Rotecna World 10

NUMBERTEN2009

ROTECNAWORLD

RESEARCH& DEVELOPMENT

Balancing sow & piglets welfare with production efficiency

TECHNOLOGY

SWING R3: The evolution of the species

FUTURE

To clone or not 1 is to clone that the question

LETTERFROMTHEEDITOR Our sector is still struggling through the situation, which now seems to show some glimmers of optimism. And that would be very welcome. Some northern countries are said to be beginning to see the light at the end of the tunnel. That is fine, although for southern countries it means seeing the light a little later.

Gener Romeu

Rotecna's President

According to experts in Holland, Belgium, Germany and Denmark, the perspectives for the last months of the year are good. However, they still maintain a certain pessimism, as we cannot know when the wind might change direction and it is better to be cautious.

Given this situation, not at all easy to deal with, given this panorama, what is left? The desire to move ahead. This is something shown not only through attitudes but also with action. So, now more than

ever, innovation must be our flagship. In our case, in Rotecna, we follow this con premise, which has always been one of our characteristics, with the launch of the Swing Feeder R3, the evolution of that first feeder for large groups that revolutionised the European market.

For companies, this is not a time to give up nor slow down; but rather this space –perhaps longer than we would wish- should be used to build the foundations for the trampoline that will push us forward.

It is true that the last year and a half have not been the best, and we are facing a 2010 -a priorijust as difficult, but the sector has always known how to overcome the downturns. It is simply a question of overcoming another one with shrewdness, hard work and also, of course, some courage.

SUMMARY 4

10

6

12

17

18

20

ROTECNA WORLD

10

october 2009

ISSN: L-41-2007

EDITION: Rotecna, s.a.

EDITORIAL STAFF: Montse Palau

design: montse guerrero

Print: Imprenta barnola

Rotecna's World's editors accept no liability for contributor's opinion

ROTECNANEWS

ROTECNA, S.A. has begun a campaign to preserve natural resources, applying the directives that refer to efficient industrial production.

The actions for a more eco-efficient production began some years ago with the classification and recovery of all kinds of residual materials (plastic, paper, wood, desecho,‌) for recycling. Later came the progressive replacement of wood pallets with plastic ones. And now, we wish to reduce the excessive material that is dumped in natural after a single use, reusing the plastic pallets.

With the slogan “Let the plastic pallets come back�, ROTECNA aims to raise awareness among its national clients to work together to protect the environment with a simple gesture. The company will recover the pallets that are in good conditions to reuse them. Currently, we use some 10,000 pallets per year, which represents a large amount of material apt for reuse.

4

Continuing with this policy of using energy resources, several months ago a solar photovoltaic plant was installed in our industrial complex. This installation, of 110 kWp (kilowatts peak) and 504 photovoltaic modules, is able to generate 145,812 kWh per year of clean electricity.

This photovoltaic solar plant is like a small power station for producing non-polluting electric energy. It is made up of:

- Photovoltaic generator.

- Supports for the photovoltaic panels.

- Electronic converter.

- Interconnection protectors measurement equipment.

and

Rotecna: Eco-efficient industrial production The photovoltaic panels have a guarantee of performance for 25 years, with output of 90% until the tenth year and 80% until the twenty-fifth.

The province of Lleida (where ROTECNA’s industrial complex is located) is the second highest in Spain for solar radiation after Almería. According to study by the Centre for Energy, Environmental and Technological Research (Ciemat), the average radiation in Lleida is between 4.5 and 5.1 kW/h per square

metre. That means that any photovoltaic installation has a high electricity producing performance.

These actions in favour of the environment are carried out within ROTECNA’s directives to move towards eco-efficient industrial production to preserve natural resources con with gestures like these, simple but effective.

If we do MORE with LESS, WE ALL gain.

“Let the plastic pallets come back”

5

RESEARCH&DEVELOPMENT

Balancing

sow & piglets welfare with production efficiency

Sandra Edwards Newcastle University

Abstract The close confinement of sows in barren environmental conditions gives rise to major public concern for their welfare. Such concern has resulted in EU legislation to ban individual confinement systems for the majority of gestation, and strong pressures to find alternatives to the farrowing crate for lactating sows. Many alternative loose housing systems for dry sows exist, and have been in widespread use for a number of years. They have the potential to deliver both higher welfare and good reproductive performance, but careful attention to feeding and management to prevent social stress is critical to success. Adoption of alternative non-confinement systems for farrowing and lactation is more problematic.

Despite their routine use in some EU countries at the current time, systems which guarantee good piglet survival under large-scale indoor production conditions have yet to be commercially proven.

It is likely that changes to both genetics and management will be necessary to make such systems function in an acceptable commercial way.

The non-confinement alternatives for gestating sows For the pregnant sow, a wide variety of alternative systems to the gestation stall exists (Edwards, 1998) and, since the banning or phasing out of confinement systems in many European countries, these have been in use on both small and large commercial scales. In the UK, group

6

housing systems have been operating since well before this became a legal requirement, and a vast deal of practical experience has accumulated. In synthesising advice and information on such systems, a UK advisory body recognised six different generic categories of gestation housing system (Pig Welfare Advisory Group (PWAG), 1997a,b,c,d,e,f,). These can be summarised as follows:

Outdoor Sows Low capital cost is incurred in a system where dry sows can be stocked at up to 25 animals/ha in large group sizes, contained by double or single strand electric fencing, housed in simple corrugated iron huts, and fed on the ground (PWAG, 1997a).

