Ciaran Carroll, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork Tel: Mob:

Similar documents
Department Staff. Head of Department. Knowledge Transfer Department. Research Department

04/11 14/10 23/09 02/09 12/08 22/07 01/07 10/06 20/05 29/04 08/04 18/03

Welcome to April s Newsletter

Welcome to September s Newsletter

Production Performance & Costs

Review of Manitoba Guidelines for Estimating Costs of Production 2013 Name (optional):

AHDB PORK WEBINAR: Getting through tough times: coping with low prices

Guidelines for Estimating. Swine Farrow-Finish Costs 2012 in Manitoba

Welcome to January s Newsletter

The PigSAFE Project: Developing an alternative to the farrowing crate Final summary report October 2012

The Pig Issue. Do you know the health status of your pig herd regarding the important diseases affecting sow fertility?

Welcome to July s Newsletter

Low cost solutions to control Salmonella

COMPARATIVE PRODUCTION PERFORMANCES OF CERTAIN PIC GENOTYPES IN SWINE COMMERCIAL FARMING

RECENT PROGRESS IN SWINE BREEDING AND RAISING TECHNOLOGIES

Introduction PIGS 208

Relative Profitability of Hog Production in Western Canada and the US Midwest Executive Summary

ENVIRONMENTAL FOOTPRINTS OF INNOVATIONS TO IMPROVE ANIMAL WELFARE

Economics of Breeding, Gestating and Farrowing Hogs in Natural Pork Production; Financial Comparison

STOCKTAKE REPORT 2015

Revised Estimated Returns Series Beginning in 2007

Future Pig Feeding Solutions. Mick Hazzledine

Weaner Pig (Nursery) Costs 5-23 kg

Study tour to Ireland October 2014

CASE STUDIES USING THE OUTDOOR PIG MODEL IN OVERSEER

NZPork Guide: Outdoor Pigs in OVERSEER

The Ministry of Agriculture and Goat Breeders Society of Jamaica

Introduction BEEF 140

Glossary of terms used in agri benchmark

HAPPY TO BE BACK WITH DNA GENETICS

Comparison of Organic swine production data across 6 different organic farms

THE EFFICACY OF VIUSID VET ON SWINE PRODUCTION IN VIETNAM

The Danish Pig Industry - quality pays. Claus Fertin, Director, Pig Research Centre

Program or Technology? Remember: National Genetic Improvement is more than a technology. Genetic Improvement: Traditional Considerations

Welcome to July s Newsletter Ciarán Carroll

Economic Impacts from Increasing Pig Farrowing in Iowa

Gearing up for increased Profitability in Drystock. A Profit Monitor the first step

Pigs Lecture 1 ANS 101 / VET

Ib Borup Pedersen Pilegaarden, Hvidsten, Denmark. Phone:

Sow Wastage and Effects on Stayability of Sows: some German results

Guidelines for Estimating. Weaner Pig (Nursery) Costs 2012 in Manitoba

Improving Sow Lifetime Performance by Focusing on Longevity PIC

UNDER 16 MONTH BULL BEEF (SUCKLER)

Heavy Market Pigs - What to Consider Sanne Baden, PIC Technical Services, Europe & Africa (EMEA)

Tab 1a. Pigs Data Entry and Assumptions (April 26, 2018)

Canfax Research Services A Division of the Canadian Cattlemen s Association

When Good Records Go Bad. Matt Swantek, Ph.D. and Iowa State University Swine Field Specialists

The passionate pursuit of lactating sows feeding. PERFORMANCES. Feeding System.

BREEDPLAN EBVs The Traits Explained

Barn Efficiency: Your Role in Driving Costs Down OUR COMMON GOAL

Economic Impact of Swine Operations. User Guide. National Pork Board

STOCKTAKE REPORT 2016

Greenhouse Gas Emission Study and Model for Swine Barn Operations. Two Topics for This Talk. Both efforts were funded by the National Pork Board

Swine Production Records

BENCHMARKING SHOW ME THE MONEY!

