Page 3 - APN June 2017

CRC sees challenges and solutions ahead
PREDICTABLY, declin- ing prices for pork pro- ducers was top of mind at the recent Australian Pork Limited Delegates’ Forum.
Also no surprise was that the theories advanced for the price decline were many and varied, includ- ing importation of cooked ribs and products such as pulled pork produced from imported pork, the fire at Swickers Kingaroy and its impact on bon- ing and freezing capacity, and increased production through expansion and productivity.
Killer fact
Take a look at APL’s published figures for March and you will see slaughtering hit an all-time high, hence a number of people at the meeting suggested vol- ume has reached a simi- lar level to that when the last marked decline in prices occurred.
I can tell you there was no Nostradamus in the room, with not one person predicting the decline in prices seen since Decem- ber 2016.
The delegates suggest- ed a number of actions by APL and industry to more accurately monitor production numbers and to understand the main cause for the decline.
The big unanswered question is if it’s tempo- rary or will some industry consolidation be required to achieve what might be termed more sustainable prices?
A sustainable price, of course, depends on what your cost of production is.
All agreed we need technologies and strate- gies to achieve a marked reduction in COP.
I think a reduction of 40-60 cents/kg was sug- gested by APL.
And this is where Pork CRC and our dedicated band of researchers can come into it by wrap- ping their smart, creative minds around this.
However, we know the low-hanging fruit lies around increased carcass weight, which requires a market change rather than research, selling more pigs/sow/year and improv- ing feed efficiency or re- ducing feed costs.
CRC benchmark
Our Pork CRC bench- marking project demon- strates that productivity is increasing all the time (see March APN Initia- tives column) and the best producers generally far exceed the average.
So where do we set the initial targets for re- searchers?
For example, average herd feed conversion for benchmarking par- ticipants in 2015/16 was 3.78.
For the best three it was 3.56, with the best herd at 3.45 and all the top three recorded wean to sale (105kg) feed: gains below 2.3 – pretty
Initiatives
much world class.
I want to see technol-
ogies that reduce HFC consistently to 2.3 or be- low.
This will require in- herent changes to the pig’s capacity for protein deposition and might be achieved through ‘ad- vanced’ genetics and/or other means of manipu- lating the animal’s physi- ology.
Similarly, for repro- duction the average pigs weaned per sow for Aus- tralian herds in 2015/16 was 23.25, with the best three at 24.6 and the best at 25.6.
Good for what we have to work with, but not world class, due largely to our average born alive sitting at 12.4, about two piglets less than the US and one less than the best herd in the benchmarking project.
Interestingly, the best herd (from New Zea- land, using US genetics) weaned 29.75 pigs/sow in 2015/16, starting with only 13.5 born alive, so there’s more than one way to skin a cat.
Nevertheless, raising born alive to 13.5 and weaned to 12.5 or above is a challenge for research- ers and new science and ideas are required.
I expect genomics of the type implemented recently by PIC to have quite a marked effect on reproduction and number weaned, but what else is out there waiting to be tapped?
Sharing essential
In the short term, we can learn from the best in benchmarking.
This certainly occurs within the Pork CRC benchmarking group and I am sure it also does within the PIC and Queensland groups.
Our participants have willingly shared the rea- sons for their success with industry in general.
Even publishing the re- sults allows other produc- ers to see where they sit and provides targets and often strategies for im- provement.
Pork CRC will hold its last benchmarking meet- ing in October this year.
The project will then be handed over to APL.
While APL might want to consider expanding it, the team must ensure the results are available to industry as an excellent means of putting our in- dustry in context with the
rest of the world and for giving our researchers re- alistic targets for improve- ment.
It is of little value report- ing a 20 percent improve- ment in reproduction if starting 30 percent below what the best in industry are already achieving. Gutsy efforts
Animal health and medication costs is more of a challenge, requiring genuine innovation from
researchers and veterinar- ians.
However, we have very smart people in the field and I am impressed with the advances being made in understanding and ma- nipulating the gut micro- biome to improve health and performance.
We have seen some in- teresting outcomes us- ing non-starch polysac- charides to alter the gut microbiome and animal performance from John Pluske and his group at Murdoch University and from Alison Collins at NSW Trade & Invest- ment, who is investigating the effects of antibiotics and alternatives on antibi- otic resistance and the gut microbiome.
I really think there is something in this and it is an area taking off in human health, where some quite outstanding
☛ continued P4
Dr Alison Collins, NSW Trade & Investment, is part of a Pork CRC-supported team doing important work into improving pig gut health.
by DR ROGER CAMPBELL CEO
Protection and Profit
from START to FINISH
® Porcilis®
Long-term PCV2 immunity for performance and profit
A single vaccination (2 mL) to pigs from 3 weeks of age* Rapid onset of immunity with long-term protection Reduces viral load and shedding
Reduces mortality*
Reduces weight loss*
Increases average daily weight gain*
* During the fattening period. Refer to registered product label for full claim details. Refer to Technical brochure for details of trial data.
Intervet Australia Pty Limited trading as MSD Animal Health ABN 79 008 467 034 Toll free 1800 033 461 www.msd-animal-health.com.au
Amanda Vardanega 0427 011 579
PCV
AU/POK/0715/0015(2)
www.porknews.com.au
Australian Pork Newspaper, June 2017 – Page 3