Better Pork - June/July 2002BEHIND THE LINES
By ROBERT IRWINThis month's cover story on "humane" dry sow housing deals with a highly contentious and emotional subject. Is the growing trend to loose housing driven by the pigs' needs, or by unnecessary demands from impractical animal welfare groups? Will it keep farmers in line with the demands of society or will it just make them uncompetitive?
Farmers and builders are divided on this, some sitting on the fence while others move full speed ahead. Still others have experimented with loose housing, but decided to return to traditional management systems. The discussion continues, both here in Canada and elsewhere.
In the United States, the National Pork Producers Council is planning to spend some of the checkoff dollars collected from producers on animal welfare research. Sow gestation housing tops the list, with comparisons of sow housing methods and economic assessments in the forefront.
In an effort to help producers in this province get it right, Ontario Pork has funded a just-released video created by Dr. Tim Blackwell. Without compromising anyone's biosecruity, Blackwell's initiative takes you inside some of the loose housing setups in this province.
And while we are on the subject of biosecurity, it's hard to believe that a year has gone by since last year's Ontario Pork Congress was cancelled as a precaution against foot-and-mouth disease. Well, the Congress is back on June 20 and 21 this year and it's shaping up to be better than ever. Like the industry it serves, the Congress must constantly evolve to survive.
One new attraction of this year's Congress, which reflects the organizers' responsiveness to change, is the creation of a biosecurity officer position. Veterinarian Gail Pauling will head up a booth where producers can get unbiased information about biosecurity products and issues.
Organizers are projecting attendance at about 3,000. That's likely far more than the recent VIV show in Toronto (whose attendance figures we still await) and about the same as the past few years at the Congress. All in all, that would represent a pretty good achievement, considering that the number of pork producers has declined by 75 per cent since 1978.
As shown in our article about Ken McEwan's and Randy Duffy's new, made-in-Ontario Hogs and Pigs Report on page 28, Ontario production is down approximately three per cent this year too. That's bad news, because at last count the pork industry was contributing about 42,000 jobs and $3.3 billion to the provincial economy.
We hope this is a temporary setback and, while we may not like the message, the Ontario industry owes messengers McEwan and Duffy a vote of thanks. Their work, which has been supported by Ontario Pork, could become a very important marketing tool for producers and their board, as well as for their customers, the processors.
The news of this important development comes at a time when Ontario Pork is dealing with a number of challenges, including the implementation of a new base price formula, a new promotion campaign and the move of its offices to Guelph. And, sadly, the departure of chief executive officer Bill Charlton, the third person in five years to hold Ontario Pork's top job. BP
© copyright 2002 AgMedia Inc..
back When cold strikes, straw bedding makes for happier pigs
But, concludes this Nova Scotia study, the use of straw in alternative housing has little influence on pig performance
by NADINE FORTIN
Straw bedding in alternative housing contributes to the production of heavier and happier pigs during winter months. Too much straw, however, won't improve production factors.
These conclusions come from a study conducted by a team of scientists from the Department of Animal Science at the Nova Scotia Agricultural College (NSAC). The researchers wanted to know the impact of bedding on hogs in alternative housing for grower-finisher swine such as semicircular "hoop" shelters, a type of housing gaining popularity in the Maritimes.
Table 1. Amount of straw bedding used in the experiment pens (7.81 m2) Amount of straw bedding Most Medium-high Medium-Low Least Initial amount of straw (kg) 85 60 35 9 Initial depth of straw (cm) 40 30 20 5 Straw added weekly (kg) 22 16 9 2 Approximate depth of weekly straw additions (kg) 15 10 6 1 Total amount of straw used over six weeks (kg) 196 137 80 20* Approximate amount of straw per week (kg) 33 23 13 3 Total /6 weeks * Total amount of straw used, including the removal and addition of
replacement straw due to spoilage = 35 kg
Table 2: Effects of amount of straw bedding on the performance of growing pigs
exposed to cold over the duration of the experiment (trials 1 and 2 combined)Amount of straw bedding provided weekly Pig performance Most
(33 kg)Medium-high
(23 kg)Medium-low
(13 kg)Least
(3 kg)ADG (kg/d) 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.83 ADF (kg/d) 2.38 2.39 2.42 2.4 Feed-to-gain ratio 2.64 2.66 2.65 2.89
They found out that bedding plays a key role in the well-being of swine, helping them to face wind and cold temperatures in these naturally ventilated and completely or partly uninsulated structures.