REDUCING FEED COSTS IN GROWER-FINISHER BARNS

An Evaluation of Over-Wintering Feeding Strategies Prior to Finishing at Pasture for Cull Dairy Cows

Born in Canada and Raised in the USA

Selecting a Beef System by Pearse Kelly

Hog Enterprise Summary

Weaner management. in northern beef herds. Russ Tyler Tyler rural consulting Gayndah. A joint initiative of:

The environmental impact of increasing weaning age K. Breuer 1, C. Docking, F. Agostini, K. Smith Session P24.4 1

BEEF PRODUCTION SYSTEM GUIDELINES. Animal & Grassland Research & Innovation Programme

Sustainable Meat Initiative for Dutch CBL ENGLISH VERSION 1.0_FEB14

MARGINS EVERY PRODUCER SHOULD HAVE 2017 I.S.U. Swine Day. June 28, 2017

Revision of economic values for traits within the economic breeding index

Manitoba Pig and Pork Industry

ARTERL OURNAL ARICIRIURAL ECONOMICS 4C-1. Vol. 16 No. 2 April '78. Price 40c. AGRICUL rt.ire SER AL RECORDS. Nt,14iPh LleiRARY MAP

Statistics for Manitoba Pig Industry

International Swine Consultant. Sow Productive Lifetime

Cost of Production Benchmark for Ontario, Manitoba and Iowa

Economics of transitioning to Once A Day milking

2015- Breeding Heifers for Profit

Agricultural Science Past Exam Questions Animal Production Higher Level

2005 PIG COST OF PRODUCTION IN SELECTED EU COUNTRIES

Call for research proposals APRIL

and returns for an enterprise of a different size and type than the one in this budget or for different

eprofit Monitor Analysis Tillage Farms 2016 Crops Environment & Land Use Programme

Profit from crop & farm analysis

Adoption of further traits to increase genetic gain in the $Index

Dairy Replacement Programs: Costs & Analysis 3 rd Quarter 2012

Market Weight Trends/Implications

Regulations and operations of pig production in the EU

-SQA- SCOTTISH QUALIFICATIONS AUTHORITY NATIONAL CERTIFICATE MODULE: UNIT SPECIFICATION GENERAL INFORMATION. -Module Number Session

Replacement Heifers Costs and Return Calculation Decision Aids

Economics of Finishing Pigs in Hoop Structures and Confinement: A Summer Group under Different Space Restrictions

4-H SWINE RECORD BOOK 2

SYNCHRONISATION. of gilts every week. Altresyn. Improves your production flow and profitability on farm. Power with control

Hog Producers Show Little Sign of Retreat

HOG PRODUCERS SHOW LITTLE SIGN OF RETREAT

Economic, Productive & Financial Performance Of Alberta Cow/Calf Operations

The competitiveness of Australian beef production in a global market

BEFORE THE HEARING COMMISSIONERS AT CHRISTCHURCH

A BIOECONOMIC MODEL BY QUANTITATIVE BIOLOGY TO ESTIMATE SWINE PRODUCTION

SKIOLD pig farm projects

5-Step Animal Welfare Rating Standards Program Application: PIG FARMS

A BIOECONOMIC MODEL BY QUANTITATIVE BIOLOGY TO ESTIMATE SWINE PRODUCTION

Project aims. My aims were:

A CORE SET OF KPI MEASURES FOR RED MEAT FARMING BUSINESSES

FARMERS INFORMATION SERIES CONTINENTAL CATTLE. Management Guide. blade-farming.com

Transcription:

