Influence of an Automatic Enrichment Device on Laying Hen Behavior and Plumage Condition

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Environmental enrichment is widely seen as an improvement to animal welfare, and in modern laying hen husbandry a variety of enrichment materials are used. In this study, which was conducted on a German organic laying hen farm, an automatic enrichment device that doses grains on rough-coated plates was tested in different quantities. The animals’ behavior in the area around the device was observed via video recordings. Furthermore, the hens were scored for plumage damage during regular visits to check whether the enrichment device helped the hens not to develop feather pecking and cannibalistic behavior. The hens in general interacted less with their environment at the end of their husbandry period, but the offer of the enrichment device did not influence their preferences for performed behaviors. However, it was observed that hens offered a high number of enrichment devices stayed in the surrounding area for longer amounts of time than those with fewer or without such devices. The effect of the enrichment on the plumage condition remains unclear, since plumage damage developed differently in the groups, independent of their enrichment offer. Hens that were offered fewer devices kept a better plumage than those without or with a high number of devices. Factors other than the enrichment device tested may have influenced the hens’ behavior, but it was well accepted and used by the hens. ABSTRACT: Feather pecking and cannibalism are prominent problems in modern laying hen husbandry. Among the various approaches to address this issue, environmental enrichment plays a crucial role. In this on-farm study, four winter gardens of an organic farm henhouse were equipped with an automatic enrichment device. Different quantities of downpipes dosing grain on rough-coated pecking plates (PPs) were tested. One group served as a control (CG) without an automatic enrichment device, while the others were offered different numbers of PPs, with one equipped with a doubled amount of PPs (DEG) compared to the other two groups (SEG). Video analyses of the hens’ duration of stay and behaviors in the recorded winter garden area and around the PPs were performed, and regular assessments of the plumage condition were conducted. By the end of the production cycle, no hens with intact plumage were found, with hens in the CG and DEG showing worse scores and earlier deterioration in the plumage condition than in the SEG. The offer of PPs showed a significant influence on the duration of stay in the filmed area. Hens in the DEG stayed significantly longer (mean: 129 s, SD: 126 s) than those in the CG (mean: 79 s, SD: 91 s; p < 0.05) and SEG (mean: 75 s, SD: 83 s; p < 0.005). On the performed behavioral bouts per hen and minute (CG mean bouts/minute (SD): 5.47 (2.92); SEG mean (SD): 5.33 (2.76); SEG mean (SD): 5.81 (3.24)), no significant influences were detected. Environmental pecking was the behavior most frequently observed in all winter gardens, where, particularly around the PPs, pecking at the device was observed. Therefore, the enrichment device can be assessed as well accepted by the hens in winter gardens. The effect of the device on the plumage condition remains unclear, with external factors probably showing a greater influence than the enrichment.