Comparing methods for catching and crating broiler chicken flocks: A trade-off between animal welfare, ergonomics and economics
By Hope Kassube, The Pennsylvania State University
Belgian researchers from the Flanders Research Institute for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Ghent University, the Experimental Poultry Centre, and Vetworks recently published a study comparing three different methods for catching and crating broiler chicken flocks. The goal of the study was to compare upright, inverted, and unforced mechanical catching methods of broilers on commercial farms using a cost-benefit analysis of animal welfare, ergonomics, and economics.
The study was conducted over about a year and a half on 15 commercial broiler farms in Flanders, Belgium. All of the flocks were the same breed (Ross 308), and the average slaughter age was 41.7 + 1.2 days. Three flocks were depopulated using the inverted (default) and mechanical methods, nine flocks were depopulated using the inverted and upright methods, and three flocks were depopulated using all three methods. There were approximately 5,000 birds per catching method. They used two types of transport systems, either unrestrained plastic drawers (n=6 flocks) or Stork ATLAS containers (n=9 flocks), which are the most commonly used container for mechanical catching in Belgium.
The researchers conducted monitoring and measurements at both the farms during depopulation and at the slaughterhouses. For the inverted and mechanical catching methods, the catching teams were instructed to proceed working as normal. For the upright manual catching method, the teams were given a brief demonstration and instruction using a poster, since they had little to no previous experience using this method. The inverted method involved grabbing one leg per broiler and carrying three broiler chickens upside down in each hand. The upright method involved one or two birds being caught and carried upright, with the hands supporting the breast and covering the wings. The mechanical method employed a conveyor belt system for the unforced approach.
To assess animal welfare at the farm, the process of catching and crating for all three methods was scored for noise, chicken behavior, and crating efficiency. They also recorded the number of broiler body parts that got caught per container and the time taken to fill the container. For inverted and upright catching, individual broiler chickens were tracked from catching to crating and evaluated for wing flapping frequency, catcher-bird interaction, whether the catching method was applied incorrectly, and whether the broiler slipped out of the catcher’s hand. To evaluate animal welfare at the slaughterhouse, they inspected the same chickens for the number of fresh bruises and fresh fractures counted, as well as the number of dead-on-arrivals at slaughterhouses (DOAs).
For the economic analysis, they evaluated the cost of the three methods for catching, crating, and loading. The cost of the upright and inverted methods each included the labor cost, the cost of the loader, and the truck loading costs. The cost of the mechanical method included the price per chicken, the truck loading costs, the transport costs of the catching machine, and the cost of cleaning and lubricating the catching machine.
They used two methods to assess ergonomics. First, the catchers completed a survey to give their opinions regarding animal and catcher welfare for the inverted and upright methods. The survey asked about their level of physical pain, their degree of fatigue, the level of restlessness or calmness of the chickens, along with the learning curve for upright catching. Ergonomics was also assessed in an experimental setting by a certified ergonomist. In an experimental setting, three non-professional catchers caught and loaded broilers using the upright and inverted methods. Their movements were recorded using six cameras, and the certified ergonomist assessed physical strain based on the video recordings and assigned a score corresponding to high, medium, or low risk to different aspects and movements.
Costs and benefits were compared between the inverted, upright, and mechanical catching methods based on animal welfare, labor conditions, and economics. The total costs were calculated for each method for catching 20,000 broiler chickens, and per kg.
Key findings:
-
“Upright catching provides better animal welfare for some parameters compared to both inverted (less wing flapping, better catcher-bird interaction) and mechanical catching (less overall catch damage)”
-
Upright catching is less labor-efficient and more costly
-
Upright catching is negatively perceived by catchers
-
Upright catching has some slight ergonomic advantages compared to inverted catching
-
Mechanical catching reduces labor strain and increases efficiency
-
Mechanical catching results in more overall catch damage compared to upright catching
-
Mechanical catching is not as cost-effective compared to inverted catching for flocks smaller than 70,000
What does this study mean for producers?
-
When considering the feasibility of upright catching for entire flocks, they should take into consideration catching procedures, truck wait times, slaughter schedules, related industry costs, and personnel conditions
-
Upright catching crews may need to be paid more
-
Crews may have a negative attitude towards upright catching; more experience might help change this
-
Due to the increased costs for upright catching, the catching, crating, and loading process needs to be streamlined
The full paper can be found in the February 2025 issue of Poultry Science and online here:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2024.104704