In the least bedded pens, animals retain their heat by staying in contact when they are lying or piling on each other. They also adopt a posture where their four legs are tucked under them in a squatting position instead of lying on the side. In the pens with the largest amount of straw, animals tend to lie alone on their side and show more burrowing.
At the NSAC's research farm at Truro, the scientists simulated the conditions of an uninsulated, naturally ventilated shelter during winter. Eight pens with a floor area of 7.81 m2 (1.83 x 4.27 m) were exposed to low air temperatures and variable air velocities. Side air inlets and a central chimney exhaust let fresh air circulate in the barn. However, the side inlets were closed during the night to prevent inside temperatures falling below 0oC. Two trials of six weeks each were conducted during the months of January 1997 and February 1998.
The researchers compared four amounts of oat straw bedding, using the typical weekly amount of straw used in uninsulated commercial farms in Nova Scotia as the reference point. In the experiment, this corresponds to the treatment called medium-low. The quantity of straw is expressed in kilograms in Table 1. Scientists estimated that 17 kg is the average weight of a square bale. Consequently, the initial amount of straw was approximately two bales for the Medium-Low treatment; half a bale for the Least; three and a half bales for the Medium-High; and five bales for the Most treatment.
Table 3: Behavioural definitions
Huddled Pig lying in contact with another pig Sternal Lying posture, with body supported by all four legs Relaxed sternal Lying posture, with body supported by two or three legs Lateral Lying on side with no leg support Alone Pig lying with any contact with another pig Sternal As above Relaxed sternal As above Lateral As above Piled Pig lying with part or all of body on top of another pig Burrowed Pig lying with part or all of body under straw, huddled or alone Overall activity Active behaviour such as eating, nest-building, fighting, playing, rooting and standing
In the first trial, 32 Yorkshire pigs with an average initial weight of 21 kg were evaluated. In the second one, the average initial weight of the 32 hogs was 24kg but different breeds were observed -- six Yorkshire, seven Yorkshire x Landrace and 19 Yorkshire x Landrace x Duroc. There were four animals per pen, allowing a space of two square metres for each pig. This area is bigger than the one recommended by industry standards for straw-based housing system. The hogs were exposed to temperatures varying between 0 and 15 oC, while the wind speed fluctuated between 0 and 0.8 m/s.
Every week, pigs were weighed and their feed consumption measured in order to evaluate their average daily gain (ADG), average daily consumption (ADF) and feed-to-gain ratio (Table 2). ADG was lower for animals with the Least straw but similar for the three other treatments. Increasing the amount of straw bedding above the Medium-low treatment (quantity usually used in commercial barns) didn't improve the production factors, only the behavioural response.
Pig behaviour was observed twice a day and three days a week. Each observation session lasted one hour. Generally, pigs were resting in the morning and more active in late afternoon. Different postures were noted (Table 3 and 4). A cold-stressed pig will lie with its body supported by four legs. As the temperature increases, the posture varies with weight support going from four to three, to two, to one and eventually to zero legs when the animal has a relaxed lateral posture. As the quantity of straw increases, the pigs showed signs of greater comfort and a better control of their environment, hiding in the straw or sleeping on their sides, totally exposed to the air.
Scientists were surprised to notice the lack of difference in feed intake and efficiency. One of their hypotheses is that the behaviour adopted by the pigs in the Least straw pens helped them to conserve heat, and consequently adapt to heat.
Straw bedding has little influence on pig performance, especially if the amount is at least equivalent to that used in commercial facilities. It does however, influence behaviour.
These data are of interest for producers who would like to go to alternative housing such as uninsulated hoop shelters. This type of facility has lower construction costs, requires less energy to operate and may offer greater animal welfare than conventional housing. Other considerations are the increased labour involved, higher feed costs and the cost and availability of bedding material.
Special thanks to the author of the study, Stephanie Hayne, who is now studying at the Prairie Swine Centre Inc. BP
Nadine Fortin is technology transfer officer for the Canadian Pork Council and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.
© copyright 2002 AgMedia Inc..
back
"The earth neither grows old nor wears out if it is dunged"
Manure management is not an issue of scale, but one of nutrient management, says one researcher. The principles and practices proposed a century ago still hold true for the most part.by SAM BRADSHAW
Quite often, we at Ontario Pork respond to letters or e-mails sent to us by concerned citizens and farmers. I received this e-mail lately, and I decided to use my response as a part of an article since there has been much in the press lately about liquid manure. Here is the e-mail:
Dear Sir: I have heard many horror stories on the dangers
of applying liquid manure on tile-drained land.
