Better Pork - April 2005

Better Pork - April 2005

France's supersow racks up big sales at home and is settling in Canada
A Brittany swine breeding company is gaining substantial market share with its Naīma sow line, which is giving a plus of 1.9 hogs weaned per sow annually, compared to other hybrids in France
by NORMAN DUNN
After 23 years of development by Jean Naveau from the PenArLan swine breeding company in France, a new prolific sow has been produced by crossing Chinese hog breeds with top performance European lines.
The resultant Naīma sow line gave rise last year to sales of more than 100,000 gilts and exports all over the world, especially to Brazil, Poland and the Netherlands. In France, only eight years after the first Naīma gilt was sold, the company delivered 70,000 gilts representing 17 per cent of the market for slaughter hog mothers in that country.
Naveau's breeding company, based in Maxent, Brittany, produces an F1 sow from Meishan, Jiaxing and Finnish Landrace lines and breeds this to Yorkshire boars. Naīma F2 sows are the result of this cross and combine very high prolificacy and mothering traits from the Chinese lines with a good carcass and high lean meat percentage when crossed with representative boar lines such as PenArLan's own P 76 terminal sire.
Breeding performance, compared with other hybrids in France, gives a plus of 1.9 hogs weaned per sow annually with 113, 423 litters averaging 11.1 hogs weaned. The top 10 per cent of Naīma herds recorded 29.9 hogs weaned per sow.

NAIMA PERFORMANCES ON FRENCH FARMS

Non-Naima sows Naima sows 10% best Naima herds Difference between Naima and other sows

Litters 885, 633 113,423 18,163

Average born/litter 13.2 13.4 13.7 +0.2

Born live 12.2 12.6 13.0 +0.4

Average weaned 10.5 11.1 11.9 +0.6

Weaned/productive sow/year 25.7 27.6 29.9 +1.9

Mortality % of live born 13.4 11.8 8.9 -1.6

Average litters in sow lifetime 4.8 5.6 5.9 +0.8

Source: PenArLan from records of a million weaned litters

Since 2004, the German national breeding programme (BHZP) has been testing crosses with its own sows and the sire line of the French Naīma sow. These will lead to the launch in spring 2005 of "German Naīma" sow lines to give higher prolificacy.
France Perrot, international development manager with the PenArLan breeding company, says that a selection and multiplication farm has already been established in Quebec for production of Naīma sows in Canada in the near future. BP

© copyright 2005 AgMedia Inc..

back

Better Pork - April 2005

Cutting odours can cost $8.00 per hog in Europe

by Norman Dunn
One of Europe's largest hog barn ventilation concerns, the Danish-based Skov company, which claims to have 6,000 barns equipped with its systems worldwide, is introducing biological air filtering for livestock units. The system is said to remove up to 90 per cent of ammonia and dust from exhaust air, and up to 80 per cent of odours.
But the equipment for this new no-smell agriculture doesn't come cheap -- the equivalent of around $220,000 Cdn for a 4,000-place feeding hog set-up, or $60 a hog place. And that's only the capital cost. Running expenditures, which include electricity for the pumps and the fresh water that's circulated through the filters, plus labour input for cleaning the filters every month, can total up to $8 Cdn per finished slaughter hog.
So why introduce such a system in the first place? Well, there are no laws demanding the removal of ammonia and nasty smells from hog house emission air in Europe as yet. But it is reckoned to be only a matter of time before there are, and in fact reports from Germany last year indicate that building planning committees are very unlikely to give the go-ahead to a new hog house if no smell-extraction filter is included in the equipment. Despite this pressure from local authorities in Germany, it is Danish farmers who have been among the first to fit the new systems. By the beginning of 2005, Skov reports that it had 12 of its biological air cleaning systems in individual Danish livestock barns, many of them for hogs.
Stig Joergensen, the company's marketing co-ordinator, says that there are chemical filtering systems available that take out more of the ammonia from exhaust air, but these are even more expensive. "That's why we mainly stay with the biological concept. This features two banks of fibre filters through which the exhaust air from the entire hog barn is pushed by the barn ventilation fans. The filters are mainly sited in the gable ends of barns, but can also be built onto the sides to comply with different air extraction systems."
He adds that clean water is circulated through the filters continuously and that this water actually takes out from four to five kilograms of nitrogen from the emission air in every cubic metre of filter water. Water use is quite high. For instance, a typical 500-place hog feeding barn uses some 500 to 600 cubic metres of fresh water annually.
"But what really takes out the most ammonia, odour and dust is a thin (one to two millimetre) layer of yeasts and bacteria which colonizes the filter exterior surfaces and digests, converts, or breaks down the various substances in the emission air," explains Joergensen. "They do an efficient job and are completely natural, so I think we'll see many more biological systems introduced in Europe very soon."
Starting in 2005, the Danish government and industry are investing some $40 million Cdn in a four-year research project on controlling odours and dust emissions from livestock farming.BP

