If there is evidence that an EU country is failing to enforce the rules we should refuse to accept all imports from that country. Simples.

In this particular case, the ideal option is that egg buyers across the UK make the choice to support these better welfare practices and avoid eggs (and egg products) from sources that don't treat animals like animals. These farmers who made the lives of their birds better need mindful citizens in their corner. I understand that not everyone cares about how chickens live, but you should care about how your fellow man pays the rent. Thousands of employees in the UK egg industry are banking on your choice to be a vote of support. Your farmers don't need you to be consumers; they need you to be citizens.

If people wanted better welfare practices, and were prepared to pay for it, they would have done so without the law. Put the law in place on British suppliers, and people who would rather have cheaper eggs will continue to buy cheaper eggs, but do so from abroad.

Honestly, who thinks of such stupid laws. If the government considers caged hens to be morally unacceptable to the point where government should act against it, then you ban the sale of them. To continue to allow them to be imported will do nothing but move the production elsewhere (which is exactly what happened with bacon).

So these farmers want me to buy their eggs because they let their chickens live in cages with an area of 750 cm2?

Why does it matter how enjoyable the chickens life was? Its still going to end up in the same place. 'Organic' food is just a byword for ridiculously overpriced.

Why does it matter how enjoyable the chickens life was?

Same reason it matters for any animal, including Humans.
Like you say, we all end up the same way - dead.

Look, far be it from me to rain on your parade, but don't you think that in the greater scheme of things that this is not all that important?

I say this having had to endure a PSHE day at a steadily improving inner city school where an overly earnest midle class WASP twit held forth at length about the rights of animals to groups of children which had often been routinely denied their rights, here and elsewhere. When a students was stabbed to death near the school gates a few years later, it eventually crossed my mind that more input on knife crime, gangs and drugs might have served their needs better.

Let me be honest here, I couldn't care less about chickens either way. I am partial to eating them when they have been properly raised- but only because I think that that improves the quality of the meat and decreases the likelihood of disease. Good luck with your narrow crusade, as you clearly have very little else bothering you at present. Would that many of the rest of us could join in with that particular chorus!

You could tell by how delicious and fluffy my eggs were this morning the layer of said egg(s) was loved.

Mrs. Ed's Hierarchy of Needs was met.

Look, far be it from me to rain on your parade, but don't you think that in the greater scheme of things that this is not all that important?

In the greater scheme of things, nothing is important.
Not even your life.
There's ample evidence to tell us where that attitude leads. The whole of the 20th Century is an horrific example.

You equate animal suffering with human suffering. I dont. The fact is these chickens wouldnt exist as a species if we didnt farm them to kill them (the same goes for cattle). To say otherwise is just middle class guilt leading to anthropomorphism

Totally agree. The welfare of a barely sentient lump of flesh which recognises basic audio-visual cues for food and sleep - I'm afraid it couldn't mean less to me.

(And I've No doubt some PETA lunatic is formulating a response to what I just said right now, along the lines of 'so you wouldn't care about a baby, then?' Of course, they'll be completely oblivious to the fact that comparing a chicken to a person speaks volumes about their mental stability).

Middle class guilt is unfortunately the sole motivating factor for a lot of people.

I'm all for livestock having a better life, but my food budget doesn't allow much choice, especially given the quality of shops locally. Going veggie would mean starving to death, for instance. I suffer from a screwed up metabolism that's been diagnosed, though isn't specifically, hypoglycemia, consequenlty i have seen nutriotionists. They weren't much help, so I do the best I can. The point: good advice on what to eat, how to cook it and where to get it is like getting blood out of a stone.

Thank you for this informative article.

I will only buy free range eggs from the UK if I can't get them for any reason I will go without eggs.

Eat less and you can afford to eat better quality.

If people wonder why we should give a shit about a chicken's quality of life, you should rethink your way of life, frankly. Wanting to eat animals and animal products is not the same as supporting torture of animals.

Happy animals produce healthier food, and they taste better. And yes, many of us can afford a few p more to have better nutrition and support less unethical farming.

Step it up another level. Studies show time and again (google it) that hens from pasture produce at least three times more omega-3s in their eggs than batter hens, twice as much vitamin E and forty percent more vitamin A, and two thirds of cholestorol.

I recently acquired three hens, who roam free on my property. I never realised how likeable, interesting and social they are. Caging them in egg factories is nasty.

And yes, many of us can afford a few p more to have better nutrition and support less unethical farming.

