Sow mortality is increasing, with average levels in most countries now in the low double figures. Note, these are average figures meaning many farms are worse. Ten to fifteen years ago we would be expecting to see sow mortalities around 6% to 8%.
There are some obvious costs of sow mortality. The most obvious is loss of sow slaughter value plus the cost of disposal of a dead sow. These costs vary continuously over time but an average of $200 to $250 over time is reasonable. This means the extra 4% to 5% sow mortality has a direct cost of between $10,000 and $12,500 per 1000 sows per year. Assuming 28 piglets sold per sow this is an extra cost of up to $0.44 per pig! This figure just applies to sows that actually die. It excludes sows that are sold with no value. This number increases directly with sow mortality.
Dead sows do not produce piglets!
Looking at average data from farms, about 47% of sow deaths whilst pregnant, about 42% are in lactation, and the remaining 11% in dry sows and gilts. Sows that die in lactation have produced piglets, the 47% that die pregnant will give a direct loss. Let’s assume an average of 12.5 pigs weaned per sow farrowed X 47% = 5.87 pigs per sow less.
For 1000 sows, assuming 47% of sow mortality occurs when sows are pregnant, 5% extra mortality X 47% = 2.35% of sows = 23.5 sows less farrowing X 5.87 weaned pigs X 2.4 farrowing = 331 less weaned piglets per year. Assuming 95% liveability wean to finish and a margin over feed of $70 then we have $22,011 lost margin per year.
Looking at PigChamp average data for USA, in the past 15 years average piglets weaned per sow per year has increased by 1.75 piglets, but in the same time born alive per farrowing has increased 1.99 piglets. Assuming 2.35 litters per sow per year would mean 4.67 extra piglets born alive. A good deal of the gains in prolificacy are being lost. Increasing sow mortality is a big part of this loss of gain.
There is an effect on the staff of higher sow mortality.
This is difficult to assess in dollar terms, but it’s there. Moving dead sows is time-consuming and hard work, dead sows are heavy. More still is the effect on motivation. When staff gets used to such high levels of mortality, it becomes more and more difficult to motivate them to improve the quality of their work – “whatever we do pigs will die”. It is not easy recruiting and maintaining skilled staff. Demotivation of dead sows is one of the reasons.
Sustainable, humane, and responsible farming practices
Lastly, and one factor that is becoming increasingly important is politics. It is very difficult for us to defend our farming practices as being sustainable, humane, and responsible when more than 10% of sows are dying. Add to that an average of 31% stillbirths and mortality from birth to slaughter. That’s nearly 1/3 of all pigs that were alive when the sows start farrowing that we lose.
In parts of the world, in particular Europe, there is already considerable pressure on farmers to reverse these trends, to the point of some countries considering legislation to stop increasing prolificacy or even to reduce it!
Higher mortality is due to increased productivity! This is the story being told by many genetic companies. At Genesus we do not agree with this. For all of the reasons above, sow mortality is a significant cost.
If you take the $12,000 direct cost of sow mortality and $22,000 from lost margin this total $34,000 per 1,000 sows. Assuming 28 pigs sold this is a cost of $1.21 per pig. This is as much more than many larger farms will be paying for their genetics!
Genesus breeding program has maintained robustness whilst increasing born alive per litter. There has never made any economic sense to blindly increase prolificacy and end up with a sow that dies or needs other sows to rear her piglets.
In trial after trial, on commercial farms, Genesus sows have significantly lower mortality than all of our competitors. We regularly see 4% to 5% lower mortality (same farm, same feed, and management).
We all know the old saying, where there is livestock there is deadstock. Some mortality is inevitable and acceptable. Today’s average levels are not acceptable, from a cost and management point of view and maybe more importantly a political point of view. Pig production is under the spotlight. As an industry, we need to be proactive in reducing mortality. Buying Genesus is the quickest and simplest way to start.
Pork Commentary, April 5th, 2021 Jim Long, President-CEO, Genesus Inc.
Our Observations
U.S.D.A. Pork Cut-outs last Friday were $1.09 – a very strong price for the beginning of April.
Iowa- Southern Minnesota Lean Hogs averaged 99.47 last Friday.
Don’t forget the Chicken Littles last August that encouraged selling 2021 summer lean hogs as 75₵ lb.? We understand that 40-50% of the U.S. industry have taken positions lower than today’s market with many going to miss the profit upside.
U.S. Pork Export Sales at 61,000 metric tonnes was the second-highest on record. China at 29,710 was the highest since September. Mexico continued strong at 15,790 metric tonnes. China exports will continue strong.
The second ASF wave has impacted China’s hog supply by 20-50% (No one knows for sure). The Canary in the Coal Mine for China is piglet prices at more than 1800 RMB ($273.94) per head up from 995 RMB ($125) last November.
“No one pays more than they have to”.
Mexico, we expect has cut hog production due to the economic turmoil of 2020. There is no government support such as CFAP in Mexico. Now high feed prices in Mexico and general lack of credit will limit recovery. We expect Mexico imports to continue strong through 2021.
We reiterate our expectation the U.S.D.A. March 1 Hogs and Pigs Report over estimates the breeding herd and market inventory. Time will tell but it will be difficult in the coming weeks to measure year over year slaughter data because of last year’s chaos. The one way will be to compare the slaughter weights. Last year as plant disrupted slaughter declined weights ballooned.
U.S. Sow slaughter numbers continue high over 67,000 in the latest week, the week before 71,000. We calculate about 61,000 is herd equilibrium when you consider the average U.S. sow mortality was an atrocious plus 13% last year. You need lots of gilts going in to maintain the sow herd.
In Europe hog prices have also gotten stronger. Spain is the largest producer in Europe and its largest exporter. On Jan 28th, Spains’ price was 1.10 Euro kg live (60.33₵ lb. U.S.). On April 1st, 1.46 Euro kg live (77.66₵ lb. U.S.) Obviously the price increase in USA is not a unique situation.
World supply and demand is pushing prices higher.
The current Spanish price is close to all-time high. Spain has been doing well but tough environmental rules and attitudes are limiting expansion. The breeding herd in 2019 was 2,577,000, in 2020 – 2,575,000. No change. The environmental rules will be hard for Spain to increase production significantly despite the industry’s success.
China
Below is an opinion from China. Their survey of colleagues throughout China.
The unofficial survey is that the recent resurgence is very serious and actually worse than the 2019 outbreak when 50% of production was lost.
Contacts are saying in their estimations more than half the hogs lost again- quite a setback. Of course no one really knows, but says losses well under reported.
Expects pig prices in second half of 2021 to sky rocket even higher once the glut to slaughter (ASF dump) dries up.
Consequences of China in Our Opinion
U.S. hog prices to continue strong with fall lean hog futures currently undervalued.
The loss of 7-15 million sows doesn’t get fixed overnight.
China Pork Export Sales (huge last report) will stay high pulling Pork out of U.S. domestic market while U.S. pork supply has shrunk. Pushing lean hog prices to stay high.
The financial implications of the loss of production in China will have some real consequences on some of Chinas hog producers. Debt + no pigs + no revenue = problems
In China there will be winners and losers. If you can keep your hogs alive you make big money. If you cannot, might be disaster.