Yards or Kennels with Floor Feeding This is the simplest and cheapest of the indoor systems and can be adopted in almost any building.

Yards and Individual Feeders This is generally the most expensive housing system because of the cost and space requirement associated with having a feeding stall for each sow (PWAG, 1997c).

Cubicles and Free-Access Stalls This is a cheaper variant in which less space per sow is required, since the stalls serve as both lying and feeding place (PWAG, 1997d).

Yards or Kennels with Short Stall Feeders Further attempts to reduce cost and space per sow have lead to development of systems in which only head or shoulder length partitions between feeding places are used (PWAG,1997e).

Electronic Sow Feeders Large scale automation of dry sow rationing has been made possible by more recent technology which permits individual sows to be electronically identified and allocated a specified amount of diet in a computer controlled feeding station.

The challenges of the alternative gestation housing systems The challenges posed by alternatives to confinement systems can relate both to welfare challenges for the animals, and practical and economic challenges for the producer.

Welfare Challenges The welfare challenges for the group-housed gestating sow relate to social aggression and ability to access a fair share of feed resources. Because of the restricted feed level and chronic hunger experienced by the animals, even on nutritionally adequate diets, competition for feed can be a major source of aggression unless feeding animals are fully segregated. With floor feeding systems, aggression at feeding time can be severe (Brouns and Edwards, 1994; Whittaker et al., 1999) and large variation in body condition can result (Edwards, 1992). In systems with partial feeding stalls (for example, cubicles and free access stalls) significant aggression during feeding can also occur if some sows within the group finish their feed allocations whilst others have food remaining. For this reason, grouping strategies with careful matching of age and body condition are important. Electronic sow feeders require animals to feed sequentially. With good feeding protection and a regular routine, such systems can operate with little aggression. However, any unreliability of the technology due to poor design or maintenance can cause aggression and vice to quickly escalate (Edwards and Riley, 1986).

1. To minimise the problems with social aggression, a number of general recommendations for system design and management, based on scientific understanding of social behaviour, can be made (Edwards, 1992, 2000). Some are: 2. Allowing adequate space for social signalling of submissive behaviour, with a minimum of 2.4 m2 per sow in stable groups (Weng et al., 1998), and providing increased floor area and visual barriers within the pen at the time of mixing (Edwards et al., 1993) can reduce the level and severity of injurious behaviours.

3. Provision of a foraging substrate such as straw bedding, or even smaller recreational amounts of long or chopped straw, allows appropriate expression of foraging behaviour and has been shown in both experimental studies and practical experience to reduce aggression and lesion scores. In unbedded systems, maintaining animals in better body condition and feeding once, rather than twice, daily to allow greater meal size reduces restlessness and aggression.

7

RESEARCH&DEVELOPMENT 4. As an alternative to increasing feed energy allowance, providing increased dietary bulk through fibre incorporation can also induce greater satiety as a result of longer feeding time, greater gastro-intestinal distention and prolonged nutrient delivery and heat generation from hindgut fermentation (Meunier-Sala端n et al., 2000).

Economic Challenges The extent to which acceptable economic performance can be realized in alternative loose housing systems for gestating sows depends on two aspects. The first relates to fixed costs arising from the capital cost of system installation, and the second to the level of reproductive performance which can be achieved in a given system relative to the variable cost requirement. Capital costs of group housing systems for dry sows vary widely depending on the building space requirement and sophistication of feeding system adopted. Total space will be greater than for confinement systems, and initial investment or building conversion cost will therefore be higher unless low cost housing structures can be used, such as deep litter systems in uninsulated buildings or hoop structures.

The significant reduction in lower critical temperature of group housed sows in deep litter systems, in comparison to individually housed animals in unbedded systems, can mean that the feed penalty associated with less controlled thermal environments is not always great.

Most producer concerns relate to whether less intensive systems can deliver the same level of reproductive performance as the very controlled conditions of stall housing. Many of the early studies on group housing systems in different countries (for example Denmark and USA) have shown reduced reproductive performance relative to stalls in both conception rate and litter size. However, these studies were often carried out in unbedded accommodation with highly competitive feeding systems and staff unfamiliar with group housing systems. It is certainly the case that social stress on sows at key times in the reproductive cycle will result in suppressed oestrus behaviour, reduced ovulation rate and, most importantly, increased embryo mortality (Arey and Edwards, 1998).

Adverse effects of stress have been identified at all levels in the hypothalamo-pituitary-gonadal axis as a result of the influence of changes in a number of hormones and neurotransmitters. Avoiding mixing and social competi-

8

tion around the period of insemination and implantation (7-14 days post insemination) by good housing design and feeding management is therefore key to reproductive success. It is for this reason that most EU countries have retained stalls for the first 4 weeks of pregnancy, although large scale surveys in countries with a tradition of group housing (Arey and Edwards, 1998) and more recent studies in countries in the process of adopting such systems (EFSA, 2007) show that well managed group systems can deliver the same high level of reproductive performance.

Comparisons of performance between different dry sow housing systems using industry survey data have periodically been published, especially at times of transition when different systems are running contemporaneously.

Feed use is typically 10-15% higher in outdoor systems, and often reported to be 5-10% higher in floor feeding

This image will disappear soon in Europe members as in 2013 the stalls in gestation will be completely banned. indoor systems. The extent to which this reflects feed wastage, increased sow activity and/or association with poorer quality buildings is uncertain.

