BASC position on a gamebirds welfare code for England

18 January 2010

What’s it all about?

In a consultation which ended on 18 January 2010 Defra invited comments on a draft code of practice for the welfare of gamebirds. This code will cover, amongst other issues, the use of breeding cages for the production of pheasant eggs.  The Government intends to bring the code into force by April. After that, anyone who does not comply with the code risks conviction of an offence under the Animal Welfare Act of 2006.  BASC supports the development of a code of practice based on self-regulation.

Read BASC's response to the consultation

  BASC response to a consultation on a draft gamebirds welfare code for England

  BASC view on an Impact Assessment for the gamebirds welfare code for England

What is BASC’s position on cages in the consultation?

BASC has campaigned for an end to the use of battery cages for pheasant egg production since 2005.  The draft code presented three options on cages

• Option 1: that their use is allowed to continue
• Option 2: that only “enriched” cages are used
• Option 3: that cage systems for breeding birds should not be used

BASC supported Option 3, but because the definition of a cage is left open in the consultation, a robust working definition is essential, and BASC proposed that such a definition should be based on the amount of floor space available for each bird. Subject to our definitions of a cage for pheasant and cages for partridge being used, we support Option 3 – for an end to the use of cage laying systems.

BASC supported Option 3 subject to the following conditions 

• That a distinction must be made between a cage for pheasants and a cage for partridges. Traditional partridge boxes and flock pens are not cages.
   
• That a cage for pheasants is any system that does not provide a minimum floor space of one square metre per bird, adequate shelter and perching.
   
• That a cage for red-legged partridges is any raised system that does not provide 0.29 square metres of floor space per bird, a partially enclosed, solid floored, dusting/laying box and a separate compartment for feed and water.
   
• That a cage for a pair of grey partridge is any system that does not provide a minimum floor space of 0.5 square metres per bird, a partially enclosed, solid-floored dusting/laying area and a separate compartment for feed and water.

Does supporting Option 3 mean a ban on traditional partridge boxes?

No. Some organisations said that supporting Option 3 in the consultation would automatically lead to a ban on traditional partridge boxes. This was irresponsible scaremongering and is not the case.  The argument will hinge on the definition of a cage, which is covered in the consultation. BASC’s preferred definitions on floor space per bird would address this.

Why is enrichment of cages not good enough?

BASC does not support the enrichment of small barren cages. Enrichment often consists of installing an area of artificial turf and a low perch. Enriching a cage which is too small does not make that cage any bigger or better for the bird. BASC has been told by game farmers who have tried this sort of enrichment that it can make matters worse. Cleaning, for example, becomes more difficult and we have heard directly of attempts to use power washers to clean cages with the birds still inside. The code does not specify what enrichment would be required and how it might improve the bird’s welfare in a cage laying system.

Go to Key Issues