Chief Vet defends 750 sq.cms per caged hen

[Marigold]

Disgusting!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42208550
Assuming the cages are square, I make that about 27.5sq cms per side - less than 11inches. This is supposed to give each hen 'extra space to nest, scratch and roost'. I would give a quail more than that!

Follows on from the government voting to exclude the clause about animals being sentient beings when amending E.U. legislation recently.

 

[dinosaw]

Yes it's an interesting argument he's got there isn't it. You could easily extend it to humans. The welfare benefits of putting humans in solitary confinement in a 6 x 6 cell could be enormous. You would cut down on diseases, they wouldn't die in car crashes or by falling down the stairs etc, perhaps Mr Gibbens ought to volunteer to trial it. In fairness to him he's probably only whistling the tune he's been told to whistle by his employers at DEFRA.

 

[rick]

It's a bit confusing Marigold. It reads like a very mixed message with that headline of 'Chief vet defends support of larger hen cages.'
I think what they are saying is that in an 'enhanced' cage containing 10 hens they have 750 sq cm each so that would be a cage for 10, 86 cm per side.
10 hens in less than a metre square is, of course, not good at all - but bigger per hen than a battery cage (banned in 2012 in favour of the 'enhanced' cages )
I think they voted to keep the enhanced cages (rather than go back to battery? Surely that wasn't up for vote?) and that was the position of the chief vet (basically replacing the EU regs.)
There is a bit about cages in general keeping hens away from the flu as apposed to free range and it seems that the other vets were preferring free range to caged at all (well with any sense you would wouldn't you! Control the risk some other way.)
Meanwhile the public must be on side or the supermarkets wouldn't be considering free range only.

This is doing my head in now! 10 hens in 86 x 86 cm???