I'd say many more of us (myself included) can't. So what then?

They are only chickens.

I really don't care whether they had a nice couch and a plasma TV to watch before they died.

They're only chickens.

As always, when I buy chicken or eggs I'll go for the cheapest option.

They're only chickens.

The fact is that this is the way that the overwhelming majority of people in the UK will think about this. All this legislation has achieved is to screw over another British Industry.

They're only bloody chickens.

You equate animal suffering with human suffering. I dont. The fact is these chickens wouldnt exist as a species if we didnt farm them to kill them (the same goes for cattle).

Suffering is suffering, but not even all Humans suffer to the same degree given the same circumstances. You want to introduce nuance, or just apply a black and white categorization?
As for the ludicrous claim that if we didn't farm an animal it would become extinct... what happened to the horse when we no longer needed it for food or transport? Do pheasants become extinct if upper class twits are banned from shooting them? Do foxes become extinct if they are not hunted with hounds?

The battery cage is at the founding of the eurozone.
The rooster makes all the noise, but the hen rules the roost.
If you want the chickens to lay eggs, you have to stand the cackling.

They're only bloody chickens.

They're only bloody animals/proles/third worlders/chavs/ etc
Start small, and work your way up. Pretty soon you'll be breaking any number of eggs to make that omelette.

Guilt is bad for society, so is eating stressed meat which is full of antibiotics and hormones.

They are only chickens.

And you are only an irritant.

"They're only chickens". Is that a reason to treat them nastily, which is what battery farming is?

Wanting to eat animals and animal products is not the same as supporting torture of animals.

I think you're arguing against yourself there.

Happy animals produce healthier food, and they taste better.

We've had this complete unmitigated bullshit from the organic industry for years. There is not a single jot of reliable evidence to support this idea, just the expressed opinions of a tiny self-important minority who really want to believe it.

Studies show time and again (google it) that hens from pasture produce at least three times more omega-3s in their eggs than batter hens, twice as much vitamin E and forty percent more vitamin A, and two thirds of cholestorol.

No they don't, that's complete bullshit. You haven't got a shred of reliable evidence to back that up.

I recently acquired three hens, who roam free on my property. I never realised how likeable, interesting and social they are.

They're much more likeable and interesting well roasted with a side helping of veg.

Why does it matter how enjoyable your life is?

I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say that keeping a chicken in a cage isn't the first stage on a slippery slope towards becoming a brutal, murdering fascist. Unless one was that way inclined in the first place, in which case the welfare of Clucky and his anthropomorphic buddies is a moot point.

Yes, if it makes them cheaper.

its not middle class guilt to want better conditions for any farm animal.its wrong for them to suffer for cheap supermarket prices,the life of a bird is worth less than 20 fags in my local tesco

Because I'm a human not a chicken. They're only bloody chickens.

where you think chickens cows or pigs came from? they came from the wild .

and how many wild chickens, pigs and cows have you come across in the UK?

Dammit, I hit recommend instead of respond.

Dare I say you are just used to foods like eggs being unreasonably cheap. And if you talk about a cost /benefit in terms of nutrition, it would make sense to work out how to buy the better eggs.

If you really really can't restructure a few p out of your budget, afraid I can't solve that for you. "So what then" sounds like a conversation I am not going to get sucked into further.

I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say that keeping a chicken in a cage isn't the first stage on a slippery slope towards becoming a brutal, murdering fascist.

I'm not going to go out on a limb, and say that having the welfare of all life as ones concern most definitely puts the brakes on sliding down the slippery slope towards becoming a brutal, murdering fascist.

That's probably the most stupid thing I've read on cif recently, against some stiff competition. Oddly enough we've been eating chickens for 10s of thousands of years, yet cannibalism is still frowned upon.

How many eggs are sold in the Uk each year? Would it even be possible to produce that many eggs in the UK if they were all free range? Would there be any space left for any other animals? Would we have to bring back rationing?

Oh dear, we've Godwined already.

Why does it matter how enjoyable your life is?

It dosnt. No one has the 'right' to happiness. But as a human I matter more than a chicken. If you cant see that or refuse to accept it then your not a rational person. Its people like you that make me want to eat KFC to spite pious vegetarians

Your edging closer to Godwins law

So 11 billion eggs per year sold in the uk. If a hen lays one egg per day you would need approximately 30,000,000 chickens. DEFRA states a free range chicken requires 1 square metere, so we would need to find 30,000,000 square metres. The chickens would be everywhere!

