Page title

Consultation on amending WASK 1995 to permit the use of gas to kill poultry outside of a slaughterhouse

25 September 2006

FAWC welcomes the suggested amendment as it offers a method of on farm killing that has potential welfare benefits in allowing birds to be killed in situ rather than being caught, transported and unloaded.

The circumstances where such killing would be permissible seem appropriate, the most significant of which is probably end of lay hens. The definition of end of lay hens implies that hens kept for the production of either table eggs or hatching eggs are included. If this is not the case, then FAWC would like the definition to include hens kept for both purposes. It is clear that current methods, whilst legitimate and practical are not in the best interests of end of lay hens with fragile bones, prone to breakage.

We should like to take this opportunity to stress the desirability of a properly funded “welfare disposal scheme” for use in circumstances relating to restrictions imposed during control of notifiable diseases. The proposal hints at such a scheme but makes no pledge that this should be wholly or partly Government funded.

The proposal refers to a “suitable chamber” which may be Defra’s Containerised Gas Units, small ‘wheelie bin’ type equipment or, under certain circumstances, an air tight poultry shed. Small chambers and the Containerised Gas Units still require birds to be handled and removed from the poultry shed. Even with this welfare compromise, this method must be better than transporting birds large distances, then unloading them prior to either live shackling or gassing. The reduced need for transportation also has the potential benefit of reducing disease spread and thus enhancing bird welfare.

Whole house gassing (WHG) has the appeal of killing the birds in situ. However, the current techniques are still in their infancy. We understand that trials of WHG are in progress and await the outcome with interest. Pending such reports, it is difficult for us to evaluate this technique effectively. There are engineering problems but these can be overcome (e.g. introducing gas rapidly, monitoring concentrations, monitoring bird behaviour and death, effectively sealing buildings etc). Using foam as a delivery medium for gas is an alternative technique with promise and we should like to be informed of the outcome of any Government-supported work on this method.

Having said that FAWC is supportive of the proposal to use WHG, the logistical and practical difficulties that can have a bearing on welfare must not be overlooked. Experience with WHG suggests that sealing of houses is time-consuming. There is a risk of compromising ventilation and hence welfare before the gas is introduced.

The proposal suggests the need for effective monitoring both of the behaviour of the birds and their death, and the gas concentrations reached and its distribution around the house. These aspects and the rapid, uniform introduction of gas require specialist knowledge and supervision, especially for WHG. Specialist teams will need to be developed.

The question of suitable gas mixtures for use outside (and inside) the slaughterhouse is important. We agree with the general requirement of WASK that any approved technique must be ‘appropriate, effective and humane’ (page 4). You will be aware that FAWC is currently studying this question as part of our investigation into the welfare at slaughter of poultry and other white meat species. At this stage it would be premature to present our conclusions, though we are studying the results of the Defra-funded project on controlled atmosphere stunning with interest (Annexe G of the amendment).

We must not lose sight of the fact that end of lay hens are low value animals and therefore an expensive and specialist technique may not be feasible for the industry. This cost aspect should not deflect us from the welfare arguments but equally there is no point in having a sterile debate if the end result is something that is never used.

The positive welfare aspects of the proposed amendment will only be achieved if these techniques are adequately supervised and undertaken by suitably experienced, trained, competent staff. Defra will need to monitor the success of the amendment.

FAWC Chairman