Red deer swine technology workshop
Seeing a room filled with hog producers keen on honing their skills was a fitting finale for the man whose mental muscle helped ensure the ongoing relevance of the Red Deer Swine Technology Workshop.
The Oct. 30 workshop, geared to hog producers and barn staff, attracted the strongest crowd in its 15-year history, with 240 people registered for the day's sessions.
Workshop manager Bernie Peet, who has now resigned from the organizing committee, received hearty congratulations from fellow organizers for his role – capably aided by his wife, Cathy – in pulling the event up by its bootstraps and making it more attractive and relevant for producers and sponsors.
Lee Whittington, president and CEO of Prairie Swine Centre, called Peet the architect of the workshop, which was moved in 2009 from Westerner Park to the former Capri Centre, now the Sheraton Red Deer.
Peet, who assumed the reins that year, was apprehensive at the time. The move had been necessary because the room in which the eve
nt had been held in the past was not available and he was not certain that the higher costs of using the hotel would be justified.
The overwhelming response from participants, however, was that they preferred the hotel, which is where the workshop has remained since 2009.
Whittington said in opening the final session of the 2013 workshop that he could see a marked difference in the room and in the hallways from the previous two or three years.
"I am truly excited by the buzz in this room," said Whittington in opening the final session of the day.
"It started first thing this morning, and it carries on now. You think back to the last two or three years that we've been here, and having chats in the back of the hall, and it sounded more like a wake than a buzz.
"Today, we're engaged, we're looking forward, we're networking, and although it's not one of our objectives here . . . one of the benefits of having this type of a workshop is that social networking time," said Whittington.
Getting people together to talk and share notes is a benefit for participants in addition to the "tidbits" of information they pick up from the sessions, he said.
THROUGH THE EYES OF THE
VETERINARIAN
Among the tidbits was a Red Deer veterinarian's intriguing - if not exactly refreshing - introduction to reasons and techniques for conducting on-farm postmortems when there are problems in the herd.
Egan Brockhoff said most Canadian producers are not inclined to do their own necropsies, but that the practice is more common in the United States as one of the tools available for maximizing the quality of care through animal health monitoring.
Postmortems can add value to a general health and monitoring program, which should be aimed at minimizing the chances of misdiagnosing a problem and then making the wrong decisions in managing that problem.
"All of us want to maximize the health and well-being of the animals on our farm. A healthy and productive animal is a profitable animal, it's a pleasure to work with and it's an absolute delight for us to be invested in," said Brockhoff.
"Our industry, which gets black eyes occasionally, really needs to remember that all of us, you and me, are focused on maximizing quality of care."
Conducting postmortems can be an effective facet in the farm's monitoring program, helping producers down to the root causes of problems as they develop, he said.
"Most of you in Alberta are probably PRRS and mycoplasma and APP negative. But some of you, of course, are positive for these disease. Our health status changes with the seasons, and it changes with the different animals we bring into our farm. We want to be monitoring that year round," he said.
Brockhoff then gave producers an overview of the technique he uses for investigating, recommending that three different animals should be necropsied to give an accurate picture of the herd.
The danger in doing a postmortem on a single problem is that the animal may have a chronic disease that does not accurately reflect what it happening with the herd, said Brockhoff.
The tools for performing an on-farm postmortem are relatively simple: Good lighting, a sharp knife or scalpel, a clean surface to work on, a camera and water for cleaning up afterwards.
There is little value in performing an autopsy if pathogens from the procedure are spread back into the barn, said Brockhoff.
While American veterinarians tend to work from the sternum, Brockhoff said he prefers to lay the animal on its right and then work through its left side, which allows a better view of its internal organs. He described for producers the series of incisions and methods for exposing the internal organs.
Once the animal has been opened up, the person performing the postmortem should inspect for lesions and other abnormalities in the respiratory, intestinal, gastric and neurological systems, taking note of whether multiple organs and systems are affected.
Photographs taken throughout the procedure are absolutely critical for on-farm postmortems, said Brockhoff.
"A lot of what you're going to see is going to be completely different. You've maybe never seen this lesion, or you're looking at something and you're convinced it's Disease A, but 
Disease A doesn't always look just like that."
A number of respiratory infections look alike inside the animal, and must therefore be analyzed further in a lab to determine the most effective course of action, said Brockhoff.
Selecting animals that are in the acute or early stages of disease will provide the most accurate picture of what is going on, because it's easiest to find the common causes of disease among those animals. Animals that are in the chronic stages of diseases such as Glässer's do not give an accurate picture of what's happening in the herd, said Brockhoff.
