Hen Moulting Practices: Welfare and Industry Reform

Forced moulting of laying hens through feed withdrawal or restricted diets is used to extend laying life but causes significant welfare harm that is driving industry reform.

Key Facts

Forced moulting involves restricting feed or feeding low-nutrient diets to trigger feather loss and restart the laying cycle
Complete feed withdrawal for up to 14 days (historically common in the US) causes severe hunger, stress and elevated mortality
The EU banned feed-withdrawal moulting in 2004 - the US still permits it, though welfare-certified producers often prohibit it
Alternative moulting methods including low-nutrient diets have fewer welfare impacts but still cause significant stress
Welfare-positive alternatives include simply retiring hens after their first laying cycle rather than moulting them for a second

Welfare Considerations

Forced moulting welfare impacts range from severe (complete feed withdrawal) to significant (restricted low-nutrient diets). In all forms, moulting is a stressful process involving nutritional restriction imposed on animals that would not naturally choose to stop eating. The welfare justification for moulting - extending laying life and reducing replacement bird costs - is economic rather than animal-welfare-based. The most welfare-positive approach is to replace hens after their first laying cycle without forced moulting, even though this increases costs. Consumer demand for eggs from un-moulted hens creates market incentive for this approach. Transparency about moulting practices in supply chains enables informed consumer choices.

What You Can Do

Look for welfare certification schemes that prohibit forced moulting in their standards
Ask egg producers whether their hens are moulted and what method is used
Support retailer sourcing policies that prohibit feed-withdrawal moulting
Advocate for global phase-out of feed-withdrawal moulting aligned with EU standards