It will be interesting where the capital will come from to rebuild after second wave. For bankers and investors what is cost premium to own hogs that have history of huge death toll and an unclear future re potential third wave?
Editor’s note: The following piece was written for Swine Innovation Porc. For more information, contact Leslie Walsh at lwalsh@swineinnovationporc.ca.
Stewart Cressman opened the presentation, featuring Aruna Ambagala and other SIP-supported researchers.
If we diagnosed African Swine Fever (ASF) like we do the common cold, you could just look for pigs that are sneezing or blowing their nose. Unfortunately, ASF is much harder to detect and far more lethal for the hog industry.
In light of that reality, the timing was perfect for a presentation on ASF diagnosis during the 2021 Banff Pork Seminar. The talk was one of six that comprised an ASF webinar presented by Swine Innovation Porc (SIP) called, “African Swine Fever: How is Canada Getting Prepared?”
Using their virtual platform, swine sector experts offered a glimpse of what the pork industry is doing to prevent and prepare for an outbreak of ASF in Canada. Moderated by Stewart Cressman, Chair, SIP, the session included information on ASF research priorities in Canada, risk mitigation, emergency depopulation preparedness, research activities in the U.S. and Canada’s efforts to face the threat of ASF.
“My objective is to provide a brief overview of our efforts to evaluate alternative sample types for ASF diagnosis,” said Aruna Ambagala, a research scientist with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s (CFIA) National Centre for Foreign Animal Disease (NCFAD) in Winnipeg. Ambagala is head of the Mammalian Disease Unit and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) Reference Lab for Classical Swine Fever (CSF) at the NCFAD.
“Because of the non-specific clinical signs, laboratory diagnosis is essential for ASF in Canada and the U.S.,” said Ambagala. “We have state-of-the-art diagnostics, but we continue to work on improving them as we go.”
How ASF is detected in carcasses
During the Banff Pork Seminar in January 2020, Klaus Depner presented on Germany’s campaign to stay ASF-free. Despite their best efforts, since September 2020, more than 500 ASF cases have been discovered in wild boar carcasses near Germany’s border with Poland.
In regard to ASF diagnosis, there are two approaches: detecting the agent, which is the virus, and looking at the antibodies to the virus.
“With the agent, we are examining the genomic material of ASF, which you can do using a real-time PCR screening test available at NCFAD and at labs that are part of the Canadian Animal Health Surveillance Network,” said Ambagala.
The Canadian Animal Health Surveillance Network (CAHSN) is a network of federal, provincial and university animal health laboratories across Canada. Used to detect ongoing outbreaks, this test spots the presence of ASF in an animal and takes two to four hours once the samples are received in the lab. The initial result will be confirmed within 24 hours by sequencing, followed by virus isolation and whole genome sequencing, all at NCFAD. Virus isolation can take up to 15 days to complete.
“The other method of ASF diagnosis is scrutinizing the antibodies for evidence of past exposure to the virus,” said Ambagala. “You can see the antibodies for months or years afterwards in the serum samples through an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay test at NCFAD.”
The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) is an immunological assay commonly used to measure antibodies, antigens, proteins and glycoproteins in biological samples. NCFAD can handle a large number of samples, and because the specificity of the test is not optimal, they must perform complementary tests to augment it. Samples currently accepted for these additional tests can be whole blood and serum samples.
“If a pig is dead, we request a full post-mortem and submit tissue samples such as tonsils, spleen, liver, kidney or lung,” said Ambagala. “The most important sample for detection of ASF and other viruses like CSF are the tonsils, and bone marrow is requested if the carcass is decomposed.”
Test limitations and work-arounds
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s (CFIA) National Centre for Foreign Animal Disease (NCFAD) in Winnipeg, where Ambagala’s team operates.
Of course, there are limitations to these sampling efforts. Early detection of ASF is critical, and diagnosis based on clinical signs is difficult. This is especially true during initial stages of the infection, when symptoms may not be an obvious indicator of the virus.
“In light of the limitations, we need to maintain some sort of surveillance program. This can be problematic, as individual sampling is quite labour-intensive and costly when you need to handle individual animals or conduct a full post-mortem to collect samples,” said Ambagala.
To overcome the cost and time hurdles, researchers are exploring alternative sample types for two different scenarios: groups of live animals and herds that have a high mortality rate.
“For group samples, we are looking at oral fluids and processing fluids,” said Ambagala. “In the case of samples from carcasses, we need ones that can be collected quickly and safely from dead pigs without a full post-mortem.”
All samples must be validated and compared to the ‘gold standard’ sampling types that include whole blood, tonsils and spleen. To do so, scientists examine the viral load of the samples as determined by real-time PCR and virus isolation.
Liquid gold: oral fluids test best
Ambagala’s team prefers oral fluids over other sampling mediums.
What makes oral fluids attractive for sampling?
“Oral fluids are a mixture of saliva coming from major and minor salivary glands, so they are a very rich sample that we can test for both pathogens and antibodies,” said Ambagala. “These fluids have also been proven to detect Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome [PRRS], Porcine Circovirus type 2 [PCV2] and Swine Influenza Virus [SIV]. Multiple research projects confirm that the ASF genome and antibodies can be detected in oral fluids upon infection.”
Additionally, oral fluids are an easy sample to collect. Pigs are naturally attracted to a hanging rope, and once they chew on it for 30 minutes, the sample can be taken. Of particular interest to both farmers and consumers, collection of oral fluids is non-invasive, humane and feasible to do on-farm.
Validation of oral fluids is necessary
Like other sample types, oral fluid testing must be validated to confirm its efficacy. NCFAD, in collaboration with the Plum Island Animal Disease Center of New York, is performing experimental inoculations to show that ASF can be detected in oral fluids early enough to be used for surveillance.
“In a preliminary experiment at NCFAD, we inoculated four pigs in a pen with ASF and found we could identify the oral fluid before the animals showed real clinical signs,” said Ambagala. “We then repeated that experiment on a larger scale with two tests at NCFAD and two at Plum Island. We used ASFV Georgia – the strain of the virus currently circulating in Europe and Asia – at NCFAD, and we used Malta/78 ASFV – a moderately virulent strain – at Plum Island.”
The researchers then introduced an infected pig into a larger pen of 24 pigs and collected daily samples from all animals, observing how the virus spread in the pen and how early they could detect it in oral fluids. The results confirmed the power and potential of oral fluids in relation to ASF.
“The specific purpose of the oral fluid would be for early detection of ASF in commercial herds and, if all goes well, could be considered for claiming disease freedom in compartments during an outbreak,” said Ambagala.
Going forward, the plan is to conduct field evaluations on oral fluids in Vietnam, and the researchers are currently running some additional evaluations in the lab.
“We are also looking in more detail at the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity and measurement of uncertainty of the oral fluid samples, and we are trying different instrumentation and technicians. Because these samples can be tricky to work with, we are planning to conduct a reproducibility experiment where we test the same oral fluid samples at two labs to ensure our detection is accurate,” said Ambagala.
