SEARCH
Industry Partners
Prairie Swine Centre is an affiliate of the University of Saskatchewan
Prairie Swine Centre is grateful for the assistance of the George Morris Centre in developing the economics portion of Pork Insight.
Financial support for the Enterprise Model Project and Pork Insight has been provided by:
Greenhouse gas emissions from stored liquid swine manure in a cold climate
Posted in: Environment by admin on January 1, 2006 | No Comments
Culturable Escherichia coli in Soil Mixed with Two Types of Manure
Posted in: Environment by admin on | No Comments
QUALITATIVE STUDY OF ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN WASTEWATERS OF A SWINE SLAUGHTERHOUSE
Posted in: Environment by admin on | No Comments
Economic Assessment of Manure Phosphorus Regulations for Manitoba's Pig Industry: Part 2 Overall impact at the Provincial Scale
Posted in: Environment by admin on | No Comments
The objective of this part of the study is to estimate the effect proposed phosphorus
regulations in Manitoba will have on manure management costs to the Province’s pig producers
(individually and in aggregate), should the regulations come into effect. The task is to apply the
framework for analysis outlined in Part 1 to determine an estimated annual Provincial cost. To establish an aggregate estimate of changed manure management costs requires first a determination of the estimated cost at the individual operation or farm level. The individual costs can then be aggregated to determine an estimate at the Provincial level. For the individual operation, the cost estimation is a three-step process: first, establish a N-based
cost and land area (cost and land area that relates to standard nitrogen-based application);
second, establish the cost and land area required under compliance to the new regulations; third,
subtract the second estimates from the first to determine the changes. The estimated added annual cost to the Manitoba pig industry under a maximum threshold
regulation of 2xPhosphorus removal of 17.88 million dollars represents about 18% of the
estimated annual 2005 net income accruing to pig producers in the Province. The estimated
added annual cost under a maximum threshold regulation of 1xPhosphorus removal of 27.86
million dollars represents about 28% of the estimated annual 2005 net income accruing the pig
producers in the province.
Extension Award for Lee Whittington
Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on | No Comments
Saskatoon – Lee Whittington, the Manager of Information Services for the Prairie Swine Centre of Saskatoon, is the recipient of this year’s Animal Industries Award in Extension and Public Service from the Canadian Society of Animal Science.
The award is to recognize outstanding service to the animal industries of Canada in technology transfer, leadership, and education in animal science. It’s sponsored by the Canadian Pork Council, Chicken Farmers of Canada and Dairy Farmers of Canada.
Lee Whittington’s largest and highest profile project was the Pork Interpretive Gallery (P.I.G.) constructed within the Prairie Swine Centre’s Elstow Research Farm. He raised more than a million dollars with half of that amount coming from the pork industry to finance the construction and initial operation of the gallery.
“The Pork Interpretive Gallery would never have happened without Lee’s tireless efforts,” notes John Patience, President of the Prairie Swine Centre. “Through his vision, the industry has a wonderful facility to showcase the pork industry to young people and the general public.”
Lee Whittington’s other accomplishments include:
· a quarterly newsletter that reaches 4,500 prairie producers four times a year.
· the first nation-wide satellite conference held for the pork industry (‘95 to ‘99).
· study tours to the United States for Canadian pork producers and consultants.
· the first training course focusing on Hydrogen Sulphide Awareness training
· the first Canadian web-based database for the swine industry providing easy search access to thousands of research reports.
In addition to scores of published research reports, Lee Whittington is a popular speaker throughout North America. He has presented in eight Canadian provinces, 6 U.S. states, Scotland, England, The Netherlands, Denmark and Ukraine.
“Technology transfer isn’t complete until we have achieved technology adoption by the commercial industry,” says Whittington, who joined the Prairie Swine Centre in 1992. “Research results have no value sitting on a shelf.”
In 1979, Lee Whittington graduated from the University of Guelph with a Bachelor of Science in Agriculture. Believing in continuous improvement, Lee has continued to upgrade his education, completing the Advanced Agricultural Leadership Program (Ontario) in 1989, and an MBA in 1997 at the University of Saskatchewan.
Prairie Swine Centre Inc., located in Saskatoon, is a non-profit research corporation affiliated with the University of Saskatchewan, and is recognized globally for its contributions to practical, applied science in pork production in the disciplines of Nutrition, Engineering and Animal Behaviour.
Large Group Auto Sort: Potential and Problems
Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on | No Comments
Summary
Large Group Auto Sort (LGAS) systems are being used successfully on a number of operations. In general they are achieving their potential in terms of sorting pigs for market. They are infrequently used to sort pigs towards different diets, even though considerable potential exists for improved efficiency. Loss of productivity remains a significant problem on some operations, although better designed food courts and better training generally address the problem. LGAS requires the collaboration and dedication of the manufacturer/distributor, the farm manager, and staff to ensure its success.