© copyright 2005 AgMedia Inc..

back

Better Pork - April 2005

Prefab swine barns come with performance guarantee

by NORMAN DUNN
Denmark's largest producer of turnkey hog barns says its new line of Euro-Farm modular buildings will be sold with a guarantee that swine housed in them will reach at least the performance standards of the top 25 per cent of Danish herds.
This will apply for feeding, grower or farrowing units, says the Graakjaer Staldbyg company, which erects some 150 barns per year in Denmark, Germany, Scandinavia and Poland. Where promised standards are not achieved, whatever the reason, the builder says it will call in selected management advisers to help the farmer hit the targets.
"What we are going to offer with our new Euro-Farm line is actually a guaranteed financial return," explains sales manager Martin Rindom. "This is really what a farmer and his bankers want to see."
He added that, where farmers can't achieve the figures on their own, Graakjaer decides on the advisers to use. Farmers, he says, still have to pay for this service, but the eventual success is guaranteed by the builder. "We have incorporated years of experience in producing the most efficient design and that's why we can offer such a guarantee."
Although Graakjaer has 30 years of experience in supplying prefabricated structures, buildings so far have been designed differently each time for the individual farm operation. The new Euro-Farm concept claims to be the first to develop completely standard modules for all customers, following the lead of the poultry production industry. The building width is always the same, at 26.14 metres, with only the length variable to cater for different herd sizes. Even the slurry storage cellar is delivered in module form.
The first building under the Euro-Farm concept is being completed in Denmark just now and is a 2,000-place feeding hog barn. An unexpected boost for the performance guarantee building concept was the winning of the top national innovation prize at this winter's Danish winter farming fair, Agromek.
"Our new system means we build about 30 per cent faster than conventional companies. A 1,000-head farrowing and dry sow unit will take approximately 25 weeks," reckons Rindom. He says cost is about the same as conventional barns at around 1,800 euros ($2,880 Cdn) per sow place, for example. "But for this the farmers gets all planning work included and also start-up management advice, plus much faster construction," he adds.
Layout inside the buildings is standard as far as flooring and ceiling height (three metres) is concerned, but the customer can choose between ventilation systems and, for example, whether the dry sows are to be kept in a stall system or loose-housed with electronic feeding stations.
"Already, we are developing the concept so that other preferences can be catered for within the standardized building shell," explains Rindom. "For instance, we are looking at straw bedding systems and of course farmers can have an emission air cleaning unit fitted if they wish."BP
© copyright 2005 AgMedia Inc..

back

Better Pork - April 2005

3-D video viewing offers accurate sow condition monitoring

By NORMAN DUNN
A prototype sow feeding station being tested on farms this winter in Europe is applying three-dimensional filming technology for a more precise monitoring of dry sow body condition. Poul Nielsen from developers Skiold Echberg says the new "SowWatch" camera system offers a very accurate condition assessment through videoing from two different standpoints while the sow is feeding.
"The information thus gained is like the stockperson's eye, not merely depending on liveweight but on the fat deposits -- or lack of them -- and fleshing around the body," he reports.
Software then analyzes the film, decides on changes in ration recommendations for the individual transponder-identified sow and may also place the animal on the attention list of the farm PC.
As an add-on system to a standard electronic feeding station, the SowWatch system should cost only around the equivalent of $2,300 Cdn, according to Nielsen. He adds that a next step being worked on at the moment should see a direct link being established between 3-D video, the controlling computer and the feed computer, so that rations can be immediately and automatically altered according to the daily video condition analysis. BP
© copyright 2005 AgMedia Inc..

