Better Pork - February 2007
Behind The Lines
In this issue's cover story, Kate Procter explores the differences in costs associated with raising pigs in Canada and the United States and, in the course of her research, interviewed producers who are doing both.Cross-border feeding appears to be a growing trend and more producers are likely to explore the possibilities now that Maple Leaf Foods Inc., the province's largest processor, has announced plans to withdraw from packing pork in this province. As our story explains, there are more differences between Canada and the United States than just feed costs. It’s clear, for example, that producers on the other side of the border pay less for medications than their Canadian counterparts.
On the positive side, some cross-border producers conclude that the average sow barn operator here does a better job than his or her counterpart in the United States. The Canadian pork industry has felt this to be true for some time, but it's good to know that this perception still stands up. Still, it's likely that differences are greater between the most and least efficient operations in our province than between farms overall in Ontario and the United States.
Water has received a lot of attention in pork production. The subject is especially important for lactating sows, where it affects not only milk available for nursing litters but the sow’s reproductive performance in subsequent parities. Some research and opinion has pointed to the need for wet/dry feeders. Both manual and self feeding have shown advantages and one study indicated a benefit from allowing sows to decide how much water they want on their feed.
Researchers at Michigan State University recently investigated the concept of allowing nursing sows the freedom to decide when and how much they wanted to eat and whether they wanted to mix feed and water together while eating. In this month’s nutrition section on page 26 (see story), Janice Murphy reviews their data and concludes that we can still find new production efficiencies in this familiar area.
Ron MacDonald brings you more efficiencies, in our engineering section, on page 29 (see story). An energy audit he conducted on a cross-section of Ontario pig farms produced average savings of about $2,300, while one large farm saved a hefty $28,000.
Looking for even more savings? Norman Dunn reports in our Eye on Europe section, beginning on page 54, (see story) that new artificial insemination technology can shave almost five and a half hours off the work week for a herd with 250 matings per week. BP
ROBERT IRWIN
|
©Copyright 2007 AgMedia Inc. |
|