At the same time, the researchers are collaborating with Iowa State University to improve the sensitivity of ASF detection in oral fluids. They will soon be starting another project with Kansas State University that evaluates commercial PCR kits for spotting ASF in those fluids.
Additional detection method options
As a second option for detecting ASF, researchers are examining processing fluid, which is the serosanquinous fluid collected at routine castration and tail docking between the ages of four and 14 days. Serosanguinous fluids are composed of clotted or diluted red blood cells mixed with serum.
“With processing fluids, we are targeting breeding herds and suckling pigs – two groups that are not well suited to oral fluid testing, because they won’t go after the rope that is used to collect oral fluids,” said Ambagala. “If we can target these groups with this sample type, we will expand our ability to screen our swine herds, doing so with much less strain on producer finances and human resources.”
A third alternative to routine post-mortem sample types is the use of superficial lymph nodes. This sample can be easily collected with little to no bleeding and minimal environmental contamination, takes just one or two minutes to collect and is readily accessible. Initial testing with lymph nodes shows great promise for detection of ASF, and scientists plan to expand this work.
As detection improves, so does industry resiliency
Disease detection is a critical part of surveillance. In May 2020, CanSpotASF was launched as a national ASF surveillance initiative, with the cooperation of farmers, assemblers, transporters, packers and labs.
Detecting ASF is one piece of the puzzle that should help Canada put up a strong defense against the virus. Engaging stakeholders from across the value chain and continuing to share information is the industry’s best chance at successfully remaining ASF-free.
As Stewart Cressman observed following the presentation, this project “highlights the collaboration that exists on these files across international borders.”
ASF detection may never be as simple as diagnosing the common cold, but if it can be done cheaply, easily and in a humane manner, that is nothing to sneeze at.
Pork Commentary, March 29th, 2021 Jim Long, President-CEO, Genesus Inc.
The March 1st U.S. Hogs and Pigs Report indicates fewer Breeding Pigs and Market Hogs.
Our observations:
Breeding Herd
Date
Year
1,000s head
Dec 1st
2019
6471
Dec 1st
2020
6276
March 1st
2021
6215
The U.S. breeding stock peaked at 6,471,000 on the Dec 1, 2019 inventory. Since then the USDA report indicates a decline of 256,000 (-4%). In the last three months a decrease of 61,000. We calculate a decline of 256,000 will have taken out 5 million-plus of annual market hog production (100,000 a week).
March 1 Market
1,000s head
1,000s head
2021 as percent of 2020
2020
2021
Market
69,804
68,558
98%
Under 50 pounds
21,571
21,288
99%
50-119 pounds
19,353
19,118
99%
120-179 pounds
15,086
14,705
97%
180 pounds and over
13,793
13,446
97%
Less hogs for sure. We expect the report has continued the trend of overstating inventory. Last week the U.S. slaughtered 8.2% fewer hogs than the same week a year ago. Last year 2,778,000, last week 2,551,000. Unless you decided to start keeping them as pets in the highest hog price since October 2014 there is a real good chance there are significantly fewer hogs than the March 1 report indicates. Year to date slaughter is down 4.7%.
We are now marketing hogs that were bred first part of May last year. 115-day gestation, 180-200 days to market = 295-315 days. We all can remember then, it was chaos with plants backed up, hog price plummeting, stories of sows being aborted, euthanized pigs, etc. Any wonder there are fewer market hogs? If you read this commentary regularly you know we have continually written of our expectation of fewer hogs coming at a degree much greater than the Chicken Littles have expounded. Some of them were still predicting more hogs in 2021 than 2020 this past week. It’s what happens when you don’t own hogs, never owned hogs, and don’t understand how fast the money was disappearing.
We are now selling hogs bred in May 2020. From May sow herd declined and we have been hammered by PRRS and PED at a level greater than normal. The sow herd continued to decline last quarter. Pork demand appears strong. If exports stay at levels, we are at 40,000 tons a week and we have less hog production, we will continue to see ever stronger hog prices.
We expect the market will be driven by Pork cut-outs. Last Friday U.S. Pork cut-outs closed at 107.53. Many lean hog future months set record highs last week. With months April-August well over $1.00.
We believe that fall futures are undervalued relative to where the hog market will be at that time. Why?
Breeding herd continued to decline. Less sows equals less pigs.
China ASF second wave will lead to continued large China imports of pork – other importing countries will keep up their demand.
U.S. economy rebounding that is helping demand now and will through fall.
All pigs that go to market in 2021 are bred – no way to increase production until 2022.
High feed prices and increased construction costs will slow many expansion thoughts.
Summary
March 1 report was bullish. We aren’t surprised by numbers but we believe both the breeding herd and market inventory overstated. The next few months we expect hog prices to reach or surpass 2014 levels. Producers have had the crap kicked out of them. Many have borrowed heavily to keep going. Some of the unfortunate have taken market position fueled by the Chicken Littles wrong predictions that will lead to them not getting close to the cash benefit of the new market price reality.
It’s the farmers’ turn to make some money. It’s here and it’s real. For all who struggled through the hell of 2020 we understand, we lived it too. It took capital and courage. There was no alternative. Today’s prices make us a lot smarter than we were in June 2020. Two quotes from a real leader.
“Never, Never, Never, Never Give up.” “If you’re going through hell, keep going.” – Winston Churchill –
Pork Commentary, March 22nd, 2021 Jim Long, President-CEO, Genesus Inc.
The U.S. hog price continues to climb
Iowa- Southern Minnesota Friday averaged $91.44, the highest price since October 2014
Pork Cut-outs closed Friday at $102.99
Both June – July lean hog futures closed over $1.00 on Friday. June 100.60. On August 12th June was 74.750. That’s over $50 per head difference. The difference is losing lots of money compared to making money.
God help the poor producers who listened to the Chicken Littles that were encouraging producers to sell hogs last August in the 2021 market. Why? Because these wizards said there was going to be more pigs in 2021 than in 2020.
From January 1 to last week, the U.S. hog slaughter has been -4.4% lower than a year ago (1.330 million fewer). No wonder hog price is higher.
Sow Slaughter continues high, the last two weeks of data both over 66,000 a week. Levels of liquidation in our opinion.
One of the factors re. Sow numbers is sow mortality. Pig Champ is a renowned swine record-keeping system. Last year (2020) the median sow mortality (305 farms) was 13.60%. A record-high number.
Pig Champ Sow Mortality Median
2020
2019
2016
2010
13.60 %
12.20 %
9.45 %
7.55%
As you can see, sow mortality has increased 6.05% over the last ten years. If we use 6 million as U.S. sow inventory that would be an increase of 360,000 dead sows a year. If a sow is worth $500 (salvage-plus weaned pig value), a 2500 sow unit (+6.05% -150 sows) = $75,000 decrease in revenue per year. A huge economic loss for our industry.
We believe the increase is mostly from European genetics designed for small European farms not able to adapt to the U.S. production facilities of scale. Poor legs, poor temperament, poor structure lead to more dead sows. There is an argument made by European based Genetic companies – that sow mortality is a trade-off to having a prolific sow
Let’s look at some Pig Champ Data.
