Better Pork - April 2004

Denmark: Now the Danes want smell-free swine

by NORMAN DUNN

Having reduced nitrate application on Danish farms by over 10 per cent per acre through tighter legislation in the last six years, the Danish government is now going for mandatory dust and odour reduction for all livestock units. Farm advisers at this winter's leading Danish farm show, Agromek, reported that new hog barns now include chemical-biological dust/odour filters as standard because farmers were afraid that complaints on odour from neighbours could lead to their stocking rates being reduced.

A simpler solution for smell control introduced at Agromek this January featured a straightforward water trap for ventilation exhaust shafts or situated within hog barns to improve interior air quality as well.

Ventilation specialists Funki/Turbovent claimed to take out up to 80 per cent of smell and dust at a cost of about $1 per slaughter hog with this approach, which relies on water droplets sprayed across the air channel. The atomized water can then be filtered and re-circulated, or simply run into the manure storage. With an eye to minimizing costs, the manufacturers have also reprogrammed their ventilation computer systems for hog barns so that the odour-reduction equipment automatically switches on when wind direction carries odours to nearby houses. When the wind direction takes the odour into open countryside, the computer shuts down the system.

Experts at Agromek also told farmers that knowing the components of the odours coming from their hog barns could offer even cheaper control. For instance, some aspects of hog odour which are particularly noticeable in the surrounding countryside can be reduced through changing the feed ration composition. Other smell components can be lessened through fine-tuning ventilation and adopting new manure removal techniques, for example.

To help in identifying the worst odour components, the Danish government has co-operated with research institutes and engineers in the development of an easy-to-use, pocket-sized odour collection system, the IQO (Identification and Quantification of Odours), under the trade name LugtTek. Special linings within steel pipes absorb the odour components. The pipes are then sealed and mailed to a central laboratory for precise analysis. The odour profile is then presented in graph form so that advisers can help farmers define smell-reduction strategies.BP

© copyright 2004 AgMedia Inc..

back

Better Pork - April 2004

France:Ten more piglets if gilts are served at the right age; between 255 and 275 days work

by Norman Dunn

Piglet Production Linked To Age Of First Service
First service (days)	Under 235	235-255	255-275	Over 275
Lifetime production of weaned piglets	54.6	53.3	54.2	43.6
Weaned piglets per sow and year during productive lifetime	25.5	25.6	25.4	24.8
Total litters produced	5.2	5.1	5.2	4.2
Lifetime litter mortality between birth and weaning	10.6%	11.6%	12.5%	12.2%

Recent results collected from 780 hybrid sows in 15 different herds in northern France show that waiting too long before first service can reduce lifetime production by an average 20 per cent.

Over 100 sows served after 275 days within the comparison averaged only 4.2 litters in their lifetime, weaning 24.8 piglets per productive year. Gilts first served between 255 and 275 days averaged 5.2 litters in their lifetime and weaned a total of 25.4 piglets per productive year. Lifetime weaner production from gilts served younger averaged 54.2 piglets, whereas the females served after nine months of age managed an average of just 43.6.

The only advantage of late serving in the French comparison was a larger first litter, averaging 11.7 born alive. But the differences in first litter size between the service date classes were not significant and, in fact, average mortality before weaning was higher with the older gilts.

Based on lifetime production of weaned piglets, the best average figure of 54.6 was achieved by gilts younger than 235 days at service -- only minimally better than the 54.2. lifetime production of the gilts swerved at the more traditional age in France of between 255 and 275 days.BP

© copyright 2004 AgMedia Inc..

back

Better Pork -April 2004

Germany: Bio hog producers struggle to make a profit

Only a few producers who can sell from their own stores are doing better than break even. Increasing efficiency is the only way ahead for those who want to stay in European bio pork production

by Norman Dunn

Encouraged by European Union subsidies of up to $173 Cdn per acre, plus government help with finance and marketing, German producers of organic or "bio" pork have doubled output in the last four years. Now there are reckoned to be 400 organic farms producing 140,000 slaughter hogs annually, or just under 0.4 per cent of total national production in this sector.