"Don't rush to a diagnosis. Try to categorize what you're seeing."
Accurate records with photos from each animals examined will provide valuable information to the veterinarian if the producer needs further help evaluating the results, he said.
"It can be a very simple and very effective process," he said.
MAKING MONEY, KANSAS STATE
UNIVERSITY STYLE
Steve Dritz, a professor in the College of Veterinary Medicine at Kansas State University, offered insight about optimizing feed efficiency and shared results from five research projects aimed at reducing feed costs.
Dritz spoke about the role small details play in changing the big picture and the need to make sure the right factors are included, measured and calculated.
"The bottom line when measuring feed efficiency is to understand how it is calculated. This will ensure that appropriate conclusions can be made about factors influencing feed efficiency when making comparisons to other farms or data sets," Dritz wrote in the outline included with his presentations.
Improving feed efficiency is a continuous process, developed from multiple angles, he said.
"You've got to really get in and know the details."
Factors that influence feed efficiency in the herd include consistent measuring of the feed to gain ratio, diet formulation, availability of amino acids, diet formulation, the quality of feed manufacturing, health status of the herd and barn management, said Dritz.
Getting good results in all of those areas requires commitment from all levels of production and continuous evaluation to ensure that the best cost practices are in place, he said.
"You've got to have all the pieces in place."
Addressing feed/gain ratios, he said comparisons between production units must be calculated with the same formula to get accurate results. KSU farms general take the total weight gain from start to finish divided into the amount of feed delivered, not including dead pigs.
Start and end weights will make a difference in that calculation given that the feed required per unit of gain is generally greater as the animals grown and mature.
Dritz described energy density as a key driver in feed efficiency. Cost and availability of feed will determine which diet formulations are most efficient, he said.
He observed that Alberta had a good barley crop this year, which would be a factor in selecting the formulation that will provide the best efficiency and looking at the types and quantities of ingredients and by-products that may be needed to reach energy targets.
"We've spent a lot of time over the last few years looking especially at DDGS and midds. Those are the two primary by-product ingredients that we run into in our area of the world. We'll use bakery product and, you never know, sometimes you run into hominy and all those other corn products as well."
His team observed early on that carcass yield will drop with higher fibre ingredients, but much of that could be recovered by withdrawing those ingredients in the last 20 days through reduction of the gut fill that results from the excess fibre.
Besides using energy efficiently, it's critical to ensure adequate levels of lysine and other amino acids, said Dritz.
In one research project, the KSU team lost $4 per pig by limiting amino acid intake, he said.
Grain particle size will also determine how the pigs perform, he said.
"Feed manufacturing has become a lot more critical."
A well-mixed, uniform diet will have a big impact in grower performance, he said.
Health status and barn management will also play significant roles in feed efficiency, said Dritz.
Lower mortality rates mean an automatic improvement in feed efficiency, because dead pigs don't contribute to the unit's gain.
Good bio-security and sanitation protocols therefore prevent the spread of pathogens and result in considerable improvements in feed/gain, said Dritz.
Well-designed buildings and rooms that are kept in good repair also play a big role. There's no money to be made from feed that falls into the pit and duct tape is not a building material, he said.
FOLLOWING THROUGH
Scott Hyshka, manager of Sunterra's Mountain Vista Farm, Kevin Brooks from Genetiporc and veterinarian Blaine Tully from Steinbach, MB. focused their talks on animal care and sow management.
Brooks addressed how public perception of the hog industry is affected by groups and individuals who focus their lenses and microphones on extremes, but don't show the big picture.
To illustrate his point, Brooks showed a picture of a car in the ditch.
"Does this mean everyone is a bad driver? Does it mean everyone is going to roll a car? No. But we have to understand the difference, and it's the same when we work with our stock people – understanding that we don't want to have the wrecks on the farm," he said.
Perception is reality in the world outside the farm, and that's why producers must take a close look at the way they and their staff are taking care of business.
"To be a good stock person, you have to have good animal welfare," he said.
The Code of Practice must be understood, the reason it exists must be understood, and so must the consequences for failing to follow through with the requirements.
He then walked through the direct effects of poor handling, from breeding through shipping.
Rushing, rough handling, failure to observe animals in distress and having people perform tasks without understanding the reasons – such as docking and clipping piglets – can have harmful consequences throughout the operation.
Sudden deaths on the truck may be linked to how those animals were handled and the stresses they experienced before and during loading or may also be a result of how the truck was being driven, said Brooks.