2010
2016
2020
Total Born per litter
12.82
14.00
15.03
Sow Mortality
7.55 %
9.45 %
13.60 %
Piglets weaned/Female/year
22.19
23.62
24.88
As you can see by data Total Born Litter size has jumped 2.2 pigs per litter since 2010. You would expect a large increase in pigs/weaned females/year. There was an increase of 2.79 but it’s for less than you would expect with an increase of 2.2 more born litter size. In the ten years 2.2 times a 2.3 turn. Is 5 pigs more?
In our opinion the huge increase in sow mortality is a big part of weaned per year numbers not increasing significantly. The attrition in the sow herd is real, limiting production and with a big cost from lost revenue for sow salvage and pigs. When you buy genetics it’s wise to study not only litter size, growth, carcass but sow herd attrition.
USDA Hogs and Pigs Report
The U.S.D.A will come out with March 1st Hogs and Pigs report this coming week. The recent history of their accuracy has been marginal.
Last September report- market hog levels up to 10% over year over year. The hogs must have all died because they never showed up in slaughter.
December 1st report- market hogs year over year 180 lb. plus was 101%, 120-179 lb. 100%.
Since January 1st, which is 11 weeks, slaughter 4.4% less year over year.
The March 1st report should show continued breeding herd liquidation and 4-5% fewer market hogs. Maybe it will, maybe it won’t.
In the end the price will be driven by what Pork sells for and with Pork-Cut-outs at $102.99 in mid-March, there seems to be an upside as supply plummets seasonally. We expect $1.20 cut-outs, pulling hogs up further than lean hog futures are now. Producers need it. 2020 was as miserable as it gets.
We received the following report today after the Pork Commentary was written.
China- Massive Sow Loss
China Ministry Agriculture Rural Affairs has said the second ASF wave has caused the following:
A loss of 9.09 million sows the two months of January- February.
China sow inventory has declined from December 2020 41.61 million sows to 32.52 million in February 2021 – a decrease of 28%
15 kg (36 lb.) feeder pigs are now 1800 rmb ($275 U.S.)
Our observations
We had heard before from the MARA report that some in China think the losses in the second ASF wave are greater than the first wave. Losing 9 million sows in 2 months is extraordinary. We expect losses are continuing at a rapid rate. The hog market price might not respond right away as pigs under 200 lbs (90 kg) are sent to slaughter before they die, and this short term puts more pork into market. This might also delay major increase in China Pork imports.
We expect that the huge sow herd reduction will lead to large pork imports for more than a year.
All the dead sows will not be producing pigs that need feed. This certainly will cut China’s grain-soybean imports.
It’s obvious that China does not have ASF under control.
We expect if there was a loss of 9 million sows in 2 months, there will be at least another 5 million before it gets slowed down. That’s a decrease of 200 million market hogs. Equal to all of USA- Canada-Mexico production plus (200 million hogs = 2 billion bushels corn needed).
In our minds, how high hogs will go in North America over the next year is almost beyond our comprehension. We expect record prices. Why? Less hogs and More Demand.
Feed ingredients from disease-positive countries are known to contribute to viral spread in countries where those ingredients are imported without any legal restrictions.
January 8, 2019: as Alberta Pork’s communications coordinator (but not yet editor of the Canadian Hog Journal), I showed up to the Alberta Pork office in Edmonton in the morning, overnight bag in-hand, ready to gather with two colleagues, load up the vehicle, and head to the Banff Pork Seminar. There was just one problem: Alberta had discovered its first-ever case of porcine epidemic diarrhea (PED) at a 400-head farrow-to-finish operation.
Immediately, the focus quickly turned from a relaxing four-hour drive to a pressing need for communicating what we knew about the outbreak, which was little, other than a confirmation of the virus’s presence. PED is a provincially reportable disease, meaning it would not have been long before the public caught wind of the news through one channel or another. In the interest of prudence and transparency, Alberta Pork wanted to get ahead of any potential rumours or misinformation.
After receiving the basic details of the incident, I hammered out a news release, posted it to the Alberta Pork website, and made my way to Banff alone, as our Quality Assurance and Production Team (Javier Bahamon and Cris Neva) stayed behind to assist incident command efforts alongside government officials, including visiting the affected farm to support the producer during that time of extreme difficulty.
By the time I had arrived in Banff, the PED case was already the talk of the seminar. Social media has a way of moving quicker than a truck on the highway. And while PED first entered Canada from the U.S. in 2014, it was unclear exactly how PED made it to Alberta from eastern Canada in 2019. And now, two years and three more PED-positive cases later, ‘presumptive negative’ status has been granted to all four previously affected farms, thanks to the hard work of so many people in the industry to stem the spread.
But a bigger question still remains: how did it happen?
Alberta Pork’s environmental disease surveillance program is always on guard to protect the industry, performing thousands of routine tests annually with the cooperation of farms, assembly yards, processing facilities and truck washes. While theories exist, Alberta’s 2019 PED cases still have uncertain origins, despite intense investigation – such is the nature of this incredibly complex problem. Many have speculated that porcine plasma is likeliest culprit, though this has never been confirmed.
Viruses move through contaminated feed
Scott Dee delivered an eye-opening presentation on feed biosecurity at the 2021 Banff Pork Seminar.
At the 2021 Banff Pork Seminar, Scott Dee of Minnesota-based Pipestone Veterinary Services presented, “Feed biosecurity: the new normal for North American agriculture.” Prior to May 2013, when PED first entered the U.S., feed ingredients were largely overlooked as potential vectors for pathogens to spread. The link between swine diets and disease has been further investigated over time to take a specific look at PED and African Swine Fever (ASF).
Experimental data collected by Pipestone’s researchers, led by Dee, has demonstrated that some feed ingredients can support the viability of pathogens. After PED started to spread in the U.S., three separate farms in the states of Minnesota, South Dakota and Iowa – clients of Pipestone – experienced simultaneous outbreaks. It was determined that feed bins on all three farms had been refilled at the same time, using the same supplier, and by the time that refilled feed was consumed by the respective farms’ sows, PED was quick to follow. It was this finding that prompted a deeper dive – for real.
“I was literally leaning over the feed bin with a long pole and a paint roller, and I was scraping the inside, collecting that feed material,” Dee recalled. “We brought it over to South Dakota State University and fed it to pigs. They consumed it, and within three or four days, they had clinical signs of PED virus.”
Dee’s test resulted in the first known demonstration of how PED could be transmitted to pigs through feed. More recently, in the case of ASF, virus survival has been successfully confirmed in nine distinct animal and human foods, including three soy products, choline chloride, three pet diets, pork sausage casing and complete feed exported from China to the U.S.
When ASF was discovered in China in 2018, contaminated food scraps imported from Russia were to blame, as this waste was bought cheaply by Chinese producers and fed to pigs. The issues inherent to feeding food scraps to pigs were covered in the Winter 2021 edition of the Canadian Hog Journal: “Feeding scraps is no solution to food waste.” From contaminated food scraps, farm-to-farm transmission of ASF was swift.
