Sign up now!
Don't show this again
Download the report!Continue to Site >
or wait 7 secs

Thank you for confirming your subscription!

(And remember, if ever you want to change your email preferences or unsubscribe, just click on the links at the bottom of any email.)

We’re glad you’re enjoying Pig Health Today.
Access is free but you’ll need to register to view more content.
Already registered? Sign In
Tap to download the app


Collect articles and features into your own report to read later, print or share with others

Create a New Report


Read Later

Create a new report

Report title (required) Brief description (optional)
follow us

You must be logged in to edit your profile.

Favorites Read Later My Reports PHT Special Reports
Pig Health Today is equipped with some amazing (and free) tools for organizing and sharing content, as well as creating your own magazines and special reports. To access them, please register today.
Sponsored by Zoetis

Pig Health Today | Sponsored by Zoetis


Managing pig flows when harvest capacity is restricted

By Joseph F. Connor, DVM, MS
Carthage Veterinary Service, Ltd


If you review efficiency trendlines and reductions in carbon footprint over the past 20 years in the pork industry, you can’t help but be excited by the strides we’ve made. Unfortunately, with the pandemic turning our world upside down, we now have to put the brakes on production and restrict performance of live animals as processing plants are slowed or halted.

That goes against our grain, but we need to adopt strategies that recognize today’s  harsh reality — that there could be anywhere from 2 million to 4 million pigs above the weight throughput of a plant, a dire situation that leaves no choice but to euthanize market pigs.

There are, of course, a number of options to explore.  Each has advantages and disadvantages, but in the end they all increase cost of production by reducing throughput. The arguments for one strategy or another change daily and are made with tremendous uncertainty. Let’s review the short-, intermediate- and long-term strategies that are available.

Where to begin

Each strategy begins with evaluating your current harvest weights, normal average daily gain and reductions in daily kills over the next 8 to 16 weeks. Most harvest plants can handle carcasses from up to 240 to 259 pounds. We think processing plants will struggle to get back to full capacity and may be further challenged as our projected harvest numbers for Q4 elevate above the anticipated normal harvest capacity. It’s therefore important to utilize your current harvest weight and inventory to project when you will be at the restrictive weights.

A host of strategies can be employed to reduce daily gain and extend the window for harvest.1 These include feeding a 97% corn diet (the anticipated reduction would be 50% or greater), adding 4% calcium chloride (anticipated reduction of 60% to 70%) and bulking up the diet with fiber from such ingredients as dried distiller’s grains (DDGs) or soy hulls. In our area (southern Illinois), DDGs are the most logical option to increase fiber. In other geographical areas, wheat mids, corn-germ meal or soy hulls may be a strategy. One caution with the addition of high DDGs: The iodine value in the carcass will increase and may trigger a discount. Mycotoxins also can be problematic if DDGs contain higher levels of vomitoxin or zearalenone from the previous harvest. Increasing stocking density reduces average daily gain and can actually improve feed conversion.

Restricting feed access

Reducing feeder openings causes the animals to require more time to eat and thus can marginally limit growth. General recommendations are to provide 40% pan coverage. If this is reduced to 20%, you will have a restriction in growth.

My preference is to tighten the feeder settings themselves rather than to entirely shut off a feeder hole because it will slow the occurrence of vices. Turning feeders completely off and then on again may not be a good strategy because it increases labor and promotes more aggressive behavior around the feeder. Pigs do not respond well to complete feed interruptions unless they are less than 12-hour interruptions.

Increasing barn temperature, which normally occurs during the summer, will reduce feed intake. Every 2 degrees (F) above the pig’s thermoneutral zone is estimated to reduce feed intake by 0.1 pound per day.

Stocking rates

Intermediate decisions revolve around finding additional space for overstocking wean-to-finish barns. Common double-stocking is effective for 7 to 8 weeks post-weaning as long as adequate water and feeder space is provided. When barns remain double or triple stocked past their square footage and/or water or feeder availability, vices will increase. Finding additional finishing capacity at a time when the industry needs the additional capacity is not likely.

Secondly, the finishing spaces that are available are generally ones that have underperformed. Even though the reduction in average daily gain is linear with respect to space, there is a threshold where one expects vices to increase including ear biting, side biting and tail biting.

Long-term decisions focus on the probability of when harvest capacity will reach normalcy or margins will improve to sustain our businesses. These strategies include reduction of sow inventory. This option is not readily available today because of the sow-harvest capacity and the likelihood that heavy slaughter pigs will be diverted to sow-kill facilities. Producers can stop breeding sows for a period of time, terminate pregnancies or euthanize suckling pigs. These all reduce inventory, but they do so at different time periods and help to stagger harvest. These strategies can have a profound effect on the morale of a production staff that has been focused on excellence.


Editor’s note: The opinions and advice presented in this article belong to the author and, as such, are presented here as points of view, not specific recommendations by Pig Health Today.

1 Euken R, et al. Economic Considerations for Reducing Growth Rates and Feed Intake in Finishing Pigs. Iowa Pork Industry Center. 2020 April 23. https://www.ipic.iastate.edu/


Share It
The pandemic put the brakes on production and restricted performance of live animals, as processing plants were slowed or halted. But in such scenarios, there are a number of strategies available.

Click an icon to share this information with your industry contacts.

Posted on June 5, 2020

tags: , , ,
  • Connor: Cautious optimism in future management of ASF

    African swine fever (ASF) has continued its steady, insidious spread in other parts of the world, but the fact that the US has remained free of the virus to-date has given veterinarians a window of opportunity.

  • When swine medicine crossed over to human medicine

    The tools used countless times to eradicate disease in sow herds and on hog farms became the tools to help pork packing plants reopen last spring after shutting down due to COVID-19.

  • Connor: Innovation driven by necessity and opportunity

    The pork industry has had a tremendous number of innovations over the years, said Joe Connor, DVM. Connor, who serves as a consultant within Carthage Veterinary Services, is a pioneer in pig production and has been involved in innovation projects for decades.

  • One year later: How the US pork industry dealt with the COVID-19 crisis

    The pork industry entered one of its darkest periods in spring 2020 when COVID-19 forced the shutdown of several plants. Paul Yeske, DVM, helped hog producers in his area work through the closures.

You must be logged in to edit your profile.

Share It
It’s not unrealistic to say that if you checked the nasal cavities or tonsils of any group of pigs, you would find Strep suis. While the strain and impact can vary widely, this commensal bacterium is on virtually every hog farm.

Click an icon to share this information with your industry contacts.
Google Translate is provided on this website as a reference tool. However, Poultry Health Today and its sponsor and affiliates do not guarantee in any way the accuracy of the translated content and are not responsible for any event resulting from the use of the translation provided by Google. By choosing a language other than English from the Google Translate menu, the user agrees to withhold all liability and/or damage that may occur to the user by depending on or using the translation by Google.