Can a breeding system really make a difference?

DARWIN KOHLER, DVM

After years of field experience and making hundreds of visits to swine farms, I have come to these conclusions: First, survivors in the hog business will be the low cost producers. Second, one of the main contributions I can make as a Veterinarian is to minimize animal health costs. Third, the biggest threat to any biosecurity program is the introduction of new breeding stock.

Which is the most economically important, genetics or health? That is a tough question, and there probably is no right answer. There really are some poor genetics out there, but also some very expensive diseases. Fortunately, we don’t have to debate this issue. The solution is to have genetics and health programs that work together. In other words, the Closed Herd™ System.

Walking around with a syringe in your hand is hard on labor, expensive, and even discouraging at times. Even water medication is a pain to monitor and expensive. Since more and more retailers want to advertise "no antibiotics used in the feed", medication cost is no longer the only consideration.

I’ve had the opportunity to compare animal health costs between Babcock and other breeding stock suppliers. The differences are large. For instance, the animal health cost for Great Plains Swine (the 1600 sow multiplier herd at White Lake, South Dakota), averages $1 per market hog, on the other hand I often see $3-$5 quoted as the average animal health cost for competitors’ herds. One of my primary goals is to further reduce animal health costs.

How can herd health costs be controlled? The first principle to understand is that every animal has a wonderful protection device called an immune system. If new diseases are not constantly challenging the immune system, the animals stay healthy without antibiotics and without most vaccines as well. The Babcock System begins with the Closed Herd™ program. This breeding program combines a rotational mating program to produce on-site replacement gilts with a terminal program to produce market hogs. Closing a herd to live animal introductions is the key to the animal health part of the Babcock System. When you close a herd and the only new genetic input is through A.I., you eliminate most of the risk of dragging disease from one herd to another. Approximately 90% of all swine diseases are transmitted from animal to animal, and in my experience, not even PRRS can be transmitted through semen. The reason I feel so strongly about the Babcock System is because of the results I have seen. In the mid 90's, the first Babcock customer herd came down with PRRS. How the virus got into the herd, no one knows. This herd experienced the normal PRRS reproductive problems for 30 to 60 days. No vaccine was used because none was initially available, but the problem stopped on its own and normal performance resumed. Today, this herd is still one of the highest performing herds for every economic factor that can be measured. They have never used a PRRS vaccine, nor have they brought in replacement gilts. I have watched as other breeders continue to recommend outside replacements, while my colleagues fight recurring disease outbreaks with vaccines and longer and longer isolation periods. As a result, animal health costs continue to rise, and productivity suffers.

Currently we stock new herds with either PRRS-negative gilts that have never been vaccinated with PRRS vaccine, or PRRS vaccinated gilts if a producer is in a hog-dense PRRS area. With good biosecurity, and use of the Closed Herd™ System, these new herds have a good chance of staying PRRS-negative, like many of our customers are now. Now, when you hear me say at our next producer meeting that "Babcock Producers are the lowest cost producers in business today", you’ll know why.