antibiotics is closely linked to commercial livestock farming (60).
According to the World Health Organization, the resulting antibiotic resistance is one of the greatest threats to global health (61). The use of antibiotics is particularly high in chicken farming. This also includes reserve antibiotics for human use. These are antibiotics that are needed when commonly used antibiotics are no longer effective (62).
The separation of sick chickens in the incubation phase (period between infection and the appearance of the first symptoms) and healthy chickens is not practiced in factory farming. For this reason, whole groups are treated. The antibiotics are usually administered via feed or water and therefore cannot be dosed individually (63).
This makes it clear that there is no provision for treating individual animals and the health status of individual animals is not decisive. The health care of the chickens is therefore inadequate. The group treatment also increases the risk of antibiotic resistance.
(49) Liu, Z., Yang, N., Yan, Y., Li, G., Liu, A., Wu, G., & Sun, C. (2019). Genome-wide association analysis of egg production performance in chickens across the whole laying period. BMC genetics, 20, 1-9.
(50) Damme, D. K., & Hildebrand, R. A. (2015). Legehennenhaltung und Eierproduktion. Verlag Eugen Ulmer.
(51) Hartcher, K. M., & Lum, H. K. (2020). Genetic selection of broilers and welfare consequences: a review. World's poultry science journal, 76(1), 154-167.
(52) Havenstein, G. B., Ferket, P. R., & Qureshi, M. A. (2003). Growth, livability, and feed conversion of 1957 versus 2001 broilers when fed representative 1957 and 2001 broiler diets. Poultry science, 82(10), 1500-1508. p. 1506.
(53) Zuidhof, M. J., Schneider, B. L., Carney, V. L., Korver, D. R., & Robinson, F. E. (2014). Growth, efficiency, and yield of commercial broilers from 1957, 1978, and 2005. Poultry science, 93(12), 2970-2982. p. 2973.
(54) Hörning, B. (2008). Auswirkungen der Zucht auf das Verhalten von Nutztieren. p. 53 ff + 66.
(55) Ekesbo, I., & Gunnarsson, S. (2018). Farm animal behaviour: characteristics for assessment of health and welfare. CABI. p. 191.
(56) Hörning, B. (2013). “Qualzucht” bei Nutztieren - Probleme und Lösungsansätze. p. 10.
(57) German Animal Welfare Act in the version published on May 18, 2006 last modified on December 20, 2022.
(58) Wissenschaftlicher Beirat für Agrarpolitik (2015). Wege zu einer gesellschaftlich akzeptierten Nutztierhaltung. Gutachten des Wissenschaftlichen Beirats für Agrarpolitik beim Bundesministerium für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft. p. 99.
(59) Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (2015). Vereinbarung zur Verbesserung des Tierwohls, insbesondere zum Verzicht auf das Schnabelkürzen in der Haltung von Legehennen und Mastputen. p. 7 ff.
(60) European Commission (2022). Study on CAP measures and instruments promoting animal welfare and reduction of antimicrobials use : executive summary. European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development. p. 3.
(61) World Health Organization (WHO). (2023, 21.11.). Antimicrobial resistance.
(62) Germanwatch (2020, 27.10). Hähnchenfleisch im Test auf Resistenzen gegen Reserveantibiotika.
(63) Richter, A., Hafez, H. M., Böttner, A., Gangl, A., Hartmann, K., Kaske, M., Kehrenberg, C., Kietzmann, M., Klarmann, D., Klein, G., Luhofer, G., Schulz, B., Schwarz, S., Sigge, C., Waldmann, K.-H., Wallmann, J. & Werckenthin, C. (2009). Verabreichung von Antibiotika in Geflügelbeständen. Tierärztliche Praxis Ausgabe G: Großtiere/Nutztiere, 37(05), 321-329. p. 324 + 326.
After the fattening or laying period, the animals are transported to the slaughterhouse. Several hours before transportation, they are no longer fed and have to starve (64). The reason for this practice is hygienic aspects during slaughter. If the animals consume food shortly beforehand, the risk of contamination from gastrointestinal contents increases during the slaughter process which is not desirable (65). The German Animal Welfare-Farm Animal Husbandry Ordinance permits a starvation period of up to twelve hours before transportation for “broiler chickens” (66).