Producers who have issues in the grower barn could ask themselves whether those problems are linked to something that happened in the nursery, he said.
"Keep sharing info with your co-workers, and make sure your standards on farm are equal for all staff. Make sure the standard is put in place and make sure that everyone follows the standard," said Brooks.
Good stock people can make a massive difference in the performance of a farm, because they dramatically reduce the types of losses that come as a result of poor handling, he said.
"At every stage of the farm, we as technicians have some effect on the performance of the animals," he said.
"Sometimes you won't see the results for weeks, months, even a year."
Focusing on the breeding barn, Hyshka described his thoughts on maintaining body condition in his herd of 4,300 sows.
His management system is based on providing the sows with fresh, clean water, and high quality feed while reducing waste and ensuring that sows are fed to the correct condition for breeding and gestation.
"Water is the most important thing in the barn and can be overlooked easily, so we want to make sure there's access to fresh water at all times," said Hyshka.
"Routine things you might want to look at is testing your water annually, looking for microbes or coliforms. You can tolerate a little bit, but none is best," he said.
Periodic chemical analysis and periodic well shocking are performed as well to make sure there's nothing harmful coming into the water.
Hyshka uses two wheat-based rations, with additional soy and peas in the lactation diet.
New crops coming in are analyzed for protein and energy levels to ensure that the formulation is adjusted and ground to a target of 600 to 800 microns. Feeds are screened at the mill for mycotoxins, he said.
Delivery systems and feed storage are monitored to make sure they're working properly, clean and free of mould.
Feed waste is addressed by a number of means, including making sure that the feed is going where it's supposed to go and that there are no leaks.
Reducing non-productive days wherever possible is a key component as is feed waste in farrowing.
Sow feeding protocols start with making sure the farm has the right animals for its systems, said Hyshka, who is currently using L277 Fast females.
"We want to figure out what the right weight and age is to be breeding at, and we want to back that down and figure out what our entry age and weight needs to be."
He targets breeding at 220 days of age, on the second heat, with gilts entering the breeding barn at about 120 kilograms and ready for breeding at 170 kg.
Hyshka uses the KSU feed chart to determine the ratio for each animal and has created a body condition chart to help staff adjust for those animals.
He said an ad-lib feeding system is working well in his barn, reducing waste and ensuring that the sows are getting the feed they need.
Hyshka said the drivers he uses to control feed costs are least-cost formulations; minimizing waste including non-productive days, spills, animals going off feed, over-feeding and feeding design; individualizing gestation feeding to the sow's condition; ad-lib feeding of farrowing sows, and keeping a close watch on the numbers.
Tully offered producers his top five factors in improving farrowing rate, including managing the boar, weaned sow management and gilt as well as breeding techniques and reviewing breeding protocol with staff – a process he referred to as stopping to sharpen the saw.
"There's nothing top secret about farrowing rates," said Tully. "There's no rocket science – we're just breeding sows."
He showed a slide charting the various aspects of swine reproduction as pieces in a "big puzzle," with pieces including genetics, nutrition, health, bio-security and facilities, and the producer at the centre.
"Someone has to be the puppet master and manage all those puzzle pieces and fit them together. It's not always an easy job."
Getting it right, however, can make a significant difference in the farm's income.
"If you consistently miss your farrowing target by five per cent a year . . . you market a lot fewer pigs and, if you do the math, that works out to about $62,000 a year."
Add that to another $15,000 lost in AI errors and that's an income loss of over $70,000," said Tully.
"Seventy grand could bring in more staff for your farm."
Good teaser boars – the ones that are the chattiest, smelliest and frothiest – play a huge role in heat stimulation, he said.
While genetics is a factor, training is important as well and should start at an early age to drive the highest possible libido factors.
It also helps to play on their jealousies of rival boars through techniques such as switching them around from time to time, said Tully.
Equal attention must be paid to management of the weaned sow and the gilt, he said.
"What happens at farrowing does not stay at farrowing," he said.
It takes about 12 days from farrowing for the sow's brain and hormones to be reset. Tully said he likes to maximize lactation feeding levels and push sows post weaning, feeding at least twice a day to shift her brain back into producing the hormones that will bring on her next cycle.
Tully said he prefers to group sows by body condition, so fat sows aren't stealing food from thinner animals.
"I'd rather have a fat sow stealing from a fat sow," he said.
Tully also encouraged producers to utilize hormone crutches like PG600, when needed, to reduce the number of non-production days in the breeding barn.
