Research note: Expert opinions of feather sucking and licking behavior in meat chicken breeder birds.

Feather sucking, or feather licking, has been reported anecdotally by employees in the Australian meat chicken breeder industry, but scarcely in the scientific literature. Consequently, the causes and implications of this behavior in meat chicken breeding chickens is relatively unknown. We surveyed 17 industry experts to generate hypotheses about feather sucking behavior. We aimed to understand the frequency and when it occurs, and attempted to understand what may cause an "outbreak". The recruitment of participants was intentionally biased towards Australian perspectives; only 5 of the 17 participants were international. All participants, except 1, had seen feather sucking/licking behavior (94.1%) and most participants (80%) suggested that the behavior was most frequently observed during rearing. Participants presented varying concerns about this behavior, ranging from the perspective that it was "normal" and had no impact on welfare, to concerns about mating injuries due to damaged feathers, increased risk of feather pecking and cannibalism, and psychological stress indicated by expression of repetitive (seemingly) functionless behavior. "Feather licking," "feather sucking," "feather eating," and "feather pecking" were terms used interchangeably, leading to confusion by participants about the cause and implications of the target behavior. The most common factors reported as the cause were boredom (52.9%), nutritional deficiencies (47.1%), and feed restriction (41.2%) and more than 80% of respondents agreed that stress contributes to feather sucking. The outputs from this study reflect only a small, but expert, number of opinions on feather sucking/licking behaviors in the Australian meat chicken breeder industry. A systematic understanding of this behavior is needed to provide insight into causation and the implications for welfare.

Visual access to an outdoor range early in life, but not environmental complexity, increases meat chicken ranging behavior.

Not all chickens access an outdoor range when the opportunity is provided. This may be related to the abrupt change in environments from the stable rearing conditions to the complexity of the outdoor range. We aimed to prepare chickens to range by increasing the complexity of the indoor environment early in life with the intention to encourage range use. Mixed sex Cobb500 chickens were allocated to 1 of 3 treatment groups: visual access (VA) treatment provided VA to the outdoor range from day old via transparent pop-hole covers; environmental complexity (EC) treatment provided an artificial haybale, fan with streamers and a solid vertical barrier; Control treatment was a representative conventional environment. Chickens were given access to the outdoor range at 21 d of age. Behavior in the home pen was assessed in wk 1, 2 and 5 and individual ranging behavior was monitored through radio frequency identification (RFID) technology. The VA chickens were more active compared to EC (P = 0.006) and Control (P = 0.007) chickens and spent more time foraging than control chickens (P = 0.036) during the first week of life. More VA chickens accessed the range area compared to EC chickens (P = 0.015). VA chickens accessed the range sooner after they were first provided access and spent more time on the range than EC and control chickens (P < 0.001). Mortality was lower in the VA treatment compared to EC (P = 0.024) and control group (P = 0.002). There was evidence that VA chickens weighed less than Control and EC chickens, however results were inconsistent between age and sex. Hence, providing meat chickens with VA to an outdoor range early in life increased activity in early life, decreased latency to first access the range and increased time on the range and lowered mortality. Future work should aim to understand the mechanism behind these changes in behavior to develop recommendations for producers to implement in commercial conditions.