Experimental within-farm comparisons of different group housing systems have been carried out within the UK (e.g. Stewart et al., 1993; Broom et al., 1995) and elsewhere within Europe (e.g. Bengtsson et al., 1983; den Hartog et al., 1993). Few consistent performance differences between systems have emerged from such studies but welfare has generally been held to be com-

promised in group feeding systems, and more at risk in electronic sow feeding systems. Studies have generally focussed on different feeding systems, with confounding of other system components such as group size and/ or bedding provision. A further concern has been the reporting of increased culling of sows from group housing systems for lameness and leg injuries incurred during aggression at mixing and mounting behaviour during oestrus, particularly in slatted systems. Once again, correct design of housing and management is the key, with adequate space, nonslippery floors and correct slat and void dimensions.

The way forward For both gestating and lactating sows, non-confinement systems which can improve sow welfare without unac-

The study also includes the electronic sow feeders in gestation. ceptably compromising piglet welfare or production economy do exist. Making these systems an effective commercial reality involves more than just implementing a building design. Although the system is often considered to be the situation into which the sow is placed, factors associated with the sow herself can interact with other components to play a crucial role in system success. Certain genotypes of sow are better adapted to extensive systems, requiring a robust individual, than others. This is particularly apparent in outdoor systems but can also be relevant in indoor group-

housing systems. Selection of genotypes for traits more relevant to social and maternal success in non-confinement systems (Baxter et al., 2007; Roehe et al., 2008) will be a critical part of a successful strategy. It is also becoming apparent that the previous physical environment and social experience of the animals can influence later group behaviour (van Putten and BurĂŠ, 1997), and understanding and utilising these developmental influences will also be important. Finally, it must be recognised that the system cannot be divorced from the human input of management and stockmanship. Sow observation and management during key production stages such as breeding and farrowing become more critical as artificial aids are reduced.

Conclusions Pig producers must consider the long term future of their industry, which ultimately depends on the acceptance of pig production methods by consumers and the wider society. The close confinement of sows in barren environmental conditions gives rise to major public concern for their welfare. Many alternative loose housing systems for dry sows exist, and have been in widespread use for a number of years. They have the potential to deliver both higher welfare and good reproductive performance, but careful attention to feeding and management to prevent social stress is critical to success.

Adoption of alternative non-confinement systems for farrowing and lactation is more problematic. Despite their routine use in some EU countries at the current time, systems which guarantee good piglet survival under large-scale indoor production conditions have yet to be commercially proven. However, promising developments are now emerging which, together with appropriate changes in genetics and management offer hope for the future. The extent to which alternatives succeed is likely to depend on the scale of operation, the skill of stockpeople and the philosophy and motivation of the producer. However, such considerations cannot be divorced from production economics. Producers in a very competitive industry can only operate within the bounds of profitability. Initiatives that reduce net margin are not sustainable and any systems which significantly reduce output or increase capital or running costs are only viable if associated with a protected market or reliable product premium.

9

SOMETHINGABOUT…

Costa Brava: between sea & mountain

Besalú's bridge; Arxiu Patronat Turisme Costa Brava, Francesc Tur. Catalonia has some 700 kilometres of coast, divided into three main areas: the Costa Central (in Barcelona province), the Costa Dorada (in Tarragona, to the south) and the Costa Brava (in Girona, to the north). The three coasts are bathed by the Mediterranean, although there are obvious differences between them. While the Costa Dorada is lower and the sand finer, the Costa Brava has a more abrupt landscape and coarser sand.

Used by many Catalans for second homes, the Costa Brava has the charm of the sea very close to the mountains. It is a very valuable area for the variety and richness of its natural resources, its centuries of history and culture in its buildings, etc, and for the quantity of

10

tourist resources; with ski slopes in winter, or its beaches and coves in summer.

The coastline of the Costa Brava, the most northerly in Catalonia, is about 200 kilometres long from Portbou, on the French frontier, to Blanes. It was discovered at the beginning of the twentieth century by writers and artists like Picasso, Marc Chagall or Santiago Rusiñol, who were attracted by the human qualities of the inhabitants, the wealth of its traditions and the main heritage of the Costa Brava: its natural beauty.

This is a very wild coast (“Brava” means wild) resulting from the various mountain ranges, such as the Pyr-

enees, the Albera range, the massif of Les Gavarres or that of Cadiretes, that reach the sea as rocky cliffs to give it a wild and jagged aspect, with hidden coves and beaches, where pines grow right down to the waterline.

There are also wide beaches like those in the Gulf of Roses or the dunes at Pals, which break up the unity and give variety to the landscape.

In the interior of the Costa Brava, there are small towns near the sea, normally with an economy based on agricultural or small-scale industry, which have managed to keep their charm and personality over the centuries. For example, there are such municipalities as Peratallada, Peralada, Monells, Ullastret or Pals. The Empordà plain, with the special aspect of the “masías” or farmhouses, singular constructions highly valued by those who seek peace and quiet as a refuge from the big city. The area of La Selva, with great forests and towns lost in the heart of Montseny, or Banyoles, with its lake surrounded by hills. Then there is La Bisbal, the pottery capital and Figueres, with the original and unique Dalí Museum.

The geographic proximity of all the towns on the Costa Brava and the good communications allow the visitor to

enjoy a wide range of activities, not only in the landscape, but also referring to gastronomy or sports, including sailing, parachuting, hang gliding or diving. Thus, it is not by chance that the Costa Brava has been the staring point for many civilisations, so that now it is full of culture and art, like the Roman ruins at Sant Martí de Empúries.