Department Staff Head of Department Ciaran Carroll, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork Tel: 076 1112388 Mob: 087 2462925 Email: ciaran.carroll@teagasc.ie Knowledge Transfer Department Gerard McCutcheon, Teagasc, Oak Park, Carlow Tel: 076 1111305 Mob: 087 8303969 Email: gerard.mccutcheon@teagasc.ie Michael McKeon, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork Tel: 076 1112259 Mob: 087 6739178 Email: michael.mckeon@teagasc.ie Dr. Amy Quinn, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork Tel: 076 1112723 Mob: 087 3779015 Email: amy.quinn@teagasc.ie David Doyle, Teagasc, Ballyhaise, Co. Cavan, Tel: 049 4338679 Mob: 087 6177268 Email: david.doyle@teagasc.ie Emer McCrum, Teagasc, Ballyhaise, Co. Cavan Tel: 049 4338640 Mob: 087 7940974 Email: emer.mccrum@teagasc.ie Research Department Dr. Peadar Lawlor, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork Tel: 076 1112217 Mob: 086 8214671 Email: peadar.lawlor@teagasc.ie Dr. Laura Boyle, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork Tel: 076 1112389 Mob: 087 9295364 Email: laura.boyle@teagasc.ie Dr. Keelin O Driscoll, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork Tel: 076 1112289 Email: keelin.odriscoll@teagasc.ie Dr. Edgar Garcia Manzanilla, Teagasc, Fermoy, Co. Cork Tel: 076 1112299 Mob: 087 9614454 Email: edgar.garciamanzanilla@teagasc.ie

Introduction This report is the detailed analysis of the performance of herds that participated in the Teagasc e-profit Monitoring (epm) recording system in 2016. The data available and included in this analysis is from a total of 111 herds representing over 86,000 sows or 57% of the national commercial sow herd. The average size of the herds included is 775 sows and ranged from less than 100 sows to over 2,500 sows. The performance parameters in this report are the weighted (by herd size) average of the participating herds to take account of the large range in size of the participating herds. Herds participating in the epm recording system and engaging with the advisory support of the staff of the Teagasc Pig Development Department continue to demonstrate, year on year, improvements in technical performance. The report also includes some analysis of production costs in a number of the participating herds. However, an increase in participation in this aspect of the system may well provide a more accurate picture of actual costs across the sector. There are indications that those herds that routinely record the full costs of production are the herds with the highest levels of technical efficiency. This would suggest that these herds have lower costs of production than herds which do not routinely check their costs of production. The Teagasc Pig Development Department welcome more herds to participate in benchmarking using the epm. Any herd that wishes to participate should contact any of the personnel listed under Knowledge Transfer on the inside front cover of this booklet. Page 3

Technical Performance 2016 Table 1: Sow Productivity 2016 2015 2016 Number of Herds 129 111 Average Herd Size 753 775 Average Maiden Gilts % 12.9 12.1 Litters per Sow per Year 2.27 2.38 Average Weaning Age Days 29 28 Empty Days per Litter 15 13 Number Born Alive per Litter 12.86 13.15 Number Born dead per Litter 0.85 0.88 Piglet Mortality % 10.6 10.8 Weaner Mortality % 2.68 2.85 Finisher Mortality % 2.36 2.49 Number of pigs produced per sow per year 24.8 26.25 Sow culling rate per annum % 48.5 50.1 Sow mortality per annum % 4.8 4.9 Feed per sow per year tonnes 1.31 1.31 Commentary The Number of Pigs Born Alive per Litter rose again this year. The rise to 2.38 Litters per Sow per Year resulted in a increase in the number of Pigs Produced per Sow per Year compared to 2015. The output of pig meat per sow per year increased from 2058 to 2179kg because the number of pigs produced increased. Page 4

Table 2: Growing Pig Performance 2016 2015 2016 Number of Herds 108 96 Average Weaning Weight (kg) 7.0 6.8 Average Live Weight at Sale (kg) 108.7 108.6 Average Dead Weight at Sale (kg) 83.0 83.0 Kill Out % 76.4 76.4 Daily Feed Intake (g) 1,689 1,680 Average Daily Gain (g) 694 697 Feed Conversion 2.43 2.42 Commentary The average dead weight in recorded herds remained the same as in 2015. There was an increase in growth rate from weaning to sale (694 to 697 g/ day), and there was an improvement of 0.01 in the Feed Conversion from weaning to sale compared to 2015. The average output of pig meat per sow per year in recorded herds was 2,179 kg. This amount of pig meat was produced using 7,777 kg feed or 3.57 kg feed per kg of pig meat. The Teagasc Pig Department have proposed a target for integrated herds to produce 2,000 kg of pig meat per sow per year from 7,000 kg of feed. We have achieved the 2,000 kg but we are above the 3.5 kg of feed per kg of pig meat target. Page 5

