The Rural Voice, 2004-04, Page 26As animal welfare
concerns change
the face of hog
farming. getting sows
out of gestation stalls is
becoming a trend. But
Dr. Harold W. Gonyou,
a research scientist in
ethology at the Prairie
Swine Centre says not
all group housing
systems are equal and
the industry should be
careful not to accept a
single issue solution.
"It is my opinion that
the ultimate success of a
group housing system
will depend upon how
well we can achieve the
nutritional and other
standards expected in
modern pig production,"
wrote Dr. Gonyou in a
paper prepared for
delivery at the Centralia
Swine Research Update
conference which was
cancelled because of bad weather.
For that reason he is not high on floor feeding systems.
"This is a very competitive situation, with dominant sows
able to monopolize the feed and subordinate animals
encountering both social and nutritional stress. Control
over individual feed intake is never very good, but some
management options can be used to improve the situation."
Forming groups of similar -sized animals will result in
more even competition for feed and a better distribution.
It's also important that all the animals have similar feed
requirements. Accomplishing this might mean further
dividing the groups and leading to small groups.
Competition can also be reduced by providing more
space and making sure the feed is distributed widely
enough that it's difficult for aggressive sows to claim a
disproportionate amount of feed. But additional space
decreases the main advantage of floor feeding — cost.
"I believe that floor feeding is unlikely to be widely
adopted as a solution to the welfare concerns of stall
housing," Dr. Gonyou wrote. "The competition involved in
feeding can be intense, and at least five per cern of sows
will need to be pulled from such a system. European
legislation is already suggesting that highly competitive
systems will not be acceptable."
In an industry which has embraced the importance of
good sow nutrition, floor feeding will only be adopted by
producers who are concerned by the higher capital costs of
feeding systems that give more control over the individual
feed intake of sows, Dr. Gonyou suggests.
One of these systems is the trickle system in which sows
are fed in partial stalls, providing protection for their head
and shoulders, but not extending farther into the pen area.
In each feeding space, feed is metered out at a set rate,
according to the eating speed of the animals in the pen.
They're
not all
alike
A researcher
warns that not
all group
housing sgstems
for sows are
alike. Producers
will have to
choose the best
sgstem for their
operation.
By Keith
Roulston
22 THE RURAL VOICE
Because sows eats much
faster than gilts, it's
important to have
animals of the same type
in each group. Because
feed is delivered at the
eating speed of the
animals in the pen, no
feed accumulates and it
doesn't benefit an
aggressive sow to move
from one stall to another
trying to get extra feed.
The trickle system has
been popular in Britain
but is not widely used in
the rest of Europe, Dr.
Gonyou reported.
Individual feed stalls,
along with a loafing
area, can bring very
good control of
individual feed intake,
he suggested. Sows
spend their time in the
common area and only
enter the stalls to eat.
Sows that might require
extra feed can also have their feed topped up in this system.
Traditionally these systems accommodated small groups
with the stalls within the pen but expanding this to larger
groups can be expensive, Dr. Gonyou wrote.
Space and capital costs can be reduced if sows "time-
share" feeding stalls, he suggested. Each pen is released
from its loafing area once a day in rotation and allowed
into the feed stalls. "Although some mechanization of sow
movement is possible, essentially you trade space and
capital costs for labour."
Moreover moving the pigs manually under such a
system allows the stock person to observe each group of
animals as they go to eat. Various procedures from
treatment to pregnancy checking or breeding can be
accomplished easily while the sows are confined, he wrote.
Still, movement to the feeding stalls tends to be a stampede
and the equipment must be designed for the safety of both
the sows and the stockperson.
Feeding stalls are gaining popularity in Europe even
though they are perhaps the most expensive of the
various group systems, Dr. Gonyou reported. The
system is very flexible in terms of housing types.
The greatest control of individual feed intake comes
through electronic sow feeders, he wrote. "Each pen of
animals has one or more feeding stations which animals
cycle through and obtain their specific daily allowance.
Each animal can be fed a different amount of feed and may
be fed different diets or a blended ration of two basal diets.
Daily feed allowances can be programmed to change as an
animal progresses through pregnancy. Theoretically, all
size and body condition combinations can be housed
together as each can have a separate feeding program."
To operate such a system you'd better be good with
computers, however, and cost can be a factor. The cost