Among the curious sites on the Costa Brava is the Art Park in Cassà de la Selva, an invitation to enjoy nature in a place designed down to the last detail to house unique contemporary sculptures. The Art Park has 150 sculptures by renowned artists in the open air in a hectare of gardens. Nothing about the landscape and the treatment of the space is left to chance, and each Zen work is put in the place it corresponds to: in the shade of a cork oak, floating on a pond, on the grass, etc.

Artistically, Salvador Dalí has undoubtedly been a plus for the Costa Brava, where the Dalí triangle (the Dalí Theatre-Museum in Figueres, Púbol Castle and his house in Portlligat) maintains the painter’s artistic creativity. It merits a chapter to itself.

Information from www.costabrava.org

Photos: Cadaqués; Arxiu Patronat Turisme Costa Brava; Francesc Tur.

11

PIGPRODUCTIONIN…

Russian Federation

the big market Resource: USDA Foreign Service. GAIN Report

Summary Russia’s red meat imports increased 10.8% during the first five months of 2008, up from 518,800 tons imported during the same period of 2007. Poultry imports increased 7.5% during the first five months of 2008, up from 426,900 tons imported during the same period of 2007. Unless Russian meat and poultry import regulations change, over-quota imports are projected to increase in 2008 and 2009. Imports of live pigs for slaughter increased 30% in the first quarter of 2008 as exporters sought to avoid import TRQ limitations. Supplies of live animals in Western Europe have been largely exhausted, and importers are turning to Australia, Canada, and now the U.S. Potential investors in Russian cattle production are deterred by historically negative financial

12

returns, and beef production is expected to decrease 2% in 2009. Pork production is expected to increase 7% in 2009, largely due to growing investment in swine production, better reproductive yields, greater availability of investment credit subsidies, and a high grain yield in 2008.

Livestock policies under the State Program for Development of Agriculture and Regulation of Food and Agricultural Markets in 2008-2012 encourage swine production and attempt to address Russia’s declining cattle numbers.

In May 2008 Russia and the United States agreed on several new veterinary certificates for livestock genetics, including for live cattle and bovine embryos.

Appropriate Russian agencies changed food safety regulation for food additives, organic food, poultry chlorine treatment, and others.

In February 2009, the First Deputy Prime Minister, Viktor Zublovbv, told that “we have a chance to fully provide ourselves with pork within three to four years”. “Russia”, added, “produced 8% more pork than in 2007”.

Production The Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat) reported that as of July 1, 2008, there were 17.4 million hogs, 1% fewer than in 2007. In 2007 the swine herd totaled 17.6 million hogs, a 9.9% increase from 2006. In Russia, private plots generated 49% of cattle, 43% of swine, and 50% of sheep and goats at the end of June 2008. Rising input prices significantly affect small Russian producers, because private households have a limited ability to pass on higher costs to consumers.

Total profits in the Russian pork industry are falling, and competition is becoming fiercer. More-profitable, vertically integrated companies are increasing their market share as they absorb less-efficient producers.

Falling grain prices will drive herd growth-potential, allowing farmers to increase their pig herds. Swine production is expected to increase 7% to 44.4 million pigs in 2009. In 2008 swine production is expected to increase 7% over the previous year due to unexpectedly high reproductive yields and an anticipated record grain yield. Some meat market analysts predict that as new and modernized pig farming complexes reach planned capacity, pork production will grow 75% from 2008 to 2012. Under the National Priority Projects, the Russian government hopes to increase annual domestic pork production to 2.4 MMT by building multiple new pork production facilities. Domestic livestock production is currently cost prohibitive due to unreasonably high production costs, feed conversion ratios, and rising energy prices. This may change in 2008 as a record-setting grain yield results in lower feed prices.

Lower input costs and higher meat prices may make pork production more cost effective.

In keeping with a long decline in the cattle sector, low productivity and reproductive inefficiency are expected to decrease cattle herds 3% in both 2008 and 2009.

Beef production is forecast to fall 3% in 2008 and another 2% in 2009. While Russia has started to develop a commercial beef cattle industry, it will not

play a significant role in beef production in the near future. Dairy cattle, including bull calves and spent dairy cows, remain the primary source of domestic beef. Making beef an attractive area for investment in Russia remains a challenge.

According to Rosstat, Russia boosted production of basic food items in 2008. Processed meat production increased

The cool climatology doesn’t worry the pig producers.

18% to 1.1 million tons from January to May 2008.

Sausage production increased 8.6% to 965,000 tons, and canned meat increased 13.5% in the same period.

Production of all processed meat and meat products increased 7.7% in the first half of 2008 over the same period of 2007. Meat and offal processing increased 14%, including a 0.5% increase in pork, a 4% decrease in beef, and a 21.4% increase in poultry. Production of semiready products increased 11%, and sausage production increased 4%.

Consumption Thanks to rising incomes, consumer demand for meat is growing. Rising domestic production and imports continue to satisfy demand.

13

PIGPRODUCTIONIN… Trade Several organizations import live cattle, live hogs, semen, and embryos under the National Priority Project in Agriculture. These include the State Agro-Industrial Leasing Company, Rosagroleasing (http://eng.rosagroleasing.ru/), Rosplem (ros-plem@mail.ru), Agroplemsoyuz (http://www.agroplemsoyuz.ru/), and several other companies. Supplies of live animals in Western Europe have been largely exhausted, and importers are turning to Australia, Canada, and the U.S for imported swine genetics. Outdated Russian swine genetics offer a 4:1 feed conversion ratio and fat hogs that are unfit for processing. Western swine genetics offer better feed conversion ratios and leaner hogs.

a 37% increase from 2007. Russia imported 59,410 hogs for slaughter from Lithuania - over half of total pigs imported for slaughter – an increase of 50% from the first quarter of 2007. Imports of purebred hogs fell from 6,941 in the first quarter of 2007 to 3,523 in the first quarter of 2008. Most imports during this period came from Hungary, Ireland, Poland and Denmark.