Table 3: Weaner Performance 2015 2016 Number of Herds 129 111 Average Weaning Weight (kg) 7.0 6.8 Average Transfer/Sale Weight (kg) 37.7 38 Creep Feed per Weaner (kg) 3.1 3.5 Link Feed per Weaner (kg) 6.6 6.3 Weaner Feed per Weaner (kg) 46.0 47.0 Total Feed per Weaner (kg) 55.7 56.8 Average Daily Feed Intake (g) 861 873 Average Daily Gain (g) 477 482 Feed Conversion 1.81 1.82 Commentary On most farms the weight of weaners transferred to finishing accommodation is estimated. These figures would be much more accurate with increased weighing of weaners at transfer to the finisher section. There has been a slight increase in the total feed fed to weaners compared to 2015. A slight increase in creep feed fed per pig was seen while link feed usage dropped relative to 2015. The Feed Conversion changed from 1.81 in 2015 to 1.82 in 2016. This might be affected by an underestimation in transfer weights although weaner transfer weights were estimated to be 0.3 kg higher than in 2015. Page 6

Table 4: Finisher Performance 2015 2016 Number of Herds 108 96 Average Weaner Transfer Weight (kg) 37.5 38.1 Average Live Weight at Sale (kg) 108.7 108.6 Average Dead Weight at Sale (kg) 83.0 83 Kill Out % 76.4 76.4 Average Daily Feed Intake (g) 2,342 2,301 Average Daily Gain (g) 864 860 Feed Conversion 2.71 2.69 The same qualification applies to finisher performance data as weaner transfer weights are usually estimated on pig units. Finisher Growth Rates decreased from 864 to 860 g/day from 2015 to 2016. The Feed Conversion improved to 2.69 from 2.71 in 2015. Pig slaughter weights remained the same as 2015. Total feed per pig from weaning to sale was as follows: 2015 2016 Creep 3.1 3.5 Link 6.6 6.3 Weaner 46.0 47.0 Finisher 193.0 190 Page 7

Production Costs 2016 Table 5: Feed and Non-Feed Costs Cost per kg dead c 2015 2016 Feed 108 102 Non-feed Costs excluding Building and Financial Costs Healthcare 6.2 6.4 Heat, Power, Light 4.2 4.2 Transport 1.2 1.0 Artificial Insemination 1.8 1.9 Manure 1.5 1.8 Labour / Management 13.3 13.5 Repairs 2.2 2.6 Administration 1.0 0.9 Environment 0.4 0.5 Insurance 0.9 0.9 Housing Rental 1.3 1.4 Contract Finishing Costs 1.5 1.7 Water 0.4 0.5 Dead Pig Disposal 0.7 0.9 Stock Depreciation 1.8 1.9 Miscellaneous 1.2 1.2 Total Non-feed Costs excluding Building and Financial Costs 39.6 41.3 Commentary Most of the costs are very similar to 2015. The items of Housing Rental, Contract finishing costs, water and dead pig disposal are costs that may not occur on all farms. Page 8

Table 6: Building and Financial Costs Cost per kg dead c 2015 2016 Building Depreciation 4.4 4.9 Interest 1.4 1.7 Building and Financial 5.8 6.6 Commentary Too few farms include data on Interest payments and Building Depreciation to obtain a very reliable indication of these costs. The cost of production per kg as calculated is limited in the absence of more data on these two costs. More importantly, too few herds are having their actual cost of production calculated. A building depreciation cost should be included based on the value of buildings on each pig farm. Low building depreciation costs reflect a lack of capital investment in many units over the last decade or so. Table 7: Total Cost of Production Cost per kg dead c 2015 2016 Feed 108 102 Non-feed Costs excluding Building and Financial Costs 39.6 41.3 Building and Financial Costs 5.8 6.6 Total 153.4 149.9 Commentary With a repayment (capital + interest) cost of 6.5c per kg pig producers needed 149.8 c per kg dead weight to cover all payments in 2016. These costs need to be unit specific rather than average which can only be useful as a guideline. Page 9