As a result of ASF, based on varying reports, China’s sow herd was reduced by nearly one-half between late 2018 and early 2020, but the Chinese hog industry has been bouncing back, with special considerations given to feed. In response, the Chinese government has since banned feeding human food scraps to pigs, and conventional feed ingredients are now being handled with greater caution.
“Nobody really knows how many sows there are in China, but clearly there’s a rapid growth of the national herd. It’s big bucks,” said Dee. “About the feed risk, the Chinese are very concerned. Everything’s pelleted in China. They put feed through an extensive heating process by cooking it at 85 degrees Celsius for three minutes before the pellets are used.”
Not all feed ingredients are equal
Pipestone’s test results of survival rates by type of virus and contaminated feed ingredient. Soy appears disproportionately risky.
Turning their attention to specific feed ingredients, Pipestone researchers decided to measure ingredient survival times and noted a stark difference between most ingredients tested and one which stood out: soybean meal.
“We held the ingredients outside in January, in Minnesota, so it was very cold,” said Dee. “We sampled them monthly, and in a handful of ingredients, we found live virus over time.”
According to the test results, live PED virus was detected in soybean meal more than 180 days later, whereas the virus had disappeared in most other tested ingredients within only 40 days. The soybean meal results suggest that surviving a hypothetical transcontinental journey from China is more than possible – in fact, quite likely.
This discovery led the researchers to think harder about how grain-drying practices in Asia could contribute to the contamination of feed. Much of that grain-drying, prior to ASF, was being performed in the open air, using traffic from people and motor vehicles to crush the grain and encourage moisture evaporation, along with the unintended consequence of disease transmission. Recognizing that this practice may have been responsible for helping spread ASF, Chinese officials have since tried to streamline and sanitize the process using modern facilities with strict biosecurity protocols, including Danish-entry-style precautions.
In 2018 and 2019, three-quarters of U.S. soymeal imports came from China, Ukraine and Russia – all three of which are ASF-positive countries. By 2020, that number had declined, but the U.S. imports close to 500,000 tonnes of soymeal annually, while exporting a staggering 50 million tonnes of its own. Though the massive discrepancy is not necessarily surprising to market analysts, it might alarm producers and other industry partners to know.
“It’s like a teeny, little needle in the haystack. It’s silly we even have to deal with that,” said Dee. “But that’s the way things work these days in global trade. So that’s crazy, when you think about it.”
Soy it ain’t so
Could soy-based human food products using imported ingredients present a similar disease risk to imported animal feed?
From human food scraps as pig feed to soy-based goods for human consumption, products containing phytoestrogens, including soy products, are suspected of potentially leading to gradual hormonal imbalance in those who eat them in excess. As such, the reputation of soy used in human food has taken a hit over time, as consumers become more discerning with their choices.
Could soy imported for human food possess the same risks as soy imported for pig feed? Dee draws no distinction between the soy format – only its origin.
“The risk of soy is independent of whether it comes in for animal feed or human food,” said Dee. “The product is a vehicle to bring the virus into a country.”
According to the Good Food Institute – a U.S.-based non-profit that supports plant-based businesses – upwards of 79 per cent of soy protein isolate, 50 per cent of textured soy protein and 23 per cent of soy protein concentrate used worldwide is sourced from China.
According to Nielsen – the Canadian-based global measurement and data analytics company – the meat and dairy alternative market in Canada was up by 31 per cent in value in 2020, worth nearly $300 million. The largest single player in that space, Yves Veggie Cuisine, was founded in 1985 to satisfy a “growing demand for healthy, ethical plant-based products.” Yves’ lineup of nearly 50 separate offerings includes mostly simulated meat products using textured soy protein as the dominant ingredient. Yves’ website does not disclose ingredient sourcing, apart from indicating that products are manufactured in Canada using domestic and imported ingredients.
“Although ingredients are predominantly sourced domestically, it is sometimes necessary to source globally,” an Yves product specialist wrote in an emailed response. “This is due to the fact that some ingredients are not available domestically or the domestic sources are limited based on market demand.”
Could the import of foreign soy for human food similarly risk the Canadian livestock industry simply by its presence in the country? Canadian soybean meal imports have hovered around one million tonnes annually in recent years and peaked at more than 1.5 million tonnes in 2007, while the use of soy in human food products has steadily risen since then. Understanding what is driving this demand in either the animal or human food sectors is important.
Buyer beware – biosecurity matters
The Canadian Pork Council (CPC) recommends holding any imported feed at 20 degrees Celsius for 20 days or 10 degrees Celsius for 100 days.
Can biosecurity guarantee a disease-free farm? No, but it can help reduce the risk. Biosecurity, together with understanding where feed ingredients are sourced, can help producers protect themselves against what looks to be a growing threat to animal health around the world.
Across Canada, feed ingredient composition varies, but Canadian pork is noted in lucrative markets globally for having a distinctive profile that comes from the inclusion of barley and wheat in diets. Corn and soy may be more widely available and less expensive in some regions, but when soy especially has its origins in ASF-affected countries like China, this should be a red flag for producers to pay closer attention.
Even the strictest biosecurity can still result in disease incursions within a herd, but it is better to be safe than sorry. Feed tops the lists of costs for producers today, and saving money in that area may appear compelling. An increasing cost of production, together with reduced revenue, has been a crippling barrier for many Canadian producers in recent years, and industry stakeholders must work together to ensure the long-term sustainability of the sector, which includes protection against disease. Recognizing the cost of that work will be important for everyone to consider and act upon.
In 2018, pork contaminated with E. coli O157:H7 was served at a restaurant in Edmonton, causing more than 42 human cases of illness, including one death.
Foodborne illness has long been the bane of the agri-food industry. A first-hand encounter with the gut-churning, mind-altering discomfort and fatigue of sickness caused by contaminated food is something no-one wants to experience. While a brutal time sitting on the toilet, laid out on the couch or delirious in bed is bad enough, it can, in fact, be much worse.
Such was the case for one poor woman in March 2018, who died after eating at a restaurant in southeast Edmonton. The culprit: Escherichia coli(E. coli) O157:H7, which was consumed in a pork-based dish that was improperly cooked prior to serving. Even when bacteria like E. coli and other related pathogens are present, they can be eliminated when food is cooked thoroughly to a safe internal temperature. This is sometimes difficult when food is consumed raw, like in salad, but the problem is largely avoidable in meat, if proper handling and cooking practices are used.
In response to the 2018 outbreak, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) issued a recall of all products from the affected on-farm processor that supplied the restaurant and sold products to other consumers. While the recall was a necessary precaution, it resulted in some negative attention toward the farm – a regrettable reputational hit for the entire pork industry. But, as such, it became imperative for research to address the many questions being asked.
Now, a team of scientists in Alberta is coming out with answers. At the 2021 Banff Pork Seminar, postdoctoral researcher Peipei Zhang, with Xianqin Yang’s research group at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s (AAFC) Lacombe Research and Development Centre, presented a poster exploring one aspect of the issue, prompting a closer look at the bigger picture.
Killer E. coli in pork?
E. coli O157:H7 is known to exist in cattle, often being transmitted at feedlots. But for a long time, no-one suspected pigs too could be affected.