On the farm, catchers round up the birds and load them. Due to the enormous time pressure, they carry two to five animals by the legs in each hand at the same time (67). This causes stress and pain for the animals and increases the risk of injury. The catchers place the animals in low transport crates, where they are stacked on top of each other and have to wait for hours until they reach the slaughterhouse (68). The chickens squat close together in the transport containers, which are only a few centimetres high (69). The conditions have a strong impact on their behavior and the animals suffer from pain, fear and frustration (70).
In contrast to other animal species, such as cattle or pigs, there are no additional requirements for long-distance transportation of chickens. This is particularly fatal when it comes to active ventilation of the loading areas. It is not mandatory for chickens transported for more than eight hours. At high outside temperatures, there is a risk of exponentially rising temperatures in the loading area and heat stress in the animals, from which they suffer enormously (71).
In 2023, over 630 million “broiler chickens” and almost 30 million “laying hens” were slaughtered in Germany (72). Slaughter is a highly stressful process that causes suffering. Stunning is mandatory before slaughter in Germany. Most chickens are stunned either in an electrical water bath or with gas. They are then bled by cutting their necks.
To stun the animals in the electrical water bath, the workers hang them by their legs in the slaughter belt. They are then immersed upside down in the water bath (73). Many animals flap their wings, come into contact with the water bath and experience painful electric shocks as a result. Not all animals are the same size, so smaller chickens are not immersed deep enough in the water bath. Incorrect stunning often occurs and the animals experience the further slaughter process during the neck cut and bleeding while conscious (74), (75).
The painful hanging by the legs is avoided when stunning with gases. Instead, the animals are exposed to different gas concentrations in crates in order to achieve a loss of consciousness. However, the frequently used carbon dioxide (CO2) has a strong aversive effect and the animals suffer from a feeling of suffocation, fear, stress and pain (76).
(64) Krautwald-Junghans, M. (2021). Sachverständigengutachten. Transport von Hühnern (Gallus gallus f. dom.) zum Schlachthof. Literaturreview. p. 18.
(65) Krautwald-Junghans, M. (2021). Sachverständigengutachten. Transport von Hühnern (Gallus gallus f. dom.) zum Schlachthof. Literaturreview. p. 20.
(66) § 19 section 1 No. 2 German Animal Welfare-Farm Animal Husbandry Ordinance in the version published on August 22, 2006, last modified on January 29, 2021.
(67) Rabitsch, A. (2014). Tiertransporte. Anspruch und Wirklichkeit. p. 103 f.
(68) Rabitsch, A. (2014). Tiertransporte. Anspruch und Wirklichkeit. p. 108 ff.
(69) Annex 1 German Animal Welafre Transport Ordinance in the version published on February 11, 2009, last modified on November 25, 2021.
(70) EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW). (2022). Welfare of domestic birds and rabbits transported in containers. EFSA Journal, 20(9), e07441. p. 45 ff.
(71) Rabitsch, A. (2014). Tiertransporte. Anspruch und Wirklichkeit. p. 99.
(72) Federal Statistical Office of Germany (Destatis) (2023). Geflügelstatistik: Erh. in Geflügelschlachtereien. Geflügelschlachtereien, Geschlachtete Tiere, Schlachtmenge: Deutschland, Jahre, Geflügelart. status of: 26.11.2024.
(73) Shields, S. J., & Raj, A. B. M. (2010). A critical review of electrical water-bath stun systems for poultry slaughter and recent developments in alternative technologies. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 13(4), 281-299.
(74) European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). (2004). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) on a request from the Commission related to welfare aspects of the main systems of stunning and killing the main commercial species of animals. EFSA Journal, 2(7), 45. p. 125.
(75) European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). (2019). Slaughter of animals: poultry. EFSA Journal, 17(11). p. 23.
(76) European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). (2019). Slaughter of animals: poultry. EFSA Journal, 17(11). p. 26 ff.