Russia Increased Meat Imports Russian pork imports increased 40% year-on-year during the first three months of 2008. From January to March 2008, fresh and frozen pork imports totaled 152,626 MT, 30% of which came from Brazil. Other significant suppliers of pork include the United States, Canada, Denmark, and Germany.

RUSSIA: LIVE ANIMAL IMPORTS BY REGION, IN HEAD COMMODITY

NUMBER

REGION

ORIGIN

10,000 SOWS, SVERDLOVSK OBLAST SEED STOCKS

PIGS

DENMARK

DATE 2008

SWINE

10,000

SVERDLOVSK OBLAST

DENMARK

2008

SWINE

240

ORENBURG

HUNGARY

AUGUST 2007

SWINE

1,000

MORDOVIA

U.K.

JUNE 07

SWINE

1,200

OREL

CANADA

JUNE 07

SWINE

1,432

KIROV

CANADA

MAY 07

SWINE

2,337

BASHKIRIYA

GERMANY

2007

Imports of Live Animals for Slaughter Russia imports a significant volume of live pigs for slaughter in response to growing food prices and an urgent need for raw meat for processing. These imports are not limited by tariff rate quotas (TRQ). Live pig imports increased 30% in the first quarter of 2008 over the same period of 2007. Most of it - 92,000 head out of total imports of 109,048 head – came for slaughter, RUSSIA: IMPORTS OF PIGS >50KG FOR SLAUGHTER 010392 IN 2005, 2006 AND 2007, IN HEAD RANK 0

COUNTRY -THE WORLD-

1

LITHUANIA

2

ESTONIA

CY 2006

57,957

CY 2007

296,617

279,266

0

40,745

159,805

1,595

61,120

47,302

3

GERMANY

0

0

21,425

4

IRELAND

0

797

15,008

5

HUNGARY

0

2,518

14,585

6

POLAND

55,456

188,232

9,124

7

CZECH REPUBLIC

32

0

6,799

SOURCE OF DATA: WORLD TRADE ATLAS

14

CY 2005

VPSS Starts an Experiment on Preliminary Notification In an effort to reduce the length of veterinary inspections at the border, VPSS introduced an experimental procedure at customs in Kaliningrad Oblast, which covers Kaliningrad, Smolensk, Tver, Pskov, and Leningrad oblasts. Kaliningrad’s regional Veterinary Directorate introduced a system of preliminary notification for rail shipments of livestock-origin products from the European Union to the Russian Federation. The exporter or importer was instructed to send electronic notification with scanned copies of the exporting country’s veterinary certificate. Such shipments would get preference over those that did not provide preliminary notification, thus saving time at customs inspections. While this experiment takes place, existing clearance procedures will still be in force at other customs posts.

In 2007 Russian veterinary officials stated that they would soon impose a new electronic system to detect counterfeit veterinary certificates and reduce the smuggling of illegal livestock products into Russia.

They cited an “increasing number of cases where accompanying documentation was filled with errors.”

Prices Consumer prices grew 9.3% since the beginning of 2008, a rapid increase compared to 6.6% during the

The Russian Government tries to reduce the smuggling of illegal livestock products into the country. same period of 2007. The Economic Development Ministry raised its inflation forecast for the year from 10.5% to 11.8%. According to Rosstat, meat and poultry prices have increased 9.6% since January 2008, reaching an annual growth rate of 15.1%.

Meat and poultry prices grew 1.6% in July alone. The trend of price increases for pork and beef – of both domestic and imported origin - will likely continue for the following reasons: • World demand for agricultural products of plant and animal origin;

manner. According to Minister Gordeyev, the government allocated 10 billion rubles (approximately $400 million) in 2008 to subsidize pork and poultry production to prevent losses and make production profitable.

Domestic pork prices were stable in 2007 and started to increase in May 2008. Imported pork prices increased from 89 rubles/kilo ($3.56) in August 2007 to 120 rubles/kilo ($4.80) in July 2008.

TABLE 3. RUSSIA: PORK IMPORTS, BY COUNTRY, 2005-2007, JAN-DEC, IN METRIC TONS % CHANGE

• Significant increase in input costs for meat and poultry production; • High inflation in Russia; • State interference into internal and foreign trade by non-market levers.

According to Minister Gordeyev, prices of livestock products should be stable and fair. The government, he said, should comply with the Federal Law on Agricultural Development, monitor price increases, and allocate compensatory subsidies in a timely

RANK

COUNTRY

2005

2006

2007

07/06

0

-THE WORLD-

562,849

625,657

671,738

7,37

1

BRAZIL

397,722

233,249

282,198

20,99

2

DENMARK

33,048

107,104

92,476

-13,66

3

UNITED STATES

29,687

68,424

75,129

9,80

4

CANADA

10,280

64,961

70,474

8,49

5

GERMANY

19,438

43,686

43,533

-0,35

6

SPAIN

4,005

13,623

26,427

93,98

7

NETHERLANDS

10,208

16,702

17,215

3,07

8

FRANCE

9,759

18,086

16,006

-11,50

9

BELGIUM

1,548

14,335

14,654

2,22

10

FINDLAND

8,617

16,388

14,463

-11,74

11

IRELAND

964,000

5,164

9,306

80,20

SOURCE OF DATA: WORLD TRADE ATLAS

15

PIGPRODUCTIONIN…

Development of livestock production in Russia increased demand for protein feeds.