Top 25% of Herds Table 8: Selected on the basis of the Number of Pigs produced per sow per year Top 25% 2016 Average 2016 Number of Herds 28 111 Average Herd Size 670 775 No. pigs produced per sow per year 28.73 26.25 Litters per sow per year 2.42 2.38 Average weaning age: days 26 28 Empty days per litter 11 13 No. born live per litter 13.62 13.15 No. born dead per litter 0.80 0.88 Pig Mortality % 9.2 10.8 Weaner Mortality % 2.02 2.85 Finisher Mortality % 1.60 2.49 Sow Culling Rate % 49.2 50.1 Sow Mortality 3.8 4.9 Feed per sow per year (tonnes) 1.34 1.31 Page 10

Commentary The herds in the top quartile of herds selected on the basis of the number of pigs produced per sow per year produce 2.48 pigs per sow per year more than the average of all herds. Each extra pig produced would have increased the margin over feed per sow by 48 if pig sale weights were maintained. All the herds in the top quartile produce at least 27.3 pigs per sow per year. These top performing herds perform better in the various factors that determine sow productivity Higher born alive per litter Mortality at all stages of production. The herds in the top quartile of recorded herds showed a range between 27.3 to over 31 pigs produced per sow per year. This is due to the higher born alive per litter and also the lower mortality at all stages of production. It is significant that the Feed per Sow per Year, adjusted to take account of Maiden Gilt numbers, is higher in the Top 25% herds compared with that in all recorded herds. Getting sows to eat more feed particularly in the farrowing house helps push the born alive in the next litter and increase the weaning weights of the suckling piglets. Page 11

Table 9: Selected on Feed Conversion Weaning to Sale Top 25% 2016 Average 2016 Number of Herds 28 96 Average Herd Size 765 706 Average weaning weight (kg) 7 6.8 Average live weight at sale (kg) 111.5 108.6 Average weight at sale (kg) 85 83.0 Kill out % 76.3 76.4 Average daily feed intake (g) 1,668 1,680 Average daily gain (g) 742 697 Feed conversion 2.24 2.42 Average feed price per tonne ( ) 287 286 Feed per pig weaning to sale (kg) Creep 3.5 3.5 Link 7.0 6.3 Weaner 43.4 47.0 Finisher 180.1 190.0 Total 234.0 246.8 Page 12

Commentary The top quartile of herds selected on the basis of Feed Conversion Weaning to Sale use 12.8 kg feed less per pig than the average of all recorded herds. Based on an average price for finisher feed alone in 2016 of 286 per tonne, this difference of 12.8 kg feed represents 3.66 per pig or 4c per kg dead weight in feed cost. This does not account for the heavier pig that the top 25% sold which will further increase their profitability. The top quartile herds have significantly higher growth rates from weaning (+25 g per day) and there is a 2.9 kg LW difference in slaughter weights. The top quartile herds used the same creep feed and more link (0.7kg/pig). The better Feed Conversion efficiency gave significant savings in terms of the feed cost. It took the Top 25% 141 days after weaning to reach slaughter weight while it took the average herds five more days to reach a 2.9 kg lighter sale weight. Page 13

Top 10% of Herds Table 10: Selected on the basis of the Number of Pigs produced per sow per year Top 10% 2015 Average 2016 Number of Herds 11 111 Average Herd Size 541 775 No. pigs produced per sow per year 30.73 26.25 Litters per sow per year 2.46 2.38 Average weaning age (days) 25 28 Empty days per litter 9 13 No. born live per litter 14.05 13.15 No. born dead per litter 0.82 0.88 Piglet Mortality (%) 7.9 10.8 Weaner Mortality (%) 1.51 2.85 Finisher Mortality (%) 1.68 2.49 Sow Culling Rate (%) 42.0 50.1 Sow Mortality 3.6 4.9 Feed per sow per year (tonnes) 1.37 1.31 Page 14

