Published Letters and Op-Eds from
COK’s Writers Group

Bias Toward Molting

Published in Egg Industry in November 2003.

I was surprised by the heavy bias in the article on the new method of molting in the October 2003 issue. The piece seemed out of line with the usually bold efforts of Charlie Olentine to present issues relatively fairly in the magazine.

The piece suggests that forced molting is somehow related to natural molts, when the UEP’s own guidelines allow forced molting through starvation to go until 30% of the birds’ body weight is lost. That would be the equivalent of me (165 lbs.) not eating anything until I’d lost 50 lbs. No bird in nature would voluntarily starve herself to that point.

While the piece only mentions the “benefits” of withholding food from birds, it should have also mentioned the enormous assault on welfare caused by traditional methods of forced molting.

Dr. Ian Duncan, sometimes known as the father of modern animal welfare research, writes that “[forced molting] is a barbaric practice … and leads to great suffering in all the hens involved … [T]he evidence suggests that hens suffer enormously during forced molting.”

Further, Dr. Joy Mench, who is on the UEP’s Advisory Committee, writes: “The bird is starved. Yes, the bird is starved. I don’t like to see hungry animals not being given food.”

It’s my hope that even if egg producers won’t listen to animal activists, they’ll at least listen to welfare researchers like Drs. Duncan and Mench, and do away with starving animals to boost profits.

Paul Shapiro
Campaigns Director
Compassion Over Killing