Tighter rules may be on the way for castration
Monday, August 5, 2013
A draft code is in the works calling for analgesics for males castrated under 14 days of age and even stricter rules for older pigs. Meanwhile, some producers are interested in an immune-castration technology in use in Australia. But how will that go down with processors and consumers?
by DON STONEMAN
The draft pig code has stirred up the pork-producing community in Ontario and much of the stir has been over the controversial use of gestation stalls to house pregnant sows and gilts. Another issue causing concern involves new standards for how producers treat male pigs at castration time.
By July 1, 2019, if a draft code currently up for public comment is approved, producers will be required to administer an analgesic when they castrate males under 14 days of age, and also when tails are docked. An analgesic is a painkiller, given at the same time as the surgery or shortly after. "Castration of pigs is painful regardless of age," says the draft pig code, which was released at the end of May. "The administration of analgesics is beneficial in controlling post-procedural pain."
For pigs older than 14 days, the regimen is stricter. They are also to be given an anesthetic to desensitize them before the scalpel is used.
Producers have time to adjust how they deal with these matters, notes John Otten, swine production manager for the Professional Pork Alliance, which has 2,500 sows, farrow-to-finish, in a three-site system. "I get a chance to look at all of the parts," from gilt management to market hogs, says Otten, who operates from the Southwest Veterinary Services office in Stratford where "they are always working on cutting-edge technology."
He is encouraged that the code says castration at 10 days is better for the pig and may result in increased weaning weights, compared to earlier treatment.
Harold Gonyou, who recently retired from the Prairie Swine Institute in Saskatoon, Sask., chaired the scientific committee which prepared an 86-page scientific report for the pig code development committee. (The scientific report is longer than the draft code, and more than 20 pages are devoted to castration.)
Gonyou says "it is absolutely clear" that castration causes pain for baby pigs. The pain is measured by "high-pitched vocalization," in particular when the cords are cut on the testicles, and also by increased levels of the stress hormone cortisol in the blood.
When they do so, producers castrate at a few days of age, largely because of convenience, Gonyou notes. The code says producers would be better to castrate around 10 days of age.
Gonyou says consumers aren't concerned about castration because so much attention has been brought to bear on sow gestation stalls. He predicts that this will change and producers will have little choice except to follow.
Stephen Moffett, who raises pigs from 3,500 sows near Sussex, NB, is one of the producers on the committee that developed the pig code. Moffett sells both weaners and fat hogs into Quebec from several sow barns. For a period of time, he ran his own trial in one barn, giving little pigs an analgesic when clipping the tails and castrating the males. He says the drug itself cost four or five cents, for a total of less than 20 cents a pig to administer.
"It is very hard to measure whether there is a productivity advantage," Moffett says. His barn workers say they see benefits, which he describes as "anecdotal evidence." They believe that, after castration, the baby pig is a bit more inclined to nurse and then lie under the heat lamp and not get laid on.
"It's our impression, and it's just an impression, that the pigs are a bit more contented. How much economic return there is for the producer is pretty hard to measure."
Moffett admits the changes are a tough sell for hard-pressed producers hurting from a deep and prolonged price downturn. "One of the problems is that we ask farmers to do more work" for no increase in return. "There is no likelihood" that raising the bar for animal welfare standards will help exports, Moffett says. "We sell products to a lot of countries in the world where people are not concerned about these changes."
No-castration market
British Columbia veterinarian Carol Morgan represents the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies on the National Farm Animal Care Council when livestock codes of practice are being developed. Morgan says some European countries now require anesthetic and/or analgesics to be administered when baby pigs are tail-docked and castrated. Some countries are trying to do away with surgical castration entirely, but when pressed she couldn't name any.
Not all producers want to castrate male pigs. In Canada, an approved alternative is the immune-castration technology called Improvest, marketed by Zoetis Canada (formerly known as Pfizer Animal Health.)
Peter van Vloten, Zoetis's team leader for Improvest, based in Fergus, stresses this is not a new technology. It has been used for 14 years in Australia, where it was developed, to deal with issues around male behaviour and boar taint. He describes Australia as "a no-castration market."
Zoetis acquired the technology in 2004 and it has since been approved in more than 53 countries – in Europe, in Japan and Russia, and in most of South America. It is registered in both Russia and China, both of which are key markets where the feed additive Ractopamine is an issue.
Improvest is problematic from the point of view of processors, says Ron Davidson, director of government and media relations for the Canadian Meat Council in Ottawa. "At least for the present, a number of uncertainties remain outstanding, the most frequently mentioned of which pertains to the degree of consumer acceptance of pork products derived from animals that could have been treated with this technology."
And there is the rub. Some producers want to use this technology. Some consumers put welfare ahead of other attributes. But still other consumers are concerned about food additives, even though, as Dr. Morgan points out, the product used to castrate the boars is actually a vaccine, not a hormone.