But when Renate Künast, Germany's "green" minister of agriculture, promised a bigger market for bio farmers, she neglected to mention whether it would be a profitable one.

Bio hog producers need about double the income per kilogram of pork to survive on the European market, and recession in most northern countries means that the public are just not in the position to pay this. Break even for bio producers this winter is the equivalent of $127 Cdn for a 25-kilogram grower or between $ 3.60 and $ 3.75 per kilo slaughterweight. Recent surveys indicate that these prices are currently only being bettered by the lucky few organic farms that sell their pork products through their own stores and can thus charge a little extra.

These break-even figures are admittedly based on fairly low performance when compared with the average conventional pork producer. Because the organic organizations insist on 40 days or more before weaning and ban farrowing crates after the first three days, weaner output tends to be low (average: 17 weaners/sow/year) and mortality high (up to 15 per cent before weaning), the latter figure mainly due to crushing of piglets by uncrated sows. The same figures from conventional producers in Germany in recent years have been 19 and 12 respectively.

Also, daily liveweight gain (dlwg) tends to be about 20 per cent below the average figure of 680 grams in conventional hog output because bio organizations do not allow imported soybean meal or added amino acids in the rations.

Increasing efficiency is the only way ahead for those who want to stay in European bio pork production. Most of the top producers are spending a lot more time in the farrowing barn to help boost piglet survival. Main methods: cross-fostering to level out litter numbers and hand feeding for weaker litter members. Those that are best at this are returning figures of 22 pigs reared per sow and year, according to results from Bioland, the largest organic organization in Germany.

The surviving feeders are getting by through attention to carcass quality and, if possible, direct sales of the meat products from on-farm stores. Successful bio hog feeders producing under the Bioland banner in Schleswig-Holstein, northern Germany, are achieving averages of only 540 grams dlwg, compared with the conventional feeder average dlwg in Germany of around 680 grams. But this is often because they are screwing rations right down so that lean meat is produced at the expense of fat, giving the kind of big, muscled carcasses preferred by bio pork consumers.

Basic ration amongst bio hog producers in the north tends to be a simple mix of grass silage and straw topped by home-grown barley, peas and beans, Daily grain intake is kept down to around 2.5 kilograms of dry matter for the last month by such feeders and this gives 55 per cent lean meat carcasses when slaughtering at 175 days and 120 kilogram liveweight and therefore prices well over the $ 3.75 break-even point.BP

© copyright 2004 AgMedia Inc..

back

Better Pork - April 2004

Ways to control those pesky (and potentially harmful) flies

As well as being annoying to workers and livestock, flies can mechanically transmit over 100 pathogens such as salmonella, E. coli, mastitis and dysentery. Some facts about how they breed and how to combat them

by RON MACDONALD

Flies have long been recognized for their ability to transmit disease and cause grief for pigs and humans. Fly populations grow in summer not only from entry via soffits and other openings, but because, indoors, conditions improve for breeding. Temperatures are warmer, signalling hibernation time is over. As a result, the best control is from indoors and by trying to minimize outdoor entry.

Once the flies get in, the main problem is that they have many ideal locations to breed, with lots of food and moisture. Thus, the most effective fly control is to reduce these sources as much as possible.

Although it is useful to think of fly control as screening off all possible openings, a fly is very small and can find ways in despite our best efforts. Every time a shipping door or main door is opened, the potential for entry is there. Once in, the multiplying can be very rapid, depending on whether the breeding and food sources are present.

The fruit fly (Drosophila melanogaster, the most commonly used laboratory species, but many other species will be similar) can develop from an egg to a mature breeding adult in nine days at 25 degrees C. As temperatures cool off or warm beyond this, the breed cycle rate decreases.