back

Better Pork - April 2005

Ontario Pork stakes out its position on nutrient management
Without an adequate funding and phase-in program in place, the livestock sector will be at a serious competitive disadvantage. Here, Ontario Pork sets out its proposals for a practical and affordable approach to nutrient management
by SAM BRADSHAW
Ontario Pork passed the following motion at a Board of Directors meeting in January 2005:
Ontario Pork supports the concept of deferring the implementation and phase-in of the Nutrient Management Act for existing farm operations, until the following principles are met:

Cost-share principles

Nutrient Management technical standards must meet the criteria of needed, practical and affordable;

No phase-in of Nutrient Management regulations without funding;

A funding program that will cover 70-90 per cent of capital cost (90 per cent funding for hardship cases);

Funding for all costs of Nutrient Management implementation, including capital, operating, administrative and loss of land use;

A minimum 24-month lead-time between funding availability and the expectation of full compliance.

Technical issues
* An adaptive funding phase-in and implementation approach for >300NU operations is established;
* All contentious issues under review by the Provincial Nutrient Management Advisory Committee have been finalized;
* There is clarity on how the Nutrient Management Act will supersede municipal by-laws;
* There is clarity on how the compliance with Nutrient Management will be recognized in relation to Source Water Protection.
Ontario Pork and the Ontario Farm Environmental Coalition (OFEC) have clearly and repeatedly indicated that farm community support for Nutrient Management is wholly dependent on OFEC's principles being met and there being adequate funding. This is especially crucial given the erosion of equity and the cash-flow crisis faced by Ontario's cattle, sheep and other livestock producers. Many producers simply cannot afford any new capital outlay to meet the new regulations.
The dates for Nutrient Management compliance and some of the features of the Nutrient Management Financial Assistance Program are summarized below.

Key dates for Nutrient Management Act compliance (For existing greater than 300 "nutrient unit" farm operations)

March 31, 2005 Nutrient Management Strategy and Nutrient Management Plan (if building a manure storage) must be submitted in order to access the Nutrient Management Financial Assistance Program Funding application to Ontario Soil and Crop Improvement Association OSCIA.
July 1, 2005 Record of Approval must be submitted.

December 31, 2005 Projects must be completed and inspected, and producer must be in full compliance with Nutrient Management Act

*A Nutrient Management Strategy outlines how much manure and other nutrient materials will be generated, how it will be stored and where it will be used. A Nutrient Management Plan assesses the appropriate rate at which the manure and other nutrient materials are applied to land.

Features of the Nutrient Management Financial Assistance Program

Provincial funding of $20 million, available until December 31, 2005
Eligibility limited to existing greater than 300 "nutrient unit" operations that have a completed Nutrient Management Plan, Nutrient Management Strategy and Environmental Farm Plan
Provincial cost share of 25-45 per cent for a eligible items
Maximum provincial contribution of $45,000 for farm units with liquid manure storage; capped at $30,000 per farm unit for all other situations
Anticipate that up to 75 per cent funding up to a maximum of $30,000 per farm operation for certain eligible items if linked with Federal Funding available through the Agricultural Policy Framework. Details of this program are not available at the time of writing.

There remains uncertainty over many key aspects of Nutrient Management phase-in and funding, including but not limited to the following. (A number of these concerns were addressed in Ontario Pork's motion.)

Clarity on how compliance with the Nutrient Management Act will provide future protection for producers from municipal by-laws;
Clarity on how Nutrient Management compliance will be recognized in relation to Source Protection legislation;
Clarity on how contentious technical issues still under consideration by the Provincial Nutrient Management Advisory Committee will be handled. When these issues are rolled into legislation, will there be an expectation of compliance without any additional cost-share assistance?
Clarity on how much impact compliance by the estimated 1,200 or so farms will have on the environment as a whole.