Until the 2018 incident, pork had never been implicated in any deaths in Canada due to E. coli. This realization caused confusion among industry observers, even to the point that some initially doubted it was possible.
“When I first heard that someone had died from eating pork contaminated with E. coli O157:H7, I didn’t believe it,” said Saida Essendoubi, a surveillance scientist with Alberta Agriculture and Forestry, and the leader of the E. coli research group. “How can this be? We had only seen this in beef before, but it turns out pigs are vulnerable too, even at the farm where this pork came from, which has very good biosecurity.”
What makes E. coli O157:H7 potentially lethal? ‘Shiga toxins,’ named after Kiyoshi Shiga, a Japanese researcher who discovered Shigella dysenteriae, in 1897. Eight decades later, in 1977, researchers in Ottawa with the Bureau of Microbial Hazards, Health Protection Branch, Health and Welfare Canada discovered the Shiga toxin normally produced by Shigella dysenteriae in a line of E. coli, which includes the O157:H7 strain.Ingestion of Shiga toxins can result in abdominal pain and watery diarrhea. In serious instances, these symptoms can be life-threatening, as was the 2018 case in Edmonton.
Cattle are a natural reservoir of E. coli O157:H7. In contrast, studies have found very low prevalence of the organism in pigs and, consequently, very few pork-related E. coli O157:H7 outbreaks have ever occurred. However, in addition to the 2018 case, two more previous non-lethal outbreaks were discovered in Alberta in 2014 and 2016, attributed to the consumption of contaminated pork at the food service level.
Finding the source of E. coli O157:H7 in Alberta meat
With the consideration that E. coli O157:H7 is known to inhabit cattle feedlots in southern Alberta, an obvious red flag was raised regarding premises that keep both cattle and pigs on-site, with assembly yards and mixed farms being places of interest.
“When people move from one part of a site to another without changing their boots, for example, there is potential for pathogen transmission,” said Javier Bahamon, Quality Assurance and Production Manager, Alberta Pork. “Back when porcine epidemic diarrhea (PED) first spread in Alberta, the question was whether the four cases were directly connected. Three of the four impacted sites were within a 20-kilometre radius of each other, suggesting farm-to-farm spread. But while no individuals or vehicles were found to have travelled directly between those farms, there is a possibility that individuals or vehicles from those farms crossed paths with each other at a neutral site. The possibility for this kind of transmission is alarming not only for spreading PED but also E. coli O157:H7, considering how many cattle premises are in proximity to hog premises in Alberta.”
To evaluate the southern Alberta assembly yards and mixed farms’ connection to the meat processing sector, Essendoubi, Bahamon, Yang and other researchers began collecting carcass and colon samples at provincially inspected abattoirs across the province.
More than 500 carcass samples were also analyzed for generic E. coli and aerobic colony count, which refers to the total number of bacteria able to grow in an oxygenated environment – an indicator of microbial quality of food. Of all the carcass samples collected, nine were confirmed positive for E. coli O157:H7, representing nearly two per cent of the total, which is consistent with existing literature worldwide. Similarly, seven of the colon samples tested positive. These positives were found across five of 39 abattoirs visited, from hogs originating at eight different farms.
Understanding the E. coli O157:H7 genome
Matrix of test results categorized by various isolates, animal species (pigs or cattle) and location (farm or plant).
To explore the potential source of E. coli O157:H7 contaminating pork, Zhang undertook an investigation into the phylogenetic relatedness of the bacteria in pigs and cattle on-farm, along with pork processing facilities. This work was led by Yang in collaboration with other researchers, with funding from Alberta Innovates.
Whole genome sequencing is a promising technology for tracing the origin of bacteria. This technique was the first choice for discovering the relationships between E. coli O157:H7 in pigs and cattle on-farm and within packing plants. Because E. coli O157:H7 genome sequences originating from pigs are limited in public databases, Yang and Essendoubi, in collaboration with Kim Stanford and Tim Reuter from the University of Lethbridge, decided to sequence E. coli O157:H7 strains gathered from pig and cattle feces, for comparison.
The study relied on whole genomes obtained first-hand by the researchers, in addition to data sourced from the U.S. National Center for Biotechnology Information – known as ‘GenBank’ – which was the best source of existing data at the time. Gene subtyping based on whole genome sequencing data revealed that nearly 95 per cent of the samples were closely related strains, with further analysis indicating that these strains all had a common and recent ancestor.
The researchers decided to dig deeper into the genetic characteristics of E. coli O157:H7. Nearly 61 per cent of pig isolates harboured one Shiga toxin variant, while 70 per cent of the cattle isolates carried two variants. The variant harboured by most of the pig isolates is associated with more severe outcomes. Analysis also shows that similar strains can be repeatedly isolated from pig gut contents over a period of up to two years, strongly suggesting pigs can, in fact, be a source of E. coli O157:H7 – the definitive finding that confirmed suspicions.
Never before could it be proven that sites common to cattle and pigs were able to support the transmission of E. coli O157:H7, uncloaking the mystery of the contaminated, undercooked restaurant pork and setting the research team on the path to supporting an enhanced approach to managing the disease risk.
Preparing the industry for the future
Biosecurity protocols, including rodent control, will be crucial for producers to stem the spread of E. coli O157:H7.
Regardless of the reasons surrounding the 2018 death connected to E. coli O157:H7, the entire Canadian pork industry is doing its part to prevent any further harm by better understanding the issue and preparing stakeholders to manage risks.
“Adapting and performing biosecurity assessments to account for E. coli O157:H7 will be an important next step,” said Essendoubi. “Alberta Agriculture and Forestry, working with Alberta Pork and other organizations, will begin to focus its attention on helping industry partners manage risks.”
Observable clinical signs of illness related to E. coli O157:H7 are non-existent, meaning efforts to educate producers will have to be very proactive. From clothing and visitor biosecurity protocols to better rodent management in barns, vulnerabilities within production remain an ongoing threat.
“We have to get producers to take this seriously,” said Bahamon. “Foodborne illness is a human health matter. Consumers care. As much as producers are rightly concerned with swine diseases and their impact on production, our social licence to operate as an industry depends on public trust in our food safety systems.”
When and where will the next E. coli O157:H7 outbreak connected to pigs occur? Hopefully, never and nowhere, but even with due attention to the matter, the industry may have to expect that future outbreaks are, unfortunately, not out of the question. Producers can and should protect themselves by reviewing their on-farm biosecurity.
Organizations like Alberta Pork, Alberta Agriculture and Forestry, Alberta Innovates, AAFC, CFIA and other industry partners are currently working to ensure all stakeholders have the knowledge and tools they need to reinforce food safety and consumer confidence.
Pork Commentary, March 15th, 2021 Jim Long, President-CEO, Genesus Inc.
July Lean Hog Futures closed last Friday at 99.47₵. Last August 12th they were 74.60₵. That’s a $50 per head jump.
U.S. 40-50lb composite feeder pigs averaged $90 last week. They were $15 last August.
500 lb. sows were 80₵ lb. last week. In mid-August, they were 25₵ lb. That would be $250 plus per head increase.
Weekly National Lean Hog price last week 83.5₵ lb., last August 35₵ lb.