Therefore, any manure that is "stagnant" or lies undisturbed, with a moist crust, is an ideal location. Mangers must decide whether to pull plugs more frequently to break the cycle or take other steps to kill the larvae.

There is limited data on fruit fly travel. Drosophila melanogaster and related species (Drosophila simulans) are found more or less everywhere in northern latitudes. Drosophila are not strong fliers and are not capable of long distance migration, especially against a head wind. So their spread in northern latitudes is probably associated with human food production, shipping and food waste.

The only known economic impact of Drosophila has been said to be the contamination of food/beverage products with wild-yeast strains.

House flies (Musca domestica) go through several stages -- egg, larva, pupa and adult -- in their life cycle. The length of the life cycle will vary according to the availability of food, temperatures and places to winter. A fly can complete its life cycle in as little as seven to 10 days under warm summer conditions considered to be ideal for fly development. Less than ideal conditions result in slower life cycles and lower fly populations.

An adult female can lay 100 to 150 eggs in a day. Over her lifetime, she can deposit about four to six batches of eggs. Most of the eggs will hatch within 24 hours after deposition at about 20 degrees C. The time to hatch varies with temperature (see Table 1).

The larva or maggot that hatches from the egg goes through three instars or stages. Larvae can survive for several days at -2 degrees C; however, below 10 degrees C, they will not pupate. The ideal temperature varies with the larval stage of development, with young larvae preferring 30 to 37 degrees C and older larvae seeking out cooler temperatures as they prepare to pupate at 15 degrees C. The rate of larval development depends on temperature (see Table 2).

Table 1: House Fly Egg Hatching Time Versus Temperature Degrees C Hours to hatch 10 or less Few eggs survive 16 49 18 33 20 23 25 14 30 10 35 8 42 Few eggs survive

Table 2: House Fly Duration - Pupation Versus Temperature 10 or less No pupation 16 11-26 18 10-14 20 8-10 25 7-8 30 5-6 35 3-4

Table 3: House Fly Duration - Adult Emergence Versus Temperature 11 Poor Survival 16 18-21 18 12-15 20 10-11 25 7-9 30 4-5 35 3-4

The larvae favour a moist environment where they feed on moist food rich in organic matter immediately upon emerging from the egg. Manure is at the top of the menu. Once the maggot is fully grown, it will crawl up to 50 feet to a dry cool place suitable for pupation. Stagnant manure trapped in corners, on ledges or in hard to clean areas will be sought out for the pupa stage. The pupa stage takes three to 21 days depending on temperature (see Table 3).

The adult fly ingests liquids or liquefied foods. Solid foods are liquefied by moistening the surface with regurgitated saliva and liquid vomit. A female mates and begins laying eggs three to four days after emergence. The lower threshold temperature during these three to four days for the female is 14 degrees C. Adult flies can survive 15 to 25 days depending on their sex and the availability of food and water.

Adults can fly one to three kilometers. Their range of migration may expand if they catch a ride on animals being shipped or on vehicles, or are caught in windy conditions.

Flies are inactive when it is dark. They typically rest overnight on vertical surfaces such as walls or on ceilings inside animal facilities. They become active when exposed to light.

As well as being annoying to workers and livestock, flies are potential vectors of disease. They can mechanically transmit over 100 pathogens such as salmonella, E. coli, mastitis and dysentery.

There are several common control measures which can be employed to manage fly populations:

• Cultural: manage manure to reduce moisture and remove materials upon which eggs will be laid and larva will feed. Since a fly's life cycle can be as short as seven days, it is important to break the breeding cycle. Eliminate breeding areas by removing wet manure and straw, piles of waste feed and other food sources at least twice a week, and seal garbage receptacles. Install a 5 -watt compact fluorescent lamp just in front of the Stage 1 continuous exhaust fan to attract flies and mosquitoes when all other light sources are off. The fan will suck them out.

• Traps: baits, ultraviolet light traps, flypaper.