Introduction
Large Group Auto Sort (LGAS)is a relatively new system that applies electronic technology to the management of grow-finish pigs. The ability of the modern industry to assemble several hundred animals of a similar weight into one pen has made the application of electronic scales and sorting gates cost effective. But the method has received mixed reviews. A number of operations have removed the scales or are using them at less than their planned efficiency, yet others are enthusiastic about the benefits to their operation. We have been monitoring progress in the technology over the past few years, been involved in a producer satisfaction survey, and are conducting a series of trials at our PSC Elstow Research Farm. LGAS has a number of potential advantages, but a number of problems have also been identified.
Potential
1. Reduced labour at sorting. Rather than herding pigs to and through a set of scales, LGAS weighs and sorts pigs as they enter the food court.
2. Hitting the grid. Pigs can be sorted for market the day before shipping, reducing the error involved in pulling pigs based on week-old weights.
3. Split phase feeding. Large and small pigs within the same pen can be fed separate diets that better match their nutrient requirements. Although recognized as a potential for the system, it is rarely practiced. Most systems have not installed additional feed lines that would be needed to accomplish this option.
4. Paylean management. As pigs approach market weight they can be sorted to the heavy feed court to receive Paylean for the maximum allowable period. All pigs in the group can receive Paylean rather than the final two market groups. Again, this potential has rarely been achieved.
5. Easier handling, reduced losses during transport. Easier handling and loading has been anecdotally reported, and transport surveys have confirmed an advantage of LGAS.
Problems
1. Poor performance. The most successful operations report losses of less than 3% in average daily gain, but some report in excess of 10%. Food court design probably accounts for much of this discrepancy. It is critical that the food court provide easily accessible feeding spaces.
2. Training of pigs. LGAS only works if pigs move easily through the scale enroute to the food court. Most producers favour a gradual training method in which the food court is accessible through several openings for the first few weeks. These openings are gradually closed until the pigs must enter through the scale only. Fewer than 5% of pigs should fail to learn the system.
3. Managing the pigs. Although pigs in LGAS are generally as healthy as pigs in conventional pens, they do require health checks and occasional treatment. Health checking requires walking through all areas of the pen. Relief pens, for suspect animals at the beginning of the grow-out period, for those requiring treatment, and for those that fail to learn the system should be provided and used.
4. Managing the program. Although the software is generally easy to manage, there is a learning curve. Managers must ensure that their staff understands the need to monitor pig performance and ensure the program sorts properly.
5. Manufacturer/distributor support. A number of operations have indicated that they could have used more support from the manufacturers or distributors in planning their system, installation, and initial operation.
Although results from LGAS are improving, and the majority of operations that have used them would install them again, some operations continue to report substantial problems even though they have done everything according to recommendations. The causes of these problems are sometimes difficult to identify, and some producers consider the program a failure.
Further Research at Prairie Swine Centre
In 2005, two fully-slatted large group grower-finisher rooms with capacity for 280 pigs each were modified to include auto sorters. A series of studies have been proposed to identify aspects of pen layout, design and pig behaviour that are limiting productivity or impacting on pig behaviour. The first series of studies will be completed in early 2007 and look at the question of handling ease and indicators of stress at transport and comparing pigs housed in large groups (approx 280 pigs/pen versus small groups (18 pigs per pen).
During the grow-out period animals will be housed and managed as per typical industry norms in each housing system. Measures included on days of transport. Physiological sampling for breathing rate, body temperature, skin blotching and cortical (hormone levels). These measure were taken in the barn, on the truck and at the packing plant
After being off leaded from the truck. Comparison of these indicators of stress will help to determine any physiological differences on animals that may lead to differences in ease of handling at market. Additional observations of speed of pig movement at leading and the amount of required use of pushing or use of prod were also made.
Implications
Manufacturers, distributors and managers must be aware that LGAS requires their attention during the design, installation, and initial operating phases. Only when staff feel comfortable with the day to day management of the system will LGAS be capable of achieving its potential. The potential to differentially feed animals of different weights within a pen is yet to be achieved, and requires greater attention to feed delivery systems.
Grower/Finisher Room: Achieving 95% Core Weights
Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on | No Comments
The variability of pigs that go to slaughter resulted in a loss in 2002 of $3.63 per pig. Dressed weight at market needs to be adjusted, as it is farm specific, and continue to be adjusted as various market factors fluctuate. Sort losses are a huge contributor to pig variability. This variability results in a variety of weights of pigs going to market, less targets being hit, and a reduction in net returns to the farm. To reduce sort losses, producers can define the barn’s optimum market weight, based on financial returns, determine the barn’s capacity for shipping some pigs sooner, to reduce heavies, or some pigs later, to reduce lights, weigh pigs, and address variability. Smaller pigs growing faster, decreasing disease, and ensuring adequate access to feeders and drinkers can control uniformity of pigs. Variability can be managed by pre-sorting the pigs into predicted groups of performance, removing lighter weight pigs at weaning to increase throughput, and not mixing gilt offspring with sow’s offspring due to compromised immunity of the gilts offspring.
Effect of organic pig production systems on performance and meat quality
Posted in: Meat Quality by admin on | No Comments