Gross Packer Margins (re. DTN) was $50 per head mid-August. Last week DTN calculated $35 per head Gross Packer Margin. $35 is close to 3-year average this time of year.
Note to Chicken Little Economists who predicted more hogs in 2021 than 2020. Year to date U.S. hog slaughter 26,702,000, year to date last year 27,746,000. Unless producers have decided to keep hogs as pets there is a million less hogs (-3.8%) year to date.
We are now 10 weeks into 2021. We doubt there will be surge of hogs to surpass 2020. Every hog that is going to market in 2021 has now been bred (10 months breeding to market). There are less sows today in production than 10 months ago. No way there isn’t less hogs through 2021.
The latest U.S. weekly sow slaughter was 66,237. At this level probably liquidation, but for sure showing no expansion.
Historically high-priced feed like we have now hasn’t been conducive to herd expansion.
We certainly have seen prices increase in the U.S., but also in Europe. This is important for both areas to compete in the world pork export markets.
Jan 7, 2021
March 11, 2021
SpainLiveweight
1.10 Euro kg.(61.29 U.S. lb.)
1.36 Euro kg.(73.32 U.S. lb.)
GermanyCarcass
1.19 Euro kg.(66.32 U.S. lb.)
1.50 Euro kg.(80.44 U.S. lb.)
U.S.A.Iowa-Minnesota
49.27 U.S.D lb.carcass
87.24 U.S.D. lbcarcass
Crops
Brazil Crop Agency Conab is projecting record soybean production of 135.1 million metric tons. Last year 124.8 million tons.
Brazil corn crop is forecasted at 108.1 million tonnes up from last years 102.5 million. Acreage planted was up 0.5% on Soybeans, up 2.1% on corn than initially projected.
When you have high prices like we do in corn and soybeans more acres get planted – abracadabra more corn-soybeans.
Next big question is what will happen this spring in the Northern hemisphere for planting. USA-Canada-China-Russia-EU-Ukraine-India. As farmers we all know that plantings will be aggressive, that’s what farmers do. Farmers are the same in every country.
Pork Commentary, March 8th, 2021 Jim Long, President-CEO, Genesus Inc.
The most recent week U.S. Pork Export Sales were 59,600 metric tonnes. Of that 28,200 were to China. Both numbers the highest since September. Quite a positive sign with U.S. hog supply declining and exports showing good demand.
Other Observations
U.S. Cull sows in the 70₵ range. This past summer they were in the 20₵ range. Huge jump in value. A $200 per head increase. Good time to sell your sows that you kept going (because you had too) and replace with gilts. Sow is worth more than a purchased gilt, a real-time opportunity.
Agriculture Canada recently released Canadas Swine Inventory as of January 1ST. It indicates the almost static production level Canada has had over the last 5 years.
Canada January 1st Inventory
Breeding Stock
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
6 Months and Older
1,255
1,259.5
1,253.5
1,244.4
1,256.9
All Other Hogs
12,680.0
12,910.5
12,721.5
12,725.6
12,768.1
As you can see, almost no change for five years. Canada’s Pork Exports are about 70% of production. It goes to show that export markets haven’t been a path to expansion for producers. We believe Canadian Packers have had a good go the last five years. Producers’ returns have been high enough to hold on but not to expand. If you believe in the adage, if you’re not growing you’re going backwards, you can see Canada’s reality in a world that is consuming more pork than 5 years ago.
Proposition 12
Our industry is facing the challenge of California’s Proposition 12. A law that will impose California’s theory on swine production into other states jurisdiction. California has 7,000 sows. Now the National Meat Institute has applied for a writ asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review previous ruling upholding California’s law. For some producers that law will have major effects on production costs and practices.
The big question at Supreme Court will be, does a state (California) have the right to extend its police power beyond its territorial borders through a trade barrier, dictating production standards in other states and countries?
When you consider the widespread implications in so many facets of business, manufacturing and the economy, the ability of any state to impose their laws and police powers on another state has far-reaching implications beyond livestock. It could create trade chaos and friction between states if each and every one enact legislation that imposes their laws on other states then use their police powers to enforce.
It’s no wonder 20 sovereign states, the National Association of Manufacturers, and Chamber of Commerce support the Supreme Court Challenge.
This isn’t just about Pigs, but a fundamental challenge to all interstate trade. Stay tuned. This is a battle beyond sow space square footage.
China Update
There was a good article in Beef Central that featured Simon Quilty from Global Agri-trends regarding China
Some Highlights:
African Swine Fever (AFS) will impact China for years to come.
Global Agri-Trends estimates that China has lost between seven million and eight million sows in latest disease outbreak over the last eight weeks.
A sign of pig supply is 7 kilo (15 lb. pigs) selling currently for 1,600 rmb ($246 U.S. pig).
With the recent announcements of further ASF outbreaks across the country, we expect 2021 to now well exceed last year’s meat import volume- possibly around 9.5 million tonnes.
Last week a futures analyst working with COFCO, the Chinese government’s meat buying arm, said the damage caused by the epidemic this winter was much more serious than last year, estimating 20 percent of sows in Northern China had been impacted and up to 30 percent in parts of Southern China.
Another consulting firm, Yongyi, said that “China breeding sow numbers for both January and December were down significantly, estimating that overall sow numbers were down 37 percent compared to pre ASF levels”.
So what led to the estimated 7-8 million sows being lost in the past eight weeks? There were two factors in play, Mr. Quilty said.
Two new strains of ASF had emerged, due to the use of illegal (less effective) vaccines. “The end result is that highly virulent strains have now come forward, and in addition, a natural mutation has occurred in ASF.”
Between them, they were sweeping through the large Chinese piggery ‘super-complexes’ that had been constructed on the past two years, to shift the country’s pig herd out of smallholder backyard operations to much larger, more efficient, and easier to manage (against disease threats) multi-story ‘industrialized’ pork-producing facilities. “These facilities were once thought to be bullet-proof, disease protection wise,” Mr. Quilty said. “But this ‘solution’ has now become the problem. These large complexes each house an enormous number of animals, and have concentrated the disease spread problem. As a result, the disease has swept right through these large complexes.”
There were also a number of other reasons why Chinese pork production was struggling.
Poor genetics and low litter sizes had caused real problems. This was partly because females that were to be used for meat consumption were now being used for breeding, and experts were saying these retained gilts were not performing at all.
“The end result is lower carcass weights and smaller litter sizes. In addition, the ASF disease has never stopped, and other diseases have also appeared, such as SARRS and Foot & Mouth, which continue to plague Chinese pork production,” Mr. Quilty said, “Add that to the new strains of ASF being seen, and it means Chinese hog rearing, as well as sows, is really problematic in China today.”
Our observations
Mr. Quilty is echoing much as we have been reporting. The devastation of ASF continues, the loss of so many sows in the last two months certainly tells us more are being lost now. It doesn’t just stop.
The implications are continued strong Pork imports to China (last week China’s U.S. Pork purchases were highest since September).
Germany being out of the China Market due to ASF will support prices in Brazil, Canada, U.S.A., and Spain as major sources of China Pork. The last couple weeks prices are increasing in Spain, we expect supported by export activity.