• Insecticides: adulticides and larvicides. The incidence of insecticide-resistant fly populations is increasing.

• Biological: predators such as wasps that kill fly pupae, and beetles and mites that attack eggs.

• Integrated system: employ several of the above measures.

The barn should be reviewed carefully for locations where water or manure can remain. These are ideal breeding spots and should be eliminated. This becomes very difficult if the problem is a poor concrete pouring job.

All ledges and support beams become breeding locations if manure can drop onto them and stay there. Again, steps to remove manure are necessary to break the breeding cycle or eliminate it as a breeding ground.

If the attempt is made to install fly screens on soffits, then the gable ends will need to be virtually completely opened up, as a minimum, and screened as well. This will do nothing for middle sections of the barn, where firewalls are in the attic. In other words, this is impractical.

More flies will enter in the attic when they are attracted to light. So the attic openings should be kept in the dark, especially at dusk. This may mean relocating or removing security lights so that even reflected light does not shine on the attic openings. If lights are left on in the attic air spaces, then flies may be attracted. Even light scatter from rooms into attics from open air inlets and scatter off the underside of the roof will have an impact.

The dirt and dust buildup outside wall fans, combined with a rain, can provide an ideal breeding ground. This is also very close to air inlet openings, so they may actually be drawn into the attic after hatching by the negative pressure into the attic. Keep the perimeter of the barn well drained and clean. BP

Ron MacDonald, P.Eng., is an agricultural engineer with Agviro Inc. in Guelph.

With appreciation to Dr. Bruce Reed, Hospital for Sick Children ,Toronto, and Jamie Heal, Department of Environmental Biology, University of Guelph, for advice and information related to fly breeding cycles and travel habits; and Katie Gibb, Agviro, Inc., for research and assistance in preparing this article.

References: April 23 2003. Featured Creatures. Common Name: House Fly. Department of Entomology and Nematology, University of Florida; Division of Plant Industry, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. www.creatures.ifas.ufl.edu. Novartis. 2002. Fly Control in Confined Livestock and Poultry Production. Novartis Animal Health Inc. Basel, Switzerland. Saskatchewan Agriculture, Food and Rural Revitalization. April 23 2003. Saskatchewan Agriculture and Food: Insect Pest Control.

© copyright 2004 AgMedia Inc..

back

Better Pork - April 2004

Some practical ways to reduce your greenhouse gas emissions

No matter what the truth about greenhouse gases and climate change, reducing your emissions of nitrous oxide and methane makes good economic sense for your operation

by SAM BRADSHAW

Environment Canada says that climate change is one of the most significant environmental challenges the world has ever faced, and we are already seeing the effects of climate change in Canada. The potential impacts on our health, economy and environment require us to take action.

With the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, the federal government has made climate change a national priority, and is working closely with Canadians and the global community to meet this challenge.

Dr. Tim Ball from Victoria, B.C., doesn't agree. Dr. Ball was the first climatology PhD in Canada and worked as a professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg for 32 years. He now works as an environmental consultant and challenges the science behind the greenhouse gas issue. Following are some paraphrased comments from his website.

Twenty years ago, the consensus supported global cooling. Now the scientific evidence indicates modest global warming. If the consensus changes again, will we then advocate burning more fossil fuels to add CO˛? At least the Kyoto debate has resulted in more people asking hard questions about the science ... and the more they look, the more perplexed they become, because the scientific evidence doesn't support the accord's assumption that CO˛ is the cause of climate change.

I believe that each of us has to decide who is correct, but what if we could reduce greenhouse gas and reap some benefits at the same time? Best Management Practices (BMPs) that reduce emissions reduce waste and promote feed efficiency, which should increase our bottom line.

I am involved with a task team funded through the Federal Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Project and delivered through the Ontario Soil and Crop Improvement Association and the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food. We are trying to produce information that farmers can use to reduce greenhouse gas and improve the bottom line on their farms. The publication we're producing ("Best Management Practices for Greenhouse Gas Reduction in Livestock Production Systems") deals with all aspects of greenhouse gas, but in this article I'm covering only nitrous oxide and methane reduction from manure storage and handling.

