Chickens and eggs

Alternatives

Although it is more profitable to raise hens in battery cages, increased consumer demand for cage-free eggs has led to the development of two alternative housing systems, namely the barn-laid system and the free-range system, which account for 5 per cent and 15 per cent of Australian egg production respectively. Certain jurisdiction’s animal welfare laws refer briefly to the keeping of hens raised in cage-free systems. These are supplemented by more detailed requirements (but not comprehensive), in the Poultry Code.

In brief, the Poultry Code requires that hens in barn-laid systems be housed in sheds in which they are free to roam. They may be provided with nest boxes and litter areas in which to dust bathe; however like battery hens, they are confined indoors for their entire lives and they may be warehoused with up to 5,000 others at any one time.http://www.rspca.org.au/campaign/choosewiselyfaq.asp

The Poultry Code requirements applicable to free-range systems also provide that hens should be housed within sheds, however, access must be provided to an outdoor area to enable hens to carry out their natural behaviours. While neither the barn-laid nor free-range housing systems allow hens to live a life free from human interference (in fact practices such as beak trimming may still be carried out in these systems), they go some way towards addressing the widespread suffering associated with the confinement of the battery cage.

Legislative attempts to ban the battery cage

While little interest has been demonstrated at a national level in banning battery cages, a number of attempts have been made to implement a state-wide ban over the last decade. The first of these, which took place in the ACT, involved the introduction of legislation by the ACT Greens, designed to ban the production and sale of battery eggs in that jurisdiction. The ACT Government passed this legislation in September 1997; however it was ultimately stymied by other Australian jurisdictions who relied on the Mutual Recognition Act 1992 (Cth) to support their claim that the new law breached national competition policy principles.

While the ACT’s attempts to ban the battery cage in the late 1990s were unsuccessful, the campaign surrounding the legislation prompted significant debate about the pain and suffering that hens endure in battery cages. This led to the initiation of a national review of layer hen housing systems, which was carried out in 1999 by the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand (now the Primary Industries Ministerial Council). The Review explored a range of issues relating to layer hen housing systems but ultimately failed to recommend a prohibition of battery cages. Its most notable recommendation, which was adopted by all States and Territories, was to increase the minimum floor space allocation per chicken from 450cm² to 550cm² for all cages commissioned after January 1, 2001. This incremental increase, which many animal protection groups have deemed vastly inadequate, is now in effect.

In light of ongoing controversy regarding the battery cage, in 2007 the ACT Greens introduced a further Bill designed to ban the battery cage. Unlike the 1997 Bill, the Animal Welfare (Amendment) Bill 2007 did not seek to prevent the import of battery eggs into the ACT but merely to close down battery hen farms in the ACT. In the lead up to parliament voting on the Bill, a survey found that 84.6 per cent of all respondents felt that it was cruel to keep hens in battery cages, and 73 per cent of all respondents felt that there should be a ban on the keeping of hens in battery cages. Despite the obvious community support, the Bill was adjourned because the ACT Government was of the view that in the absence of a nationwide ban, the 2007 Bill would simply shift production interstate. The “compromise” proposed was for government to offer $1 million in industry assistance to help local producers convert to barn facilities and to undertake to only provide cage-free eggs in its agencies; including hospitals, schools and canteens.

In March 2008, following the lead of the ACT Greens, the Tasmanian Greens introduced the Animal Welfare (Ban Battery Hens) Amendment Bill (the Tasmanian Bill) which seeks to impose a ban on battery cages in Tasmania. At the time of writing, the Tasmanian Bill has yet to be debated. Preliminary discussions about battery hen farming (which have taken place during debate concerning a review of the State’s Animal Welfare Act 1993) suggest that, although the Tasmanian Minister for Primary Industries is opposed to battery hen farming, he is likely to follow the ACT lead in demanding that any ban on battery cages involve a nationwide approach, overseen by the Primary Industries Ministerial Council.

International legislative outlook for layer hens

The continuing refusal by Australian State and Territory Ministers to take a leadership position with respect to the banning of battery cages stands in stark contrast to developments overseas. For example, in the European Union, the phase out of battery cages is in progress following the passing of a Council Directive in 1999. Under the EU Directive, the installation of new battery cages has been prohibited since January 2003. Additionally, EU member countries are required to phase out all battery cages by 2012. Certain nations such as Sweden and Austria for example, have taken proactive steps to ban battery cages prior to the Directive taking effect. Under the Directive, battery cages are to be replaced with alternative systems known as “enriched” cages, barn, or free-range systems.

The “enriched” cage system provides each hen with 600cm² of usable space per hen, which is 50cm² more than the current Australian standard for battery cages. Enriched cages also differentiate from battery cages in that they can contain nesting boxes, litter to enable foraging, and perches. While these are important symbolic improvements, enriched cages still condemn hens to a life of confinement and fall short of meeting their behavioural needs.

Although it is important to acknowledge the legislative progress made for hens in the EU, the real victory to date lies in the support that consumers are demonstrating for alternatives to the battery cage system of egg production. Recently, sales of cage-free eggs have overtaken sales of battery eggs in the UK and Ireland. While cage-free egg sales in Australia are notably lower (at less than 30 per cent of total egg production), free-range and barn laid markets have expanded significantly in recent years. As more Australians continue to support cage-free production, they send a strong message to politicians to fall into line with popular expectations by ending the widespread abuse associated with battery cage production.

Australia continues to lag shamefully behind when it comes to providing meaningful improvements in hen welfare. In light of this, increasing retail support for cage-free eggs in domestic markets should be construed as a message to our legislators that Australians care about the treatment of animals and that the time has come to place the chicken before the egg.