How is a farmer supposed to do this correctly and
safely?
Thanks, JohnHi John,
Ontario Pork spends much time and money carrying out applied research with many researchers at the University of Guelph, the University of Waterloo, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, the Prairie Swine Center, industry leaders and others. Much of this research centers on applying manure properly.
These researchers have identified that the following is an effective way to apply manure for plant growth, while keeping it in the soil and out of the water table.
1. Complete and follow a nutrient management plan (NMP).
2. Make sure that the soil is in a workable condition.
3. Till the soil lightly to break up macro-pores, if cropping practices allow.
4. Apply the proper amount of manure according to your NMP.
5. Check your tile drains periodically while applying manure.Researchers at Agriculture Canada are presently engaged in testing soil, surface water and crop yields after applying manure at different rates and using different application methods. They are using surface applied, incorporated and injected manure to determine the best timing and application methods.
Results on sandy soil showed that pre-plant injection of liquid swine manure to supply all (5,300 gallons per acre) or some (3,500 gallons per acre plus a small amount of additional commercial fertilizer) did not result in excessive nitrate leaching. It also showed that soil solution nitrate concentrations below the crop root zone were less in manured treatments than where inorganic fertilizer was applied.
Research on loam soils shows that the rate of manure application can be extremely important to the transfer of material to tile drains. According to the researchers, preliminary results indicate that, with the proper rate and equipment and at reasonable soil moisture contents, manure application via injection does not result in significant transfer of manure constituents to drainage tiles. Contamination was noted at the highest rates (8,000-10,000 gallons per acre injected), but was surprisingly low at the lower application rates.
These results should provide a greater incentive to producers to reduce the flushing of water into lagoons, so that the volume of manure applied is low enough to minimize the transfer of contaminants to the environment while still meeting crop requirements. The main drainage outlet and also the downstream collection point showed very low levels of NH4-N, even following manure application, demonstrating little impact on adjacent surface waters.
Bonnie Ball-Coelho, who heads a three-year Agriculture Canada study looking at applying liquid manure at different rates and using different application methods, says that injecting hog manure into standing corn at 6,000 gallons per acre produced the top yield of 184 bushels per acre, and there was virtually nothing moving down into the field tile.
The Agricultural Institute of Canada Foundation hosted an outstanding and timely conference in April of this year entitled "A National Conference on Agricultural Nutrients and Their Impact on Water Quality." There were 118 papers presented along with 21 posters. One presentation from Donald Lobb of the Land Improvement Contractors of Ontario confirms that with proper management, manure can be applied to tiled land with excellent results.
He says: "Livestock producers have a complex challenge in dealing with animal manure disposal, planning for efficient nutrient use, protecting water quality, producing feed requirements, managing soil in a sustainable way, and balancing budgets, while satisfying the expectation of a growing non-farm rural population."
Manure cannot be managed effectively in isolation from responsible soil management if water quality is to be protected. This demands the integrated application of all the best management practices (BMPs) that apply to any given site. When used appropriately, good soil drainage is a BMP that contributes to acceptable crop yield, sustainable soil quality and improved water quality.
Karen Bolton, MA, P.Ag, manure management specialist with Saskatchewan Agriculture, Food and Rural Revitalization, gave the audience a good dose of reality about manure management, in her talk entitled "The Earth Neither Grows Old Nor Wears Out if It is Dunged." Part of what she said follows:
"Manure management is gaining popularity with the public as sensational headlines of pollution and death warn us of the dangers of intensive livestock production and the use of organic fertilizers. Certainly, intensive animal production has issues of scale associated with the storage and application of large volumes of manure that require more intensive management. Managing manure responsibly, however, requires the same information and involves the same steps on both small and large farms.
"The myth continues, nevertheless, that the small farmer with perhaps only 50 head of cattle, as opposed to several thousand, can somehow manage manure differently. Irrespective of the source, nutrient movement up, down or off the land may compromise water quality. Manure management is, then, not an issue of scale but an issue of nutrient management. The principles and practices that were proposed 100 years ago still hold true for the most part.