Commentary The top 10% of recorded herds selected on the basis of the Number of Pigs Produced per Sow per Year produced 4.5 pigs more than the average for all recorded herds. These top performing herds had: Higher number of litters per sow per year: 0.08/litter Higher number of pigs born alive per litter: 0.9 Lower mortality among piglets, weaners, finisher: 5.05% These top 10% of herds reported higher annual usage of sow feed per sow suggesting a strong link between overall sow nutrition / feeding levels and sow productivity. Page 15

Table 11: Top 10% of herds selected on the basis of Feed Conversion Weaning to Sale Top 10% 2016 Average 2016 Number of Herds 11 96 Average Herd Size 930 706 Average weaning weight (kg) 7 6.8 Average live weight at sale (kg) 114.2 108.7 Average dead weight at sale (kg) 87.5 83 Kill out (%) 76.6 76.4 Average daily feed intake (g) 1,627 1,680 Average daily gain (g) 749 697 Feed Conversion 2.17 2.42 Feed per pig weaning to sale (kg) Creep 3.7 3.5 Link 7.8 6.3 Weaner 44.0 47.0 Finisher 176.2 190.0 Total 231.7 246.8 Page 16

Commentary The Top 10% of recorded herds selected on the basis of Feed Conversion Weaning to Sale had slaughter weights that were 5.5 kg heavier than the average of all recorded herds. Despite this the Feed Conversion Weaning to Sale (2.17) is considerably better than the average for all recorded herds (2.42). They used 15.1 kg of feed per pig less to bring the pigs to a 5.5 kg heavier liveweight. Based on an average finisher feed price of 286 per tonne for 2016 this amounts to 4.31 per pig or 5c per kg dead weight. The pigs in the herds in the Top 10% had a Growth Rate Weaning to Sale 52 g per day higher than the average of all herds. They used more creep, link, and less weaner and finisher feed per pig. Table 12: Pig Meat Produced per Sow per Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 No. pigs produced per sow per year 24.1 24.5 25.2 25.3 24.8 26.25 Average Slaughter weight (kg) 78.4 79.3 80.6 81.1 83.0 83 Pig Meat Produced per Sow per Year (kg) 1,889 1,943 2,031 2,052 2,058 2,179 Commentary The quantity of pig meat produced per sow per year has increased by 15% since 2011 due to a combination of increased number of pigs produced per sow per year and increased average pig carcass weights. A target of 2,000 kg of pig meat produced per sow per year for every integrated unit has been proposed by the Teagasc Pig Department. This is based on producing 25 pigs per sow per year with an average carcass weight of 80 kg. Page 17

Table 13: Growing Pig Performance 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Average Daily Gain (g) 638 690 664 670 694 697 Feed Conversion 2.53 2.46 2.46 2.49 2.43 2.42 Sale Weight Live (kg) 103.6 104.5 105.5 106.2 108.7 108.6 Commentary Since 2011 growth rates from weaning to sale have increased by 9%. Feed conversion from weaning to sale has fluctuated in the past five years.. Table 14: Production Costs per kg Dead Weight c 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Feed 110 120 130 117 108 102 Total Non-feed Costs excluding Building 33.9 29.8 34.6 36.9 39.6 41.3 and Financial Costs Building and Financial Costs 8.5 9.3 7.0 6.0 5.8 6.6 Total 152.4 159.1 171.6 159.9 153.4 149.9 Commentary Feed normally represents about 70% of production costs as reported in PigSys and now epm recorded herds. Feed costs per kg fluctuate in line with the cost of feed ingredients which determines the price of pig feed. The feed costs each year have been close to the costs as collected in the Teagasc Monthly Feed and Pig price Monitor. It is critical that each farm monitors its own production costs. These costs are critical to the overall management of the pig unit. Every farm can and should benchmark their performance and production costs on the epm now. This will allow each farm compare their performance figures with the Average, Top 25% and Top 10% of farms keeping records on the epm. Talk to your Advisor today on accessing the epm to view and benchmark your own records. Page 18