Please note that because this is a relatively new area of study, there are some unknowns. Some greenhouse gas BMPs need more farm verification and some impacts of greenhouse gas BMPs have not been sufficiently documented. Moreover, a few greenhouse gas practices may increase the risk of water contamination.

It is estimated that primary agriculture is responsible for about nine per cent of Canada's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Of this amount, 65 per cent is attributed to livestock agriculture.

Key gases of concern are nitrous oxide, methane and carbon dioxide. The global warming potential of each compound is as follows: N20:CH4:CO2 = 321:21:1. This means that if the potential of carbon dioxide to cause GHG is given a rating of 1, then methane is 21 times as influential and nitrous oxide is 321 times as powerful.

Therefore, it is believed that approximately 50 per cent of the reductions could come from the adoption of Best Management Practices related to manure and nutrient management (due to reduced methane and nitrous oxide emissions, as opposed to carbon sinks in cropland and forests).

Researchers generally agree that methane and nitrous oxide are the prime sources of greenhouse gas from the hog industry, so let us focus on these.

Nitrous oxide reduction

It is generally agreed that nitrous oxide is the largest component of greenhouse gas problems for agriculture. It's also the production component offering the greatest opportunity for reductions. Nitrous oxide emissions can be reduced through diet manipulation by:

• reducing crude protein in diets,

• providing a better amino acid balance (a 15-kg pig can convert 87 per cent absorbed N above maintenance to carcass protein);

• improving feed efficiency;

• practising phase feeding (balance amino acids in the diet so less N excreted); Using split-sex feeding.

• Manure storage and handling can also play a part. In the case of liquid manure, consider these strategies:

• Cover manure storage (but using straw can increase all GHG emissions from 6- 1,000 per cent).

• Use slatted floors (so reducing exposure of manure to air).

• Remove manure quickly from the barn (so preventing anaerobic conditions).

• Reduce volume (lower moisture = lower emissions).

• Aerate manure (but this will increase ammonia emissions).

For solid manure, remember that bedding should be kept dry and clean (allow proper ventilation); long straw is 10 times worse than short or chopped straw; and wheat and barley straw combined emit 150 per cent more than barley straw alone.

When applying manure, follow these practices:

• Test your manure and soil.

• Apply what the crop needs when it needs it.

• Place nitrogen where the crop roots can access it.

• Make sure you account for organic N to reduce the need for fertilizer N.

• Don't apply manure in winter or in wet conditions.

• Plant cover crops to capture and hold plant-available N for future use.

• Incorporate manure quickly whenever possible.

And when it comes to housing, be sure to use adequate insulation (for improved ventilation) and to reduce feed and water waste (allows reduced volume and drier manure).

Methane reduction

Feeding strategies can be used to reduce methane production. Ground or pelleted feed can reduce methane production by 20-40 per cent. And providing a better amino balance could make for 40 per cent less methane production.

Manure storage considerations can also help. Most of the greenhouse gas from manure is methane from liquid manure. Most greenhouse gas emissions come from stored manure during the first few months. Greenhouse gas emissions increase with temperature, exposure and moisture.

Methane is produced from anaerobic (without air) decomposition. Ways to reduce methane emissions include:

• Covering your storage to reduce emissions by 90 per cent;

• Aerating manure;

• Keeping manure dry and cool if possible;

In the case of solid manure, keep bedding dry and clean and remember that shallow solid- pack manure emits less than a deep pack. You should also avoid late fall and winter manure application, and you should incorporate whenever possible.

As with nitrous oxide, adequate ventilation and dry and cool bedding areas reduce methane production.BP

Sam Bradshaw is environmental specialist with Ontario Pork.

© copyright 2004 AgMedia Inc..

back