Stocks Stocks of meat are sufficient for retail trade and processing. Imports help keep prices at an affordable level.

Development of livestock production in Russia increased demand for protein feeds. Russia’s imports of soybeans and soybean meal subsequently skyrocketed, thereby suggesting that demand for biotech feed products is also growing. Russia imported 215,259 MT of soybeans from July 2007 through March 2008, compared with only 2,333 MT in the same period of the preceding year.

culture (VPSS) registers biotech feeduse crops. VPSS developed and adopted new registration procedures reportedly similar to an earlier protocol used in 2004. Registration for feed use still expires after five years.

Pre-Notification of Export Certificates For certificates issued on or after August 1, 2008, Russia’s Veterinary and Phytosanitary Surveillance Service requires advance e-mail notification of all scheduled shipments of U.S. poultry, pork, and beef. It is the responsibility of the exporter to assure that notification is provided.

RUSSIA: FEED STOCKS AS OF APRIL 1, 2008, IN MMT FEED UNITS 2006 FEED AVAILABILITY INCLUDING FEED GRAIN

2007

2008

10.0

9.0

3.4

3.3

9.0 3.4 SOURCE: ROSSTAT

There are no specific bans on importing biotech products. The Federal Service for Veterinary and Phytosanitary Surveillance of the Ministry of Agri-

16

Russia issued a draft “Technical Regulations On Meat Production and Its Turnover”, stipulating that many products may be produced only from chilled pork.

Belarusian meat processing facilities subsequently ordered special refrigerated tracks to transport chilled carcasses and half carcasses to Russia. Currently, this product is shipped in refrigerators with a temperature of -18 degrees Celsius.

TECHNOLOGY

Practicality for

feeding in gestation Everyone knows that the feed for a pregnant sow is one of the most important aspects to ensure optimum reproductive performance. The best is to seek a balance so that the sow does not suffer from underfeeding or overfeeding.

On one hand, underfeeding could affect the reproductive performance in the following two or three deliveries, as the mother sacrifices her own body reserves to avoid affecting the prenatal development of the piglets.

also play an important role. In Rotecna, we have developed the FOUR dosifier, very practical to work with.

Among its characteristics there is the semitransparent front and back to enable the available feed to be checked. Another important characteristic is that it has a trap to open or close the feed drop in the “Four” depending on whether the gestation or farrowing place is free or occupied by an animal.

On the other hand, excessive feeding in this period also has negative effects. Sows that are overfed after insemination and during gestation have higher embryo mortality and produce smaller litters than sows that are correctly fed. Furthermore, sows that are very fat at delivery suffer a depression in feed consumption during lactation, resulting in higher weight and backfat losses.

The FOUR – for gestation and farrowing – has been designed for better handling in the gestation and farrowing pens, especially bearing in mind the importance of feeding, which must be adjusted to the needs of each sow, in both phases. It has also been developed taking its handling by the farmer into account, so the component pieces can easily be disassembled with only a “click”. This way, the dosifier can be cleaned without mounting and dismounting being cumbersome.

To draw up a correct feeding plan for pregnant sows, the experts recommend knowing the body state of the animals, as well as measuring the thickness of the backfat. So that intake is correct, the dosifier used will

Some studies show that feed intake can vary by 20-25% between farms. Thus, the precision of the dispensers plays an important role. So, in Rotecna this is a characteristic you will not find lacking in our range.

17

TECHNOLOGY

SWING R3: The evolution of the species It is 12 years since the launch of the Rotecna hopper, the Rotecmatic, later replaced by the Swing Feeder R-2.

Over this decade, the company has used its characteristic research, development and innovation to optimise the initial design. And now it launches the latest version of this feeder. Between the first version and the Swing Feeder, Rotecna has managed to sell over 250,000 units around the world.

This is the Swing R3, the new generation that has been optimised for greater efficiency as the same feeder can be used for weaning, fatteners and wean to finish.

Rotecna presents this latest version with the same essence as at its birth, but updated, with the innovations and experience of twelve years on farms all over the world.

The base of the new Swing R3 is the same: feeder for dry and wet feed, with two lateral drinkers and an easily learned feed drop mechanism. However, this new version also has the following: • The plate, totally stainless steel, now keeps water and feed separate.

• The pendulum that allows better working for the feed drop.

• The plastic structure reinforced with stainless steel.

• The more precise adjustment with 24 positions, instead of the previous 15.

• Ease of filling and cleaning designed for more comfortable handling by the farmer.

• The better performance with meals, thanks to its diameter and the drop mechanism being apt for all kinds of feed.

18

A single version that is designed for animals from 6 kg to 120 kg, with a swinging pendulum that provides better learning top work the feed drop as the animals make it work with their natural rooting instinct. The new design (with a capacity for 30 to 50 animals) is also easier to fill and clean bearing in mind the handling by the farmer. The performance of the new Swing R3 with meals is also notable.

Antecedents The first version of this type of hopper was presented at the end of the 1990s, when Rotecna was already well established on foreign markets. In some north European countries, it was habitual to find farms with weaning and fattening with large numbers of animals, so a feeder that could feed this large group of pigs was necessary. Rotecna designed the Rotecmatic feeder.

