To date, information about reasons to select and kill poultry on-farm and which method veterinarians and poultry producers preferably use is scarce. Little is also known about their knowledge of the legislation regarding on-farm killing methods and of methods alternative to the one(s) they use, as well as their perception of those alternatives. In this study, Flemish poultry veterinarians (n = 13), broiler chicken producers (n = 27), and turkey producers (n = 4) were surveyed on killing methods they currently use in practice and alternative methods, on their opinion about what constitutes an appropriate method for on-farm killing of poultry, and on their reasons for killing. All poultry veterinarians and chicken producers who filled out the survey kill poultry by manual cervical dislocation (CD), whereas some turkey farmers also indicated killing by percussive blow to the head (n = 1) or exsanguination (n = 1). Turkey producers seem to be more inclined not to kill animals with injuries or symptoms of disease as compared to veterinarians or chicken producers, such that moribund turkeys are more likely to remain in the flock. Veterinarians considered the following properties of a killing method important: animal friendliness, applicability inside the stable, a high success rate, and time efficiency. Producers ranked the properties similarly, but for them, ease of performance and cost-efficiency were more important than applicability inside the stable. Producers scored those killing properties rather positively for manual as well as mechanical CD. Veterinarians and chicken producers considered the captive bolt method to be easy to perform, to have a high success rate, to be feasible to perform in the stable, and to be animal-friendly. Turkey producers, however, had doubts about the latter 2 properties. Gas, injection, and electrocution were inferior methods to kill poultry according to producers. In conclusion, manual CD is the most common method for killing broiler chickens and turkeys, and knowledge of, and experience with, alternative methods is very limited, both among veterinarians and producers. Informing them about legislation and training for the use of alternative killing techniques are recommended.

中文翻译：

---

农场宰杀个体家禽——对兽医和农民的调查。


迄今为止，有关在农场选择和宰杀家禽的原因以及兽医和家禽生产者优选使用哪种方法的信息很少。人们对他们对农场杀戮方法和替代方法的立法的了解以及他们对这些替代方法的看法也知之甚少。在这项研究中，佛兰德斯家禽兽医 (n = 13)、肉鸡生产者 (n = 27) 和火鸡生产者 (n = 4) 接受了调查，了解他们目前在实践中使用的屠宰方法和替代方法，以及他们对什么构成的看法。农场宰杀家禽的适当方法及其宰杀原因。所有填写调查的家禽兽医和养鸡生产者均通过手动颈椎脱位（CD）杀死家禽，而一些火鸡养殖者也表示通过敲击头部（n = 1）或放血（n = 1）杀死家禽。与兽医或鸡肉生产者相比，火鸡生产者似乎更倾向于不杀死受伤或有疾病症状的动物，因此垂死的火鸡更有可能留在鸡群中。兽医认为屠宰方法的以下特性很重要：动物友好性、马厩内的适用性、高成功率和时间效率。生产商对这些属性的排名类似，但对他们来说，性能的易用性和成本效益比马厩内的适用性更重要。生产商对手动和机械 CD 的杀伤性能给予相当积极的评价。兽医和养鸡生产者认为圈养螺栓方法易于实施、成功率高、在马厩中实施可行且对动物友好。 然而，土耳其生产商对后两种特性心存疑虑。据生产商称，毒气、注射和电击是宰杀家禽的较差方法。总之，手动 CD 是宰杀肉鸡和火鸡的最常见方法，而兽医和生产者对替代方法的了解和经验都非常有限。建议向他们通报有关使用替代杀戮技术的立法和培训。