Low Investment Finishing
Hoop Style Structures for Swine Finishing
The USA exports $6.9 billion dollars in feed grains and soybean oilseed cake/meal each year (average for 1990-94; USDA, 1996). Adding value to these grains would enhance the United States economy while providing jobs for rural America. In our estimation, we could double the US pig industry and still not fully utilize the feed grains currently being exported. This growth in the US pork industry could have an added economic impact of over $64 billion.
Many countries are imposing restrictive guidelines for animal welfare and swine production practices. This style of production could direct more production towards animal and environmentally friendly sustainable production practices therefore alleviating concerns about the intensive confinement systems of the US swine industry. This will continue to open markets and allow the US swine industry to enter specialized markets focused on animal welfare and environmentally-friendly reared pork.
In recent history, extensive (outdoor) systems of livestock production have been shown to have a higher cost of production than indoor systems (Guither and Curtis; 1983). Veal and poultry units are prime examples of industries where giving the animals more room, access to bedding and a "welfare-friendly" environment, significantly increased the cost of production (Guither and Curtis; 1983). We have shown this economic principle is not the case for outdoor reared pigs.
In 1988 we undertook a project to develop low-investment pig finishing on the Southern High Plains. We hypothesized that because of our low humidity and mild climate, we could produce finishing pigs in low-investment facilities that included a covered shed, bedding, and an open run. We were initially surprised to learn that the pigs grown in the low-investment facility actually grew 13% faster than indoor-reared pigs. With a lower facility cost and better pig performance, we showed that this system produced pigs with a 7% lower cost of production (Nicholson, McGlone and Ervin,; 1995) than the indoor system.
Pictures of TTU outdoor facility (coming soon)
An intensively managed low cost swine housing system receiving considerable interest in the Midwestern United States and Canada is the deep-bedded, hoop style system. This shelter design first originated 15 years ago in Manitoba Canada. The design and management scheme is based on the Ishigami (tunnel housing) system. The hoop style unit is a quonset-shaped structure, with a woven polypropylene tarp pulled over a tubular steel hooped frame which is secured to a wooden or concrete pony wall. A short concrete pad is poured at one end of the facility where feeders and waterers rest. These facilities are cold (non-heated, low energy use) structures and animals maintain a proper micro-environment by burrowing into the deep bedding provided.
Diagrams of hoop structures (coming soon)
The animals are handled in an all-in, all-out one group scheme. These facilities have been designed to accommodate 180-200 animals, or the equivalent of a market-sized semi-load. This hauling system maximizes ease and efficiency of handling, while guaranteeing high animal welfare.
Pictures of animals in structures (coming soon)
In-depth production research at Iowa State University (Honeyman; 1996) and University of Manitoba (Connor et. al.; 1994) has shown excellent results compared to standard confinement facilities for finishing of feeder pigs, although feed efficiency has suffered during the northern winter months.
Table 1: Combination of Results of Hoop Style Structures
| Iowa State | Univ. of Manitoba | |||
| Winter | Summer | Winter | Summer | |
| Start weight, lb | 55 | 51 | 74.5 | 62.2 |
| Final market weight, lb | 246 | 265 | 222.5 | 222.5 |
| ADG, lb/d | 1.78 | 1.87 | 1.91 | 2.00 |
| Feed:gain ratio | 3.53 | 3.27 | 3.95 | 3.53 |
| Mortality (%) | 2.6 | 2.7 | 0.55 | 2.0 |
Honeyman, M.S. Iowa State University
Connor, et al. University of Manitoba
Hoop Style Swine Finishing in Texas
In the Texas Panhandle, hoop style structures should provide excellent results for swine finishing due to the dry climate, continuous windflow, and mild winter conditions. Four hoop buildings of 180 pigs each will be established for growing-finishing swine. Due to the environment of the Texas Panhandle, management strategies and facility integrity will be evaluated on a quarterly basis to guarantee maximum animal performance and facility lifespan. Pig performance, health, behavior and handling will be evaluated.
In this system of production animals are bedded on a continual basis to guarantee an environment that maximizes animal welfare and productivity. Recent university recommendations (Brumm et al.; 1997) are for approximately one pound of bedding material per pound of weight gain, this includes increased bedding requirements during the intense winter period. Bedding and animal waste is removed from the facility once the group of animals are sold for processing. Many different types of material have been shown to be excellent sources of bedding. Common bedding materials include straw, sawdust, cornstalks, etc..
Due to the diversification of agriculture in this region several bedding alternatives are available, these include wheat straw, corn stalks, milo stalks, and soybean stubble. In addition the composition, low cost and availability of cotton-gin trash, now considered a waste product, should provide an excellent source for bedding these facilities in the Texas Panhandle.
With the availability of bedding alternatives and the region’s mild winter temperatures the cost of operating these structures should be considerably reduced compared to the Midwestern United States, but these bedding alternatives must be evaluated and optimal management techniques determined for the region.
The shift in pig inventory to the Southern High Plains has had tremendous benefits for the region, but recently public concern has developed regarding the effects of the swine industry on the environment. To insure the welfare and environmentally friendly nature of hoop style swine finishing units, we will conduct an analysis of the structures interior environment and to determine the effect of this type of swine finishing facility upon the surrounding environment.
This type of swine finishing facility has great potential in Texas due to the mild climate, availability of bedding sources and low initial investment but we must demonstrate to industry and agriculture producers that the system is economically viable.
Literature Cited
Last Modified 08/11/02 08:54 PM
© 1997, Department of Animal Science & Food Technology
Texas Tech University
Questions or
comments about this page? Send to Mike Heup:
mheup@ttu.edu