This is a feeder for wet or dry feed with easy and effective dosing, thanks to the eleven positions to adjust the precise distribution of the feed. The feeder has already appeared in two versions, Maxi –fattening- and Mini –weaning. The design was done with a distributor like a pendulum that was worked by the animal to make the feed drop. As well as the central zone in stainless steel for the dry feed, the feeder was completed with two lateral nipple-like drinkers.

This ease of intake favoured a good atmosphere in the pen, as the animals did not need to compete for feed as they did in other feeders. They all had the chance to feed and thus their growth was uniform. Moreover, the two lateral drinkers improved the pigs’ appetite and reception of the feed.

TECHNICAL DETAILS:

These were the basic lines of that first version. Over the years, Rotecna has optimised its design, part of its materials, but without varying from the initial idea: easy access to the feed for all the animals. The lines of the pendulum have been modernised, the capacity of the feeder extended and we made it semitransparent, added four more positions to the adjustment. Even the name has changed: Swing Feeder.

And in 2008, new characteristics were added to ensure its advantages continued to increase.

ADVANTAGES:

Nº animals for feeder

30-50

• Better learning

Animal live weight, kg

6-120

• Better working with meals

Hopper capacity, L. Hopper filling height, cm

95 125

• Easier regulation (24 positions) • Easier filling given its lower height

Diameter of hopper (maximum), cm 57

• Easier cleaning

Plate width, cm

55

Plate depth, cm

45

Plate length, cm

10+3

HIGHER EFFICIENCY BOTHFOR WEANING, FATTENING AND WEAN TO FINISH

SWING R3 reforircement, use when the feeder for finisher in the middle of the pen.

19

FUTURE

To clone or not to clone

that is the question In 2008, the European Food Safety Authority launched a draft of its scientific opinion about the implications of cloning animals for food safety. The work was in response to the request by the European Commission (EC) in February 2007 for the EFSA to give an opinion about this question.

20

The opinion of the European Authority had to help to take the necessary considerations for future measures by the European Union (EU) regarding the animal cloning and the food products obtained from them. In February 2009, after the EFSA conclusions, the European Commission met again to debate animal cloning

• Although death and disease rates of clones are significantly higher than those observed in conventionally reproduced animals, healthy clones and their offspring indicate that somatic cell nucleus transfer (SCNT) can be successfully used as a reproductive technique in cattle and pigs.

Based on a number of parameters including physiological and clinical ones, healthy clones and healthy offspring show no significant differences from their conventional counterparts.

• The health and welfare of a significant proportion of clones have been found to be adversely affected.

The proportion of unhealthy clones is likely to decrease as the technology improve.

The first pig cloning was in 2000 with 5 piglets.

and asked the European Authority to extend the information sent to them about this subject, and specifically about:

• Food products obtained from healthy cattle and pig clones and their offspring, i.e., meat and milk, are within the normal range with respect to the composition and nutritional value of similar products obtained from conventionally bred animals. In view of these findings, and assuming that unhealthy clones are removed from entering the food chain as is the case with conventionally bred animals, it is very unlikely that any difference exists in terms of food safety between food products originating from clones and their progeny compared with those derived from conventionally bred animals.

• No environmental impact is foreseen as a result of animal cloning, but only limited data is available.

The EFSA report

The report stated that SCNT is a relatively new technology and the available data for risk assessment are limited. Most studies have been of small sample size and the currently available data only allow for an assessment of cattle and pig clones and their progeny. In addition, as SCNT is a developing technology, information on animals reared and remaining alive for considerable periods of time is limited. Also, the current welfare assessment is largely based on interpretation of limited data.

The EFSA’s Scientific Committee drew up a report about animal cloning as a multidisciplinary theme for the use of groups of experts in different areas. Some of the main conclusions by these experts were:

In these moments, the Commission is awaiting for the new report from the EFSA by June (with the two above-mentioned requests) to enable the adoption of the required measures in the field of animal cloning.

• Research into the causes of the pathologies and mortality observed in cloned animals during gestation or in the periods after birth and those observed less frequently in adult animals.

• The health and welfare of the cloned animals during their productive lives.

21

ROTECNANEWS

The scientists expect that the cloned pigs will contribute to meeting the demand for pig organs, if these are approved for use in human transplants.

Ethical Opinion The European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (EGE) also presented a report to the European Commission with their opinion, to complement the EFSA’s conclusions that do not reflect the ethical moral or social aspects in their opinion.

The EGE’s opinion concluded that “considering the current level of suffering and the health problems of the cloned animals, the EGE has doubts as to whether cloning animals for food supply is ethically justified”. “At present”, the Group continued, “the EGE does not see convincing arguments to justify the production of food from clones and their offspring”.

Europe versus the USA Cloning is an international question. Cloning techniques are being used in a good number of countries, with Japan being the latest to allow it, although the United States stands out. The country’s food

22

safety authorities, the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) have expressed their opinion about the risks to food safety from meat products obtained from cloned animals.

The FDA concluded that “meat and milk from clones of cattle, swine (pigs), and goats, and the offspring of clones from any species traditionally consumed as food, are as safe to eat as food from conventionally bred animals”. The North American Agency requires no additional labelling or measures for these foods from cloned animals or their descendents given that no differences were observed compared with foods from conventional breeding.

If we compare the opinions of the FDA and the EFSA, we must note that the European Authority mentions the subject of animal welfare while the FDA does not contemplate this aspect in its considerations. Also in the European context, the EC also takes the ethical opinions of the EGE into consideration, while the FDA does not.

