| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
University of Missouri, Columbia 65201
Abstract
This study was conducted during March and April, 1970 to evaluate the performance, economics and management of farrowing 117 litters in the following facilities: (1) An enclosed confinement building with 48 farrowing crates on a solid concrete floor. The sows were fed on a feeding platform twice daily. (2) An enclosed confinement building with 22 farrowing stalls on a solid concrete floor and a slotted floor pen located behind each farrowing stall. (3) Forty-seven individual outdoor houses located side by side in two rows facing the south with a pen in front of each house. The sows in facilities 2 and 3 were hand fed twice daily.
The age of the litters when removed from each facility differed considerably as attributed to the design and intended use of each facility and the existing management program. Baby pig mortality was similar (9 to 11%) for all three farrowing systems. Litter weight was related to the age of the pigs when removed from the farrowing facilities. However, creep feed was provided in facility 2, but not facilities 1 and 3.
The average daily temperature and relative humidity were similar in facilities 1 and 2 which maintained a more uniform environment with considerably less diurnal variation compared to the outdoor weather. The temperature and humidity in the individual houses varied with the outdoor conditions.
The daily labor required per sow and litter was approximately six to seven times greater for facility 1 compared to facilities 2 and 3, respectively. The low labor requirement for facility 3 may be attributed in part to the mild climatic conditions at the time this experiment was conducted. Total variable costs per sow and litter were higher for facility 2, mainly due to the longer time the sows and litters were in the facility which increased the sow and creep feed cost. However, total variable costs to produce 99.0 lb. (45.0 kg) of pork were the lowest for facility 2 followed by facilities 3 and 1. Total fixed costs per sow and litter (based on maximum utilization of each facility) and total production costs (variable plus fixed cost) were considerably higher for facility 2 compared to facility 1 and the low cost for facility 3.
The results of this study clearly indicate that the enclosed confinement building with a solid concrete floor was the least economical farrowing system, primarily due to the large amount of labor required daily in relation to the investment costs. In contrast, the enclosed confinement building where sows were fed in the farrowing stalls and the pen floor was slotted to eliminate daily cleaning was an economical long term investment, mainly due to the lower labor costs.
However, the individual outdoor houses had the lowest daily labor requirement per sow and litter, the lowest investment cost and the lowest total production cost per sow and litter. The individual outdoor houses would be the most profitable farrowing facility where climatic and economic conditions do not differ greatly from those inherent in this study. The individual houses would be attractive to swine producers with limited capital and a need for flexibility.
1 Contribution from the Missouri Agricultural Experiment Station. Journal Series No. 6302.
2 Experiment was conducted on a commercial swine farm (approximately 5,000 head farrow to finish annually) near Marshall, Missouri, owned and operated by Mr. Gerald Sandidge. We are indebted to Mr. Sandidge for his cooperation in the collection of this data.
3 Research assistant, Department of Animal Husbandry, who supervised and assisted in the daily collection of the data for this experiment as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science. Present address: Farmland Industries, Jefferson City, Missouri.
4 Department of Animal Husbandry.
5 Department of Agricultural Engineering.
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