The potential to use Improvest in Ontario isn't clear. Van Vloten says it works like a vaccine, causing the pig's own immune system to temporarily suppress the functioning of the testicles. The meat remains unaffected.
It's also not clear what Ontario packers are doing. Conestoga Packers did not reply to a request for an interview on this subject. Quality Meat Packers would not comment on the record, nor would a large pork producer comment on whether trials had taken place.
Andy Marks, director of hog procurement for Fearmans Pork Inc. in Burlington, says a trial program was under consideration, but logistics of where in the processing of the carcass the testicles would be removed, for example, is a concern.
"We have no consumer push back" in any markets where Improvest is approved, van Vloten asserts. There have been intense consumer attitude studies in Europe, Asia, the United States and Canada, both quantitative, using statistics, and qualitative, using focus groups. Consumers "really don't want to know a lot about pig production," he says.
"They are more focused on getting a quality product, a nice eating experience, and getting pork at a reasonable price. When we talk to them about the technology some would like to know more. Others say, if the regulators approved it in their country 'then they are good with it.'"
There are production advantages because the boars are still intact. In Canada, a two-dose program is allowed. There is no Canadian approval for three doses, as in some other markets, says van Vloten. The first shot is a primary dose which "primes" the immune system. A second shot, given a relatively short time before slaughter, removes the taint and undesirable male characteristics in the barn.
Van Vloten would not say what Improvest costs, while allowing that there is a financial advantage to use it because of better feed efficiency and faster growth rates with intact males. And he says operators receive extensive training in the use of the safety injector, which is used to vaccinate pigs. Improvest is not injected with a hypodermic needle, he stresses.
Boar-tainted meat
Jim Ross, chairman of premix supplier Grand Valley Fortifiers in Cambridge, has strong feelings about chemical castration, and in late June he indicated he would lead a charge against Improvest's use. He says consumers will be turned off as soon as they cook and eat boar-tainted meat, while welfarists such as Carol Morgan of the federation of humane societies welcome the use of Improvest as a way to increase the welfare of animals.
But producer Stephen Moffett says producers and animal welfarists see the welfare of pigs in fundamentally different ways. In stocking pen density, for example, farmers see welfare as management up to a point where the pig's ability to be productive is impaired. Welfarists on the other hand, says Moffett, look for changes in behaviour, such as how pigs lie down and how often they go to the drinker, as a signal that welfare is being compromised.
Morgan says she "was struck that producers are getting crunched" because processors won't accept intact male pigs. In Europe, processors take lighter-weight pigs to reduce the risk of boar taint. But North American processors offer financial incentives for heavier and heavier hogs in order to maximize throughput on hook space. "The processors are part of the equation" on the humane side, she says.
Morgan insists that the federation of humane societies is not an animal rights group. "We are interested in the welfare of animals. We are not interested in abolishing animal use." (Retailers were invited to take part in development of the code but stayed away from the table.)
Scientist Gonyou says using an anesthetic would be better for reducing the stress associated with castration but is impractical. A gas general anesthetic would leave piglets woozy and susceptible to crushing, while a local anesthetic with a needle would require that a piglet be handled twice.
As the draft code stands, it is already ahead of solutions to mitigate pain, says Warren Skippon, manager, national issues & animal welfare for the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association.
Skippon says Meloxicam, developed by Boehringer-Ingelheim, can be prescribed by veterinarians for off-label use in pigs, but producers must be provided with withdrawal times. "This would come by way of a request to the Canadian Global Food Animal Residue Avoidance Database (CgFARAD), and they do not have tissue depletion data in swine that would be needed to provide a recommended withdrawal interval."
From his car, travelling from one barn to another in the Professional Pork Alliance system, Otten says producers can cross the pain mitigation bridge when they get to it in several years. "There has to be buy-in, but we have time to do it." He adds: "I hate the word 'castrate.' They use the word 'neuter' in the pet world."
Otten won't be sitting on his hands, though. He sees better "neutering" as a way to increase barrow productivity: "My observation is the barrows in the nursery are always going to be more of a challenge than the gilts." He will be talking to barn workers to modify their processes and watching to see how it affects their productivity as well. BP
SIDEBAR: What happens if you don't follow the code?
Nothing is going to happen immediately if you don't comply with the code, says New Brunswick producer Stephen Moffett, who sat on the code committee. But the code is linked to Animal Care Assessment, which is part of the Canadian Quality Assurance (CQA) program. And your packer will only take your pigs if you comply with CQA.
Moffett acknowledges that producers are concerned the code "will be used by law enforcement as a standard over time." It's a double-edged sword, he says. If a producer gets in trouble with the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), "no judge is going to condemn you" if you comply with the code, Moffett says. "But if you are way off side," it may be another matter. BP