What is the estimated cost and impact of Nutrient Management compliance? Studies completed by the George Morris Centre demonstrate that many producers will suffer financial hardship as a result of meeting the Nutrient Management standards unless there is a comprehensive, fair and equitable funding program.
The estimated average cost of compliance for > 300 nutrient unit operations is as follows:

Sow farrow-to-wean operation: $123,614-$169,844.

Farrow-to-finish operations: $54,210-$100,678.

SEW sow operations: $20,990-$51,970.

The highest cost of compliance is for >300 nutrient unit hog farrow-to-wean and farrow-to-finish operations. These sectors are expected to bear significant cost and some may not remain profitable.
The implementation of the Nutrient Management Act without an adequate funding program will place the livestock sector at a competitive disadvantage. The funding programs in competing jurisdictions are more comprehensive than the Ontario funding program.
The anticipated annual record-keeping, administration and operating costs of between $1,500 and more than $10,000 per year, depending on site-specific conditions and nutrient management compliance management decisions, will be an on-going drain on producers' bottom line.
The impact of the Nutrient Management Regulations is site- and farm-specific. Some may have less than average compliance costs due to site conditions and existing infrastructure. Others will face significant cost pressures.
There is a demonstrated need for a comprehensive environmental policy solution that will provide for the management of nutrients and the protection of the natural environment while respecting the future sustainability, economic viability and global competitiveness of agricultural operations.
Our analysis of the impact of the Nutrient Management Act and the proposed Source Water Protection initiatives has concluded that the solution to the outstanding concerns is an adaptive funding model. This approach would target funds only to areas or activities of highest risk, based on the Source Water model.
The benefits of this approach include the application of a rational procedure to limit public funds to the area of greatest need with consideration for the relative cost and benefit, greater improvements to water quality, reduced drinking water risk, and reduced impact on the global competitiveness of agricultural sectors affected.
As of this writing, the OFEC funding principles and the recommended adaptive phase-in and funding model have not been followed.
We remain hopeful and optimistic that farm organizations can negotiate a rational, practical and workable approach to Nutrient Management and Source Water Protection based on co-operation and collaboration rather than confrontation and uncertainty. BP

Sam Bradshaw is environmental specialist with Ontario Pork.

© copyright 2005 AgMedia Inc..

back

Better Pork - April 2005

Maintaining healthy temperature ranges is key to sound semen storage
University of Guelph research has found that 10 out of 28 semen storage units studied had undesirable temperature fluctuations. A properly controlled environment will ensure sows are bred with healthy, viable sperm cells
by Cate Dewey
Semen used for natural breeding is almost always perfect -- the boar takes care of that for us. It is stored at the right temperature, kept within a narrow temperature range, overly abundant and it is fresh right when you need it.
But, with the current use of AI, the storage and care of the semen is no longer controlled by the boar and becomes our responsibility. Recent research done by Dr. Beth Young at the University of Guelph indicates that we may not be up to the challenge.
Dr. Young examined the 28 units used on farms to store semen. She recorded the temperature in the unit every minute for 48 hours, using a HOBOTM data logger. Other research has shown that stored semen must be kept between 15^oC and 20^oC and must not be exposed to rapid temperature fluctuations of more than 2^oC. Storing semen at temperatures outside the healthy temperature ranges (15^oC and 20^oC) will reduce motility and viability (survival) of the sperm cells. It will also damage the acrosome, which is an essential part of the sperm cell for fertilization of the egg. Sperm cells exposed to both hot and cold temperatures or regular variations in temperatures need to change their metabolic rate. This uses up the nutrients and buffer in the extender and shortens the life span of the sperm cells.
There were problems with the temperature in 10 out of 28 (36 per cent) of the storage units. In nine units, the temperature went either above or below the acceptable range for at least 40 minutes. In one unit, the temperature was unacceptable, fluctuating by more than 2^oC. There were specific events that triggered these temperature problems in seven of the 10 units. These included poor unit maintenance and faulty temperature control in the unit. From this research we suggest that producers ensure that the door of the unit closes and seals properly and that the thermostat is set at the correct temperature.
In one case, there was a frayed electrical cord. Because the people working at this farm regularly monitored the temperature of their semen storage unit, they quickly found the problem and had it fixed.
A common reason for high storage unit temperatures was adding warm, fresh semen to the storage unit. Although this does not likely harm the fresh semen, it does have a negative impact on the semen already in the unit. It is difficult to cool semen collected on the farm without putting it in the semen storage unit. One option may be to cool the freshly collected semen in a second storage unit before placing it in the main storage unit. Another may be to use a fan or an air conditioner to cool a room to 20^oC so that the semen can reach this room temperature before being added to the storage unit.
Research from North Carolina has shown that semen was exposed to fewer temperature changes if it was shipped in plastic or Styrofoam shipping containers with cool packs than if no cool packs were used. This may be important in Ontario during hot summer days.
Dr. Beth Young's research indicates that many storage units used on farm to store semen had unacceptable temperatures or temperature fluctuations, which would likely cause poor semen quality. Producers are encouraged to monitor the temperature of the storage unit on a regular basis. This can be done either with a device that measures temperature at one-minute intervals as was done in this research. This method is especially important for herds with low reproductive productivity.
For a routine monitoring device, a high/low thermometer will suffice. It will indicate when the unit is reaching excessively high or low temperatures between the times the thermometer is read. Keep in mind that the temperature of the unit will change each time the door is opened to add or remove semen. At all other times, the unit should stay between 15^oC and 20^oC. A controlled environment in the storage unit will ensure the sows are bred with healthy, viable, motile sperm cells.
We appreciate the financial support given by Ontario Pork and the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food, and the co-operation of the participating producers.BP