A robin redbreast in a cage puts all nature in a rage (William Blake)
Auguries of innocence

Seeing a chicken as simply protein
Is un-finger-lickingly emotin'....

Irritant indeed. I didn't mention organic at all. If you are too lazy even to check wikipedia for many citations of studies of pasture-fed vs battery hens, that's your problem.
Thank you for your extraordinary witty and considered response. You've really enhanced the quality of the debate.

Let's take this to its logical conclusion.

Back when I was a poor student, I ended up living in a flat that had a bedbug infestation. Was I right to call in the exterminator, or should I have respected the life of those precious little creatures, as I should respect 'all life'?

The next time I come down with a nasty virus, should I go to the doctor for medicine, or should I let the virus flourish and grow, as after all, it's a form of life?

Ah yes because its the Sun readers ( for that read working class) who eat meat, the fools. If only they knew what beasts they are and how the poor little animals suffer. If only they went to the organic vegetable markets and spent an extra £3.50 on a packet of carrots when they can get larger ones in Tesco for half the price.

I'll be off back to the slums now sir, thank you for imparting your wisdom and pointing the prols in the right direction

The EU gave 13 years' notice of this to allow farmers ample time to plan, and fund, the necessary changes. It makes Osborne's timetable for ring-fencing the banks look breakneck in comparison.

UK farmers have spent some £400 million putting themselves in a position where as far as I am aware they are all now compliant with the new law.

It is, quite simply, unacceptable for any EU farmer to moan and whine that he hasn't got round to it yet. And then to expect to make a fast buck by undercutting rivals who did comply.

The governments of non-compliant EU member states should unhesitatingly close down such farms today. They've had plenty of time to sort this out.

If they can't or won't do so, we should ban all agricultural produce form the country in question. Minister Jim Paice says:

"However, given the very significant legal and financial implications of introducing such a ban, coupled with practical difficulties in enforcing it, it is not a realistic option."

No European country bothered about such difficulties when they arbitrarily, and illegally, banned British beef at the time of the BSE scare. They just did it. No penalties ever ensued.

Cameron's popularity ratings improved when he vetoed the Eurozone bailout deal. They would improve again if he told non-compliant EU states where to go on this one.

yes you should let the virus grow

This is the thing, isn't it? That whole nasty, hate-the-proles superiority that underpins a lot of the 'organic food' wafflers. Iy's not about food, it's not even about animal welfare to a great extent, it's about Keeping Up With The Joneses over a nice board game of 'Who Has The Most Morally Impeccable Credentials (Special Extra-Hand Wringing Edition'). Deeply unsettling.

This should be a matter of preference, not EU directives.

My own is for free range eggs and very free range chickens from my local farmers market but I wouldn't presume to impose that choice on others.

If hundreds of European farmers intend to flout the ban, then it will be because there is a demand for the cheaper products and the state should butt out the situtation.

As usual it looks like we in the UK have managed the worst of all worlds and what we have here is a rather ugly call for protectionism.

I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say that keeping a chicken in a cage isn't the first stage on a slippery slope towards becoming a brutal, murdering fascist.

Your right.

its the final stage.

Aw, I used to get bitchy when the school holidays were almost over too.

Please be trolling.

Earlier on you said

I've No doubt some PETA lunatic is formulating a response to what I just said right now, along the lines of 'so you wouldn't care about a baby, then?' Of course, they'll be completely oblivious to the fact that comparing a chicken to a person speaks volumes about their mental stability).

Now you are comparing bedbugs and - even better - a virus, with an animal produced for food. Classic.

@toothpastetube1 January 2012 02:51PM
Response to pangar, 1 January 2012 02:43PM

when your kind to animals very often you are kinder to humans.

Your qualifier "very often" is necessary here, however it leaves room for the opposite being very often true. Many misanthropic and even brutal people love animals. Hitler was a notorious dog lover. That does not make me hate dogs: it just makes me suspicious of equating compassion for animals with compassion for humans.
Do remember that the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals was founded in 1824, when it was still legal, and generally considered acceptable, to make children of six do dangerous, hard physical work down mines and up hot chimneys, with no legal restrictions on working hours. (The laws of 1802 and 1819 had set a minimum age of 9 and a maximum juvenile working week for factories, but other places of work were unaffected.) By contrast, in the London (now National, never "Royal") Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children was not founded until 1884.