The UE is working in a legislative way to approve or not the consumption of meat from cloned animals.

Other countries are not so advanced in their discussions about cloning and its risks.

The Europena citizen Most Europeans have a negative attitude to animal cloning for meat and milk production, with 58% stating that it would never be justified, according to a Eurobarometer survey published in October 2008. In the case of Spain, there was greater tolerance, with the percentage of people against falling to 44%.

For now, in September 2008, the European Parliament asked for the UE-wide prohibition of cloned animals for food production and requested a ban on the import of all products from animals obtained by this technique.

Cloning pigs In March 2000, the scientists responsible for Dolly the sheep announced the birth of the world’s first five cloned piglets. The PPL company, based in Edinburgh,

Scotland, expect that these animals will contribute to meeting the demand for pig organs if these are approved for use in human transplants.

The five piglets were born on 5th March 2000 and were named Millie, Christa, Alexis, Carrel and Dotcom.

The animals were created from adult cells, using a “nuclear transfer” technology, similar to that used with Dolly.

Colin Blakemore, Professor of Physiology at Oxford University, hopes that, in the future, these cloned animals can be used in new cellular therapies. According to him, pig cells could be modified to generate human insulin, to be used to treat diabetes. Until now, this disease cannot be cured by organ transplant.

Also in 2000, but in Japan, Akira Onishi from the Department of Animal Reproduction and Genetics in the National Institute of Animal Industry Tsukuba Norin Danchi, cloned pigs. A year’s work on cloning pigs with his team produced Xena, a black piglet born from a surrogate sow that was white coloured.

23

Your profitability is our target

SWING R3 Feeder for Weaning, Growing, WTF

TECNA PAN Initation pan for suckling piglets

MAXITAINER para MAXI PAN Vacuum type liquid container for weaning for supplying milk or medication

GROW FEEDER MAXI Growing wet / dry

EASY PAN Initation pan for suckling piglets

GROW FEEDER MINI Weaning wet / dry

SOW FEEDER Farrowing wet / dry

MINI HOPPER PAN Initation feeder for suckling piglets

TOLVA TR Weaning 4 / 5 feeding outlets

MINI PAN Initation pan for suckling piglets

MAXI HOPPER PAN Support feeding for weaning and WTF

MINITAINER Vacuum type liquid container for suckling piglets for supplying milk or medication

MAXI PAN Pan for weaning

Lit

er

FEEDING BALL Accurately regulates the exact quantity of feed

SOW BOWL Synthetic bowl with stainless steel rim

SIMPLEX 6 / 10 liters

DISPENSER OUTLER REDUCER 60Ø / 63Ø

CLUTCH DISPENSER 6 / 10 liters

s

DOSIMATIC 6 / 7 / 10 liters

EASY DRINKER MIDI Stainless steel nipple

SWING DRINKER Unique drinker with swing action and constant flow of water for weaning and growing MAXIWET Wet feeder for weaning

VR-H VALVE Valve maintains a constant water level

EASY DRINKER DUO drinker trought with VR-H valve for sows, pics and growing

Polígono Industrial, s/n, nave nº3 · 25310 Agramunt (Lleida) SPAIN Tel. +34 973 39 12 67 · Fax: +34 973 39 12 32 e·mail: rotecna@rotecna.com · www.rotecna.com

FOUR 7 liters

EASY DRINKER MINI Stainless steel nipple

FAST LOCK BRACKET SYSTEM

U BRACKETS SYSTEM P.V.C. PEN DIVIDERS PLANKS for modular pennings

SOLID GRIP

DROP KITS 55Ø / 75Ø / 90Ø

AUGERS 55Ø / 75Ø / 90Ø

AUGER SYSTEM The silo outlet system consist of a silo boot, a transfer unit and a slide gate assembly that allows horizontal and inclined installation.

CHAIN AND DISK SYSTEM Shock absorbing teeth system.

Easy adjustable chain tensioning system with graduation scale.

Corners with easy aperture system.

Silo extraction system with an agitator.

ZINC-PLATED STEEL CHAIN 50Ø / 60Ø

NITRURATED CARBON CHAIN 50Ø / 60Ø

DELTA BEAM PROFILE 110 / 135 mm T PROFILE 90 / 120 mm SILENT BLOCK

ERGOFIX Slat anchors concrete / plastic

CLICK-IN For close the slots in concrete slats

DELTA NET Tilting flooring system

The most extensive equipment range

BASIC POST BEAM Adjustable support point for profiles

BLIND SLAT 10% OPEN 1200x500

WEANER SLATS 200x400 mm 600x400 mm 600x500 mm 600x600 mm

WEANER SLAT 1200x500

WTF SLATS 600x400 mm 600x500 mm

WEANER SLATS 100x400 mm 100x500 mm BLIND SLATS 600x400 mm 600x500 mm

WEANER SLAT 200x600 mm with TRAP SLAT

HEATED PLATES 600x400 mm Water / Electrical

PARTIAL BLIND SLATS A and B 600x500 mm

SOW SLATS 200x600 mm 600x200 mm 600x300 mm 600x400 mm BLIND SLAT 10% OPEN 600x600 mm SOW SLAT CONFORT 600x400 mm

SLAT TRIM FERROCAST速 STEP SLAT 1200x600 mm 1000x600 mm CAST-IRON SLATS 400x600 mm 600x400 mm 600x600 mm FERROCAST速 LEVEL SLAT 600x600 mm 1200x600 mm

The most extensive equipment range