The loss in China of so many sows and pigs in production will affect feed demand. The loss has been equal to or has exceeded the total of U.S. hog production. Not hard to see Chinas demand for feed will decline radically in the months ahead.
So in summary- despite the Chicken Littles September 2020 predictions:
“It’s shackle space that will dictate pig prices moving into the future, not the pig supply. With that, it will be likely 8-10 quarters before the profit picture looks much better.”
“The pork industry doesn’t see a full recovery until at least 2022.”
It’s the dilemma of predictions i.e. Saudi Arabia… “Saudi Arabia appears devoid of all prospects for oil,” attributed to a director of Anglo Persian Oil Company in 1926.
Despite these Chicken Little Predictions- we continue to see strong prices in 2021. Less production- strong domestic and export demand. Prices will blow by $1.00 lb.
The Banff 2021 edition of the Canadian Hog Journal is here!
This year’s Banff Pork Seminar adopted the theme, “Resiliency in a New World.” In this edition, you will notice that theme woven into the various pieces of coverage and commentary on the presentations delivered during seminar, including topics on economics, disease management, mental health, awards, research and more.
The first-ever Banff Pork Seminar took place in 1972, following an earlier prototypical event held at Olds College, a renowned agricultural institution located about 100 kilometres north of Calgary. Since then, the event has taken place at a handful of venues in the Banff area. From the beginning, the seminar was jointly organized by the University of Alberta, Alberta Pork and the Government of Alberta. The partnership remains unbroken to this day. Prior to COVID, the seminar’s advisory committee had planned to mark the 50th anniversary this year with special in-person festivities. Sadly, we will have to wait for that celebration, but hopefully not too long.
The cover of this edition of the Canadian Hog Journal features Banff’s bridge over the Bow River, constructed in 1923. Adorned with First Nations reliefs and located in the historical lands of the Stoney-Nakoda people, the bridge connects us through time, distance and relationships. The same bridge today connects the seminar’s usual location – the Banff Springs Hotel – with the main townsite to the north.
Over the years, our industry, country and the entire world have changed in so many dramatic ways. COVID-19’s impact and the Banff Pork Seminar’s virtual format this year are a contemporary reminder of how the passage of time can impact choices and alter perspectives. The Canadian pork industry has no shortage of issues that still require mending, but if we can continue establishing honest connections, rather than making excuses for dysfunction, our future looks bright, despite any existing grievances.
The image included in this ‘Message from the editor’ was captured at the 2019 Banff Pork Seminar – my first since entering this industry in June 2018. From left to right, the photo includes Michael Young (former Vice President, Canada Pork), me, Marvin Salomons (farm labour consultant, Salomons Group Solutions) and Ron Gietz (former extension economist, Alberta Agriculture and Forestry) – all gentlemen whose depth of knowledge and experience eclipses mine, but certainly positive role models and reminders of the long-term commitments that so many in this industry have made. It is invaluable encounters like these that we lose with a virtual conference, which is unfortunate, but as this year’s seminar theme confirms, resiliency has long been a hallmark of agriculture. We will return.
What are some of your favourite memories from the Banff Pork Seminar? I would love to read those stories and share them in the next ‘Letters to the editor’ section. Reach out to me by emailing andrew.heck@albertapork.com.
The Cost of Sow Mortality
Sow mortality is increasing, with average levels in most countries now in the low double figures. Note, these are average figures meaning many farms are worse. Ten to fifteen years ago we would be expecting to see sow mortalities around 6% to 8%.
There are some obvious costs of sow mortality. The most obvious is loss of sow slaughter value plus the cost of disposal of a dead sow. These costs vary continuously over time but an average of $200 to $250 over time is reasonable. This means the extra 4% to 5% sow mortality has a direct cost of between $10,000 and $12,500 per 1000 sows per year. Assuming 28 piglets sold per sow this is an extra cost of up to $0.44 per pig! This figure just applies to sows that actually die. It excludes sows that are sold with no value. This number increases directly with sow mortality.
Dead sows do not produce piglets!
Looking at average data from farms, about 47% of sow deaths whilst pregnant, about 42% are in lactation, and the remaining 11% in dry sows and gilts. Sows that die in lactation have produced piglets, the 47% that die pregnant will give a direct loss. Let’s assume an average of 12.5 pigs weaned per sow farrowed X 47% = 5.87 pigs per sow less.
For 1000 sows, assuming 47% of sow mortality occurs when sows are pregnant, 5% extra mortality X 47% = 2.35% of sows = 23.5 sows less farrowing X 5.87 weaned pigs X 2.4 farrowing = 331 less weaned piglets per year. Assuming 95% liveability wean to finish and a margin over feed of $70 then we have $22,011 lost margin per year.
Looking at PigChamp average data for USA, in the past 15 years average piglets weaned per sow per year has increased by 1.75 piglets, but in the same time born alive per farrowing has increased 1.99 piglets. Assuming 2.35 litters per sow per year would mean 4.67 extra piglets born alive. A good deal of the gains in prolificacy are being lost. Increasing sow mortality is a big part of this loss of gain.
There is an effect on the staff of higher sow mortality.
This is difficult to assess in dollar terms, but it’s there. Moving dead sows is time-consuming and hard work, dead sows are heavy. More still is the effect on motivation. When staff gets used to such high levels of mortality, it becomes more and more difficult to motivate them to improve the quality of their work – “whatever we do pigs will die”. It is not easy recruiting and maintaining skilled staff. Demotivation of dead sows is one of the reasons.
Sustainable, humane, and responsible farming practices
Lastly, and one factor that is becoming increasingly important is politics. It is very difficult for us to defend our farming practices as being sustainable, humane, and responsible when more than 10% of sows are dying. Add to that an average of 31% stillbirths and mortality from birth to slaughter. That’s nearly 1/3 of all pigs that were alive when the sows start farrowing that we lose.
In parts of the world, in particular Europe, there is already considerable pressure on farmers to reverse these trends, to the point of some countries considering legislation to stop increasing prolificacy or even to reduce it!
Higher mortality is due to increased productivity! This is the story being told by many genetic companies. At Genesus we do not agree with this. For all of the reasons above, sow mortality is a significant cost.
If you take the $12,000 direct cost of sow mortality and $22,000 from lost margin this total $34,000 per 1,000 sows. Assuming 28 pigs sold this is a cost of $1.21 per pig. This is as much more than many larger farms will be paying for their genetics!
Genesus breeding program has maintained robustness whilst increasing born alive per litter. There has never made any economic sense to blindly increase prolificacy and end up with a sow that dies or needs other sows to rear her piglets.
In trial after trial, on commercial farms, Genesus sows have significantly lower mortality than all of our competitors. We regularly see 4% to 5% lower mortality (same farm, same feed, and management).
We all know the old saying, where there is livestock there is deadstock. Some mortality is inevitable and acceptable. Today’s average levels are not acceptable, from a cost and management point of view and maybe more importantly a political point of view. Pig production is under the spotlight. As an industry, we need to be proactive in reducing mortality. Buying Genesus is the quickest and simplest way to start.