PART 2
Risks and Challenges
for Poultry Production
45
Risks associated with poultry
production systems
L.D. Sims
Asia Pacific Veterinary Information Services, PO Box 344, Palm Cove,
Qld 4879, Australia.
E-mail: [email protected]
SUMMARY
Every poultry farm has its own risk profile for the introduction of pathogens, subsequent
development of disease, and spread of pathogens to other farms. This risk profile is deter-
mined by a complex interaction between the levels of infection in an area, the measures
implemented on the farm to prevent disease, and other factors including the density of
farms in the area and linkages with other farms and markets. Farm biosecurity measures
reduce, but do not eliminate, the risk of introduction or onward transmission of pathogens;
they include factors such as the location of farms, the physical facilities, and the operational
procedures implemented. Investments in these measures are subject to the law of dimin-
ishing returns. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has
defined four production systems based partly on the biosecurity measures implemented.
Distinguishing between farms on the basis of the measures practised is important, as not all
intensive poultry production units apply biosecurity measures appropriate to the level of risk
of virus incursion. Experiences with highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses of the H5N1
subtype have shown that farms in all production systems have experienced outbreaks, of
highly pathogenic avian influenza, and that it is not possible to blame one particular system
for the genesis or spread of the disease. Nevertheless, farms that rear ducks outdoors or
where poultry are sold through poorly regulated live poultry markets appear to be high-risk
enterprises, especially in countries where infection is present. Enhancement of biosecurity
measures is generally agreed to be the best way to minimize this risk, but not all farms are
in a position to implement stringent biosecurity, especially those that rely on rearing poultry

and Marius Gilbert
2
1
Animal Production and Health Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations,
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy.
2
Biological Control and Spatial Ecology, Université Libre de Bruxelles CP160/12, Av FD Roosevelt 50, B1050
Brussels, Belgium.
SUMMARY
Given conflicting zoosanitary regimes, the question arises whether or not old and new
forms of poultry production may peacefully co-exist in the face of highly pathogenic avian
influenza (HPAI) and other biological threats. Here, we argue that commercial poultry plants
and associated distribution and marketing channels may have to step-up biosecurity and
sanitation efforts in order to halt the evolution of further pathogens that thrive on mass-
rearing of birds in quasi-biosecure conditions. Scavenging poultry, on the other hand, may
be more capable of resisting parasites and infectious disease agents, but it should be noted
that there are a growing number of exceptions, including HPAI and other, mainly RNA,
viruses. Mostly, these pathogens first emerge as virulent agents in large poultry plants.
Conversely, there is evidence that commercial poultry chains are forced progressively to
invest in health protection because the poultry plants are under increasing threat from
microbes circulating freely in nearby village or backyard poultry. Given the rapid evolution
of medium-size systems and live-bird markets, meeting points between old and new forms
of poultry husbandry are on the rise and so are the options for mutually destructive patho-
gen transmissions. Hence, structural reforms are necessary in order to address the growing
health threats present in today’s far too complex poultry circuitries.
Key words: old, new, production, systems
Poultry in the 21
st
Century
48

countries. The recent action plan for animal welfare introduced by the European Commis-
sion aims to further expand the body of regulatory standards.
In broiler production worldwide, birds are kept on deep litter. Recently, the EU agreed
on a new directive to set maximum standards for bird density. However, this is not consid-
ered likely to have a great impact on global trade. At present, the difference between Brazil
and Thailand and the EU in terms of animal conditions, including bird density, is limited.
In egg production, the majority of commercial layers are kept in battery cages. There is
wide variation in space allowance per bird from 300 to 400 cm
2
in Brazil, Ukraine or India to
the current 550 cm
2
per hen in the EU. After 2012, hens in the EU will be kept in enriched
cages with a minimum space allowance of 750 cm
2
per hen. It can be expected that this
will have an impact on world trade in egg products and especially egg powder. Trade in
table eggs will continue to be limited to within regions.
The EU is considering the use of labelling to provide consumers with more information
concerning the standard of production. Another option could be to use financial mecha-
nisms such as taxes or tariffs. The likelihood that a measure is challenged depends on how
difficult it is for exporters outside the EU to meet the requirements.
Keywords: poultry production, animal welfare, economics, international trade
Poultry in the 21
st
Century
50
Zoonotic disease risks and
socio-economic impacts of
industrial poultry production:

consequences of this system for global public health are significant. A full understanding of
experience in the United States of America with respect to the implications of the zoonotic
disease risks and economic impacts associated with contract growing can inform policies
aimed at reducing these risk factors in nations where the private sector is increasingly
adopting a contracting model.
Key words: poultry, United States of America, model, contract
51
Response of the Thai poultry
industry to highly pathogenic
avian influenza
Anan Sirimongkolkasem
President of the Thai Broiler Processing Exporters Association.
SUMMARY
Significant markets remain much the same as they were before highly pathogenic avian
influenza (HPAI). Thai producers are continually adjusting their marketing strategies. Fol-
lowing the severe HPAI outbreaks of 2003, government stepped in to regulate processing
plants through certification programmes. Despite these measures, only half of the existing
plants managed to meet the required standards and producers had to adjust their strate-
gies. Adjustment in the private sector is far from easy and requires significant investment
in equipment. Skilled labour, however, is one of Thailand’s strong points. A cooked-meat
customer base is essential for industry survival, and the Thai industry has been successful
in meeting customer needs. Thailand will continue to increase exports of cooked chicken
meat.
Key words: Thailand, poultry, export, HPAI
Poultry in the 21
st
Century
52
Food-safety concerns in the
poultry sector of developing

poultry houses
J. Hartung and J. Schulz
Institute of Animal Hygiene, Welfare and Behaviour of Farm Animals, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover,
Bünteweg 17p, 30559 Hannover, Germany.
E-mail: [email protected]
SUMMARY
Aerial pollutants in confined animal houses are widely recognized as detrimental to the
respiratory health of animals kept in these facilities. Primary and opportunistic microbial
pathogens may directly cause infectious and allergic diseases in farm animals, and chronic
exposure to some types of aerial pollutants may exacerbate multi-factorial environmental
diseases. There are, however, few international field surveys paying attention to the health
of the farmers and the farm personnel working in such atmospheres, and to the spread of
pathogens from farm buildings. Studies reveal that up to 20 percent of farmers and farm
workers report work-related symptoms of respiratory affections, such as coughing, sputum
and wheezing. Some develop asthma, others develop diseases that are described as ODTS
(organic dust toxic syndrome). There are indications that various pathogens can survive in
ambient air for several minutes and can be distributed over long distances, (e.g. foot-and-
mouth disease (FMD) virus more than 50 km, and staphylococcae up to 500 m).
This paper describes the complex nature and composition of the aerial pollutants, such
as gases, dust, micro-organisms and other compounds, present in the air of farm animal
houses, their potential role in the development of respiratory diseases in humans and ani-
mals, and their distribution in the surroundings of farms. Future-oriented sustainable farm
animal production should (in addition to improving animal welfare, consumer protection,
economy and occupational health) enhance standards aimed at preventing or reducing the
aerial spread of pathogens.
Key words: air pollutants, bio-aerosols, poultry farming, disease transmission, occupa-
tional health, dust, gases, bacteria
Poultry in the 21
st
Century

poultry production
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS
The threat posed by highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) gave rise to numerous
comments. Particularly emphasized were the challenges of ensuring communication and
cooperation among stakeholders (particularly across the dividing line between human and
animal health) and of developing effective strategies for small-scale production systems and
for locations where the infrastructure for disease control is inadequate. It was noted that
inappropriate media coverage of HPAI can sometimes present a problem for those work-
ing on the control of the disease. Cooperation between the public and private sectors was
considered to be essential for effective disease control, and some positive developments in
this area were mentioned. It was also noted that there are lessons to be learned from the
control of other diseases such as Newcastle disease. Communication among all stakehold-
ers, including the consumers, was emphasized as a means to foster trust and openness. The
need to clarify the role of vaccination in the control of HPAI was noted, as was the need
for a better understanding of the roles of wild birds and the transport and trade of poultry
in the spread of the disease.
The future of small-scale poultry production was also discussed. Its important contribu-
tion to the livelihoods of the poor was recognized, as were the challenges of controlling
diseases such as HPAI in this production system. It was noted that there is a need to learn
more about the livelihoods and priorities of poor poultry keepers – without this understand-
ing, attempts to introduce new technologies would have little impact in terms of poverty
reduction. There was a call for improvement of community-based animal health systems,
backed by adequate training and community participation in the financial aspects of such
schemes. The need to develop effective early-warning systems at the community level was
noted.
With regard to the environmental impacts of poultry production, it was argued that
the real problem is not a lack of technologies to deal with the problems, but the costs of
implementing them and a lack of incentives and regulations to enforce their use. It was also
suggested that pollution costs and other externalities should be taken into account when
assessing the relative efficiency of different production systems.