Farmed Laying Hen: Moulting Practices and Welfare

Induced moulting of laying hens to extend productive life is practised widely in conventional systems, with welfare implications depending strongly on the methods used.

Key Facts

Induced moulting forces hens into a second laying cycle by withdrawing feed for up to 14 days in some countries
Feed withdrawal moulting is banned in the EU but still legal and common in the USA
Non-feed-withdrawal moulting using low-nutrient diets is increasingly used as a welfare-improved alternative
Moulting causes significant stress evidenced by behavioural changes and immune suppression
Post-moult hens can produce higher quality eggs with stronger shells
Some higher welfare systems avoid moulting entirely and use younger flocks continuously

Welfare Considerations

Feed withdrawal moulting causes acute hunger and significant welfare suffering in laying hens over the withdrawal period. Hens show increased stereotypic behaviour, aggression, and chronic stress during feed deprivation. EU prohibition of feed withdrawal moulting represents a welfare improvement, but alternative low-nutrient diet moulting methods still cause stress. The fundamental welfare question is whether extending productive life through induced moulting is ethically justified given the suffering involved. Systems that avoid moulting entirely and use younger, well-managed flocks offer a welfare-superior alternative.

What You Can Do

Choose eggs from systems that do not use induced moulting or use non-feed-withdrawal methods
Support campaigns for global bans on feed withdrawal moulting
Ask egg producers and retailers about their moulting policies
Advocate for international harmonisation of moulting standards at EU welfare levels
Support research into moulting alternatives that preserve hen welfare