Gilt development begins after the animal is weaned as a first-parity sow, he said.
"Everything we do up to the point of when she's weaned as a parity one will impact what she's going to do for the rest of her active lifetime in that herd, so that's important," he said.
Factors in gilt development include selecting animals for the gilt inventory, exposing them to the boar at the correct age (180 to 210 days), frequency of boar exposure, the acclimation and feeding programs, their age and weight at the first heat, their age and weight at the first mating and hormonal manipulation for problem animals.
Tully went on to discuss pitfalls in breeding techniques. Regardless of whether producers are using live cover, AI or post-cervical AI, the same set of factors are important, including hygiene, boar exposure and heat detection, care taken in handling semen and being especially careful to correctly follow the chosen method.
With so much room for error, it is essential that barn staff are well trained and that they understand what they are doing. Paying attention to the basics will optimize breeding rates and achieve targets, said Tully.
MAKING SPACE
Bernie Peet also took the stage, giving a talk on the factors producers need to consider in preparing to switch from stall to loose housing for their sows, whether by choice or by mandate from the pending changes in the Code of Practice.
Making the switch is a complex process that will require considerable thought and planning, said Peet. Producers should look at their overall business model and decide whether it needs to be changed as part of the move to group housing, he said. They should familiarize themselves with the various systems that are available and then determine which of those system would best meet their objectives.
Decisions will depend on a number of factors, including the size of the farm and the age of the buildings.
"This is a massive topic, we could talk about this for days," said Peet.
"I spent a lot of my time in the 90s working with producers in the UK, who were undergoing the change from sow stalls to group housing.
"Because there's a significant capital investment, we have to consider what that business should do.
"Do we need to change the business model? There's lots of options to look at, because you are undertaking a fairly substantial change."
For some producers, the answer may be to simply quit.
For older producers whose children don't necessarily want to take over the business, a line in the sand like having to change to group housing will precipitate that choice, said Peet.
"This is a very tough decision for people to make."
Peet commonly advised clients in the UK who wanted to stay in the business to use existing sow stalls for farrowing and growing, and then build new gestation rooms and increase the number of sows in their herds.
Weaning age, carcass weight and the number of hogs sold per year combined would justify a bigger investment, said Peet.
He found that cheaper conversions, such as cutting of the backs of the sow stalls, were almost always a disaster.
"I don't think it is economical to keep the same building and reduce the number of sows. It's probably economic suicide. So, we need to look at different ways of developing the business."
Peet offered a discussion of various feeding systems that can be incorporated into a group housing setup, depending on the number of sows in the operation and in each group.
Static groups, in which all sows are in the same stage of gestation, are easier to manage, but not practical on smaller farms, he said.
Hospital and recovery pens are essential to isolate sows that become sick, injured or disadvantaged. Danish swine specialists suggest that the number of spaces that should be set aside would depend on the feeding system, varying from five per cent with electronic feeding systems to 10 per cent in barns that use floor or liquid feeding, said Peet.
Monitoring sows for lameness and other health issues will be more difficult in a loose-housing system, making it imperative that barn staff be especially vigilant in watching for problems and getting those sows into a hospital or recovery stall as soon as possible, he said.
"It's a big decision, especially if you've not experienced group housing before. Do you want truly individual feed systems, or can you manage with individual feed systems?" said Peet.
"The group size will tend to point you in the direction of one or two systems you could look at. Do you want bedding or slatted floors? In this part of the world, probably slatted floors would be the choice. But, in other parts of the world, that's not necessarily true."
The amount of space available, the room available to build and other factors must all be considered, he said.
"You need a high level of stockmanship. Don't approach this as something you just walk into."
BYE BYE, BERNIE
At the end of the session, Whittington thanked Peet for choosing to come to Canada and congratulated him for his "incredible run" as editor of the Western Hog Journal, which he described as a magazine that was in need of some help.
"When Bernie came on, he had this special sense of being able to take science and make it interesting and applicable in that magazine, and we've watched that magazine blossom under his guidance."
While he has retired from the magazine and the workshop, Peet continues to offer his expertise as an industry consultant.
A new editor, Sheri Monk, has taken over the magazine and the workshop committee is still looking for someone to take over its management.
Peet took the last word, saying it had been a tremendous day for him.
"Some years of this have been harder work than others. I've enjoyed it. I've enjoyed being with every one of you."
He said he hopes to continue projects on group sow housing and training in different parts of the world. •
— By Brenda Kossowan