Can technology address animal welfare and economic gain? This was the central question Tom Tabler, PhD, University of Tennessee poultry Extension specialist, addressed during a May 2025 Poultry Extension Collaborative webinar.
In the highly automated world of poultry production, precision livestock farming (PLF) technology to monitor birds in real time can be used to improve their health, welfare and efficiency. But there are limitations to this technology.
“The purpose of PLF is to detect deviations at an early stage, improving animal health, welfare and efficiency, ultimately leading to an improvement in production sustainability,” Tabler stated.
He noted that while PLF systems do provide actionable data that assists in management, they are not yet a complete welfare-monitoring system.
PLF systems often monitor only a few key factors within poultry houses and alert the farmer if there is something out of range, Tabler commented. “This begs the question: Is PLF aimed at increasing production or animal welfare?”
Animal welfare or production?
“Animal welfare is essential to address consumers’ demands and for long-term sustainability of commercial poultry production,” he said. But assessing welfare in large flocks is difficult, and detecting potential welfare risks and controlling or minimizing impacts is challenging.
Exploring animal welfare from the Five Freedoms system, Tabler noted that these parameters account for:
- Freedom from hunger and thirst — good nutrition
- Freedom from discomfort — good environment
- Freedom from pain, injury and disease — good health
- Freedom to express normal behavior — ability to display normal behaviors
- Freedom from fear and distress — positive emotional state
“Animal welfare is complex and multidimensional,” Tabler commented. However, he also noted that “improving welfare is a direct road toward sustainable poultry production systems.”
He explained that recognizing bird welfare involves not only providing birds with what they need but also with the things they want. There isn’t yet a system or adequate technology that fully addresses both welfare and optimized production.
Monitoring environment
Temperature, humidity, air quality, locomotion, lighting, nutrition, sound levels and more can be monitored using technology. However, Tabler cautioned, “Research and technology designed in the lab must be validated on the farm.”
For example, he described a robotic system in a chicken house suspended on rails several feet above the chickens. Due to low light and the height and angles of cameras and sensors, the data collected didn’t always represent what was happening at the chicken level. Additionally, the sensors that monitored temperature recorded at robot height, not chicken level. And the cameras that were said to identify dead chickens were often inaccurate, particularly in areas where chickens gathered, like near feed sources.
Although robotic data may not accurately reflect conditions at the bird level, Tabler believes PLF technology has great potential and is very useful because it can:
- Collect and analyze large amounts of data in real time
- Enhance automated monitoring of environmental conditions
- Detect problems early to improve and accelerate management decisions and reduce economic losses
In addition to these important capabilities, the robotic data can be used to automate management systems to control welfare, health and performance. Also, PLF can potentially improve production and profitability through precise control.
He believes that PLF technology can help growers better understand bird behavior and be used to improve the quality of life of birds and the lives of poultry farmers. But, he cautioned, there are hurdles to overcome.
PLF obstacles
“PLF technology must be compatible with other tools and equipment, and the cost of implementation must be shared to make the technology accessible to farmers,” Tabler said.
Tabler highlighted several obstacles to applying PLF technology:
- High investment costs
- Lack of validation and user knowledge at the farm level
- Accuracy limitations for large flocks with many small bodies
- Specificity of tasks requires multiple devices
- Breakdowns and repairs require a technical specialist
- Harsh environment of poultry houses impacts sensors. Dust, low light, water lines, feeders and environmental enrichments impede readings and view.
Tech devices, in general, prefer stable environments, but poultry houses have very dynamic environments with multiple variables. The wide variability of structures, management styles and existing technological systems on farms hinders the adoption of new technology. In addition, algorithms must be trained to each unique environment, which further slows adoption.
Tabler also mentioned that many are concerned about the risk that PLF technology will intensify production with little emphasis on enhancing animal welfare, resulting in less farmer/animal contact.
But he believes PLF technologies are tools to assist farmers in managing animals and addressing animal-welfare concerns. “PLF can’t actually replace producers, but the management that is in place determines PLF’s use and value.”
Answering the question
“Technology is simply a tool,” Tabler said. But good tools don’t guarantee good results because tools can be used incorrectly. That being said, Tabler believes PLF tech systems can improve management if farmers respond to alerts.
“Poultry production is increasing globally as chicken consumption continues to rise. PLF technology can assist farmers in managing larger flocks with optimized health, welfare and production while reducing costs and environmental impacts.”
So, back to the original question: Can PLF be used to enhance welfare and production? Technology to monitor houses at the individual bird level isn’t there yet, so assessing individual welfare isn’t possible. But, Tabler explained, PLF monitoring at the house level to ensure optimal environmental conditions goes a long way toward addressing both welfare and production.
Editor’s note: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.
