Page 4 - Pork Newspaper - February 2018

Treatment
Crate
Crate to Pen
SSP closed to day 7
SSP closed day 1 to 7
SSP open
Replicates
145
121
118
112
112
Born alive
11.2
11.5
11.3
10.9
10.8
Piglet losses (n/litter)
1.19a
1.33ab
1.73b
1.71b
3.46c
Number weaned
9.8a
9.4ab
9.2b
9.3b
7.9c
Performance indicator/Season
Winter
Summer
Experimental period
Total born
12.16
12.15
Born alive
11.05
11.28
Piglet losses to weaning (n/litter)
2.03b
1.63a
Weaned
9.0
9.3
Subsequent
Weaned sows mated (%)
84
90
Farrowing rate of those mated (%)
85
85
Sows farrowing a second litter
71b
76a
Total born
13.57a
12.43b
Born alive
12.54
11.62
Contact AGCO
Australia team TODAY for your next project
President’s Perspective
by JOHN COWARD
CRC looks up genes to see what it can see
Table 1: Effects of housing during farrowing and lactation on piglet losses to wean- ing (day 26). SSP – swing-sided farrowing pen, abc treatment means with different superscript letters are significantly different (P<0.05).
☛ from P3
entry to farrowing house to day seven; pens closed from day before farrowing to day seven; and pens re- mained open to day seven and throughout lactation.
The work was conducted in commercial research facilities and was one of the largest-scale studies of its type ever conducted.
Weaning age averaged 26 days and average sow parity was 3.3.
In summary (Table 1), leaving the swing-sided pens open through lacta- tion resulted in signifi- cantly higher pre-weaning mortality than all other treatments, with farrow- ing crates having the low- est mortality.
Piglet losses in the open pen system were three times higher than in far- rowing crates.
Results are similar to those of previous stud-
ies in the same farrowing pens, clearly showing that leaving pens open during farrowing can result in ex- tremely high piglet losses.
In this study, piglet losses were higher in the open system throughout lactation.
The higher mortality in the swing-sided pens closed to day seven sug- gests there may be a de- sign fault, which is com- mon with any of these types of systems.
The results confirm freedom-type farrowing pens, especially if left open in early lactation, can have severe adverse effects on piglet welfare and sow productivity.
Details of the pens and other outcomes are in- cluded in the report on Pork CRC’s website – well worth reading – and it also covers the effects of sys- tems/treatments on piglet
growth performance and subsequent reproduction and how all are affected by season (summer and winter).
Piglet mortality across the housing treatments was not affected by sea- son, but aspects of repro- duction were.
Some of the seasonal ef- fects are shown in Table 2. Next month I will cover where we sit globally on cost and productivity and where we need to improve to become a force in the
global pork industry.
I think we’re getting closer, but let’s see if you
agree.
To give you a taste of
what’s to come, I can tell you I believe we are glob- ally competitive in herd feed efficiency, measured as total feed used divided by total carcass weight produced/sold.
The bad news is it might be difficult to tease out the cause of high HFC (a value above 3.8).
www.porkcrc.com.au
Table 2: Experimental period and subsequent reproduction of sows that farrowed and lactated during summer or winter. A,b means with a different superscript letter are significantly different (P<0.05).
Pork CRC Program One leader Will van Wettere reported on his program’s progress to the 2017 Pork CRC Stakeholders’ Day, including Pork CRC Project 1A-110.
Raids hit QLD farmers
PORK Queensland Inc recommends all pork producers should con- sider their farm could be next after activists were recently arrested for il- legally breaking and en- tering farms in the Sun- shine Coast Hinterland.
Two neighbouring farms, a pig and a poul- try farm, were targeted by local animal activists who disregarded signs and breached the biosecurity of the properties with the intent to ‘free’ a number of animals that were to be transported interstate to a ‘refuge’.
The local couple were assisted by members of a southern activist group that recently conducted a demonstration at the gates to the properties in an at- tempt to gain public sup- port.
However, their misguid- ed thoughts and activities actually led to the injury of a number of livestock on each of the properties as a result of the midnight raid upsetting the live- stock, let alone the finan- cial impost of breached biosecurity.
All the activists’ claims of mistreatment were dismissed through good on-farm QA records and observed practices.
PQI supported the farm- ers and contacted Queens- land Police who were very supportive of investigating the alleged offence, which
resulted in the arrest. While some may say they will not get the pun- ishment they deserve and as such why bother engag- ing the police, if we don’t, they will get away with it and it encourages them to
continue to the next farm. With activists seeking more and more attention, producers are urged to re- view their own farm secu- rity measures, including cameras, signs and fenc-
ing.
Having prior contact
with the local police sta- tion raises their awareness of the risks to the live- stock, let alone the breach of trespass laws.
Producers should utilise Australian Pork Limited’s ‘Tool Kit’ available online at australianpork.com. au to provide the greatest protection and a plan of defence prior to an inva- sion.
In this recent case, talk- ing to neighbouring farms and being aware of such activities and sharing in- formation of suspect ac- tivities helped in arresting the culprits.
Remember, most farm- ers say after the raid that they didn’t think it would happen on their farm!
PQI continues to rep- resent Queensland pig farmers on a number of industry and government working groups targeting on-farm biosecurity is- sues.
Page 4 – Australian Pork Newspaper, February 2018
www.porknews.com.au