Cate Dewey is a professor in the Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph

© copyright 2005 AgMedia Inc..

back

Better Pork - April 2005

Two-way piglet stress relief
by Norman Dunn
Battling boredom but also relieving hog stress through ensuring adequate supply of essential minerals is the aim of a new hog pen play station now introduced in Europe. "Funbar" is the name of the concept and it comprises two hollow plastic tubes fixed perpendicular to a movable feeding trough. In these tubes are placed a choice of round bars either of compressed straw, sphagnum moss, solid mineral mixes or vitamins. The straw bar also contains a core of stress-reducing minerals and the solid mineral bar includes magnesium fumerate, again with the main aim of reducing stress build-up in the animals.
A small adjustable gap between the bottom of the tubes and the trough allows enough room for the hogs to chew and pull at the bars inside and thus pull play material, minerals and vitamins down into the trough and pen floor.
Feed supplement specialist Vitfoss says its Funbar is currently being used on 450 Danish hog farms with a marked reduction in tail biting and other fighting being reported.
Price for farmers in Denmark is currently the equivalent of $1070 Cdn for a package of eight Funbar stations plus a supply of 20 bars. Larger purchases bring discounts, says the Danish firm.BP

© copyright 2005 AgMedia Inc..

back

NAIMA PERFORMANCES ON FRENCH FARMS
	Non-Naima sows	Naima sows	10% best Naima herds	Difference between Naima and other sows
Litters	885, 633	113,423	18,163
Average born/litter	13.2	13.4	13.7	+0.2
Born live	12.2	12.6	13.0	+0.4
Average weaned	10.5	11.1	11.9	+0.6
Weaned/productive sow/year	25.7	27.6	29.9	+1.9
Mortality % of live born	13.4	11.8	8.9	-1.6
Average litters in sow lifetime	4.8	5.6	5.9	+0.8
Source: PenArLan from records of a million weaned litters

Key dates for Nutrient Management Act compliance (For existing greater than 300 "nutrient unit" farm operations)
March 31, 2005	Nutrient Management Strategy and Nutrient Management Plan (if building a manure storage) must be submitted in order to access the Nutrient Management Financial Assistance Program Funding application to Ontario Soil and Crop Improvement Association OSCIA.
July 1, 2005	Record of Approval must be submitted.
December 31, 2005	Projects must be completed and inspected, and producer must be in full compliance with Nutrient Management Act
*A Nutrient Management Strategy outlines how much manure and other nutrient materials will be generated, how it will be stored and where it will be used. A Nutrient Management Plan assesses the appropriate rate at which the manure and other nutrient materials are applied to land.