"So what have we really learned, if anything? We continue to build on the principles established centuries before us and must be responsible for the application of what we know. The responsibility for governments is to ensure that extension efforts are adequate and that regulations are in place that support the body of knowledge that is available. The responsibility for applying manure management principles and practices remains with farmers as they gain a better understanding of how to manage manure fertilizers on a large or small scale."
Tracey Ryan, MSc, of the Grand River Conservation Authority in her talk, "The Rural Water Quality Program: Lessons Learned," reported this good news: "The Rural Water Quality Program is the first source water protection program in Ontario funded by municipalities to improve and protect water quality in upstream areas. The program began in 1998 in the Region of Waterloo and has expanded to include Wellington county, the City of Guelph, Brant county, City of Brantford and funding from both the federal and provincial governments. The program is providing over $4 million to agricultural landowners to implement best management practices that improve and protect surface and groundwater. The Grand River Conservation Authority provides technical expertise and delivers the program on behalf of the partners.
"The program is built on partnerships with the agricultural community and recognizes the role of the landowner as steward of the land. There is an intrinsic understanding that practices carried out on agricultural lands can maintain and protect water quality for the future. It is a program with a broad vision that empowers and embraces the actions of landowners, rather than laying blame and laying charges. To date, program staff has worked with over 400 landowners. The program has provided $1.5 million toward more than 370 projects that improve and protect water quality in the Grand River watershed."
So, John, to answer your question, yes, we can apply manure safely on tiled drained land.BP
Sam Bradshaw is environmental specialist with Ontario Pork.
© copyright 2002 AgMedia Inc..
back How to ensure predictability in the barn
Just as a CEO's job is to prevent surprises for the shareholders, so a barn manager's task is to get reliable results from the capital and labour invested
by RICHARD SMELSKI
Wouldn't life be boring if there were no surprises in our work routines? You would know how many pigs to ship next week, the week after or in the following three months. You would know how many sows would come into heat, how many born alive and even who shows up for work.
A CEO's main challenge is to prevent surprises to the shareholders. A barn manager's role is to do the same -- to obtain predictability for the capital and labour invested. Set your targets and know your options whenever your targets are not being met. The question is not whether there will be surprises, but how quickly you can anticipate and respond to them. That's why bragging rights should be on variation control, and not the averages. One hand in the fridge and one hand in the stove and on average it's good (but not something you want to brag about).
The first challenge is having an indication of the normal variation in your operation and whether your associates continue to accept that variation. Will the packer agree to sell your pork when you cannot deliver the designated number of hogs? Will the banker give you credit when you cannot meet a deadline? And how many extra crates, pens and movement of pigs do you need for the "just in case situations?" Be realistic you say. Tell that to 900 employees waiting on a processing line because the sows didn't breed this week.
The big cost is allocating capital and labour for a crisis versus anticipating something outside of normal variation and warning others about it? To date, we have been communicating only the crisis. We continue to pay the extra cost by capitalizing for the "just in case" situations, while the more adept managers identify and accept the standard deviations within their production. Being realistic is accepting variation but not surprises.
Variation (Fig. 1) is measured by the amount of observations on either side of the mean One standard deviation measures 68 per cent of all the observations away from the mean (34 per cent on each side of the mean). Two standard deviations include 96 per cent of the observations (48 per cent on either side of the mean). If you take three, five or seven weeks to ship a pen between first and last pig, the normal variation is bigger if first to last is longer. Even worse is that variation is cumulative through the chain, including the packer variation. There should never be more than a 10 per cent variation from the mean in your production.
"Dwell on the solution not the problem" is a golden rule. So how do you reduce variation in production parameters on a hog operation?
Dr. Cate Dewey, through Ontario Pork Research, has documented variation on Ontario farms and makes the following suggestions.
1. Accomplish a birth weight of 1.7 +/- 1/2 kg via disease prevention, all-in all-out and good sow management.
2. Small pigs have the potential to grow if they receive special care like fostering, split suckling, preventing of chilling, and instilling hygiene.
3. Provide plenty of water. Variation is reduced by one-half, if there are two drinkers in a pen.
4. Minimize the moves of pigs yet maintain all-in all-out.
5. Feed according to the phase, genetic potential and environmental conditions.Some of these observations may be basic to good stockpeople, but you may also need these records to show the sceptics that laggards aren't the result of neglect.BP
Richard Smelski is hog technical services manager for Agribrands Purina and a former Ontario government swine specialist
© copyright 2002 AgMedia Inc..
back