Controversial plans to change farm animal welfare codes for chicken producers have been scrapped by the government.

Environment secretary and South West Norfolk MP Elizabeth Truss had planned to replace statutory welfare codes with industry-led guidelines.

Charities including Peta, the Humane Society International and Compassion in World Farming wrote to ministers to oppose the plans.

Allowing the industry to 'self-regulate' would risk lowering current standards because farmers would no longer be required to abide by the codes, they argued.

Opponents to the plans said the move would also potentially increase the risk of diseases and further overuse of antibiotics.

On Thursday, Defra said the current system would remain in place. A Defra spokesman said: 'In light of views raised, we have given the matter further consideration and believe we can achieve our objectives by retaining the existing statutory codes.'

The British Poultry Council (BPC) was involved in the government's consultation and said it was disappointed by the U-turn as livestock farmers would be left with 'outdated welfare guidance'.

BPC chairman John Reed said: 'By revoking its decision, Defra is walking away from an opportunity to ensure welfare guidance is kept up-to-date with the latest research using industry expertise.'

Minette Batters, deputy president of the National Farmers' Union, aded: 'It's extremely concerning to us that Defra are rescinding the jointly-owned animal welfare guidance – it sets a dangerous precedent for both government and our industry.

'Reversing considerable efforts with the industry to replace older, out-of-date guidance in the face of sensationalist pressure from campaigning groups undermines both government rationale and the importance of an up-to-date animal welfare code.

'The NFU, alongside other farming organisations, has been strengthening this guidance with scientific evidence, making it relevant to farming practices today. The guidance is one of the key tools farmers can refer to when health planning for their herd or flock and to disregard such an important resource shows little understanding of its value.'