HACCP for Reproduction and Farrowing Problems

Deliverables of the COREPIG project are management tools based on the HACCP principle (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points). These tools help farmers (in a farm specific way) to solve and prevent problems with endoparasites, reproduction and farrowing problems, weaning diarrhoea and suckling piglet mortality. They are available as Microsoft Excel® files. We recommend that the tools be used by the farmer together with the farm's advisor or veterinarian. Each tool contains instructions for use and consists of three parts: i) a questionnaire for the farmer, ii) a check list to be used in the barn and iii) the farm specific report. The farm specific report has three parts for six different areas: mummified piglets, born dead, farrowing sickness, poor conception, abortion/small litters, poor gilt performance

HACCP Reproduktion und Geburt

Ein Ergebnis des COREPIG-Projektes sind HACCPbasierte Managementhilfen (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points). Diese Hilfen unterstützen Landwirte betriebsspezifisch bei der Lösung und Vorbeugung von Problemen mit Endoparasiten, Problemen der Reproduktion und rund um die Geburt, bei Absetzdurchfall und Saugferkelsterblichkeit. Sie sind in Form von Microsoft Excel®-Dateien verfügbar. Es wird empfohlen, die Hilfen zusammen mit der Beraterin und/oder dem Veterinär anzuwenden. Jede Managementhilfe beinhaltet eine Gebrauchsanleitung und besteht aus drei Teilen: a) einem Fragenbogen für den Betriebsleiter, b) einer Checkliste zur Stallbeurteilung und c) einem betriebsspezifischen Bericht. Der betriebsspezifische Bericht besteht aus drei Teilen für sechs verschiedene Bereiche: mummifizierte Ferkel, Totgeburten, Krankheiten um die Geburt, hohe Umrauscherrate, Fehlgeburten/kleine Wurfgrößen, niedrige Leistung der Jungsauen

HACCP for Parasite Control

Deliverables of the COREPIG project are management tools based on the HACCP principle (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points). These tools help farmers (in a farm specific way) to solve and prevent problems with endoparasites, reproduction and farrowing problems, weaning diarrhoea and suckling piglet mortality. They are available as Microsoft Excel® files. We recommend that the tools be used by the farmer together with the farm's advisor or veterinarian. Each tool contains instructions for use and consists of three parts: i) a questionnaire for the farmer, ii) a check list to be used in the barn and iii) the farm specific report

HACCP for Weaning Diarrhoea

Deliverables of the COREPIG project are management tools based on the HACCP principle (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points). These tools help farmers (in a farm specific way) to solve and prevent problems with endoparasites, reproduction and farrowing problems, weaning diarrhoea and suckling piglet mortality. They are available as Microsoft Excel® files. We recommend that the tools be used by the farmer together with the farm's advisor or veterinarian. Each tool contains instructions for use and consists of three parts: i) a questionnaire for the farmer, ii) a check list to be used in the barn and iii) the farm specific report

HACCP for Suckling Piglet Mortality

Deliverables of the COREPIG project are management tools based on the HACCP principle (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points). These tools help farmers (in a farm specific way) to solve and prevent problems with endoparasites, reproduction and farrowing problems, weaning diarrhoea and suckling piglet mortality. They are available as Microsoft Excel® files. We recommend that the tools be used by the farmer together with the farm's advisor or veterinarian. Each tool contains instructions for use and consists of three parts: i) a questionnaire for the farmer, ii) a check list to be used in the barn and iii) the farm specific report

Why observers should train clinical scoring

Epidemiological studies often involve clinical scoring of animals by several observers due to the high number of farms to be visited. Detailed written procedures and intensive observer training minimize variation between observers. This, however, is still not common in international cooperation. We present data on clinical assessment of sows from an EU project on organic pig health (COREPIG) to illustrate the consequences. The clinical scoring system was based on procedures from the Welfare Quality ® project and included measures regarding body condition (5-level scale), injuries (number of lesions >3cm on shoulder, side and hindquarters), lameness (3-level scale), dirtiness (3-level scale) and skin problems (3-level scale). Nine observers from 6 EU countries trained clinical scoring during two days in two herds. Of the 9 observers, 4 had no or little, 2 had intermediate and 3 had extensive experience in working with pigs. Four observers each had little or intermediate experience in clinical scoring of sows and only 1 had extensive experience. Training comprised parameter discussions and joint scoring of animals. After training, each observer scored up to 30 pregnant sows per farm in 3 to 20 herds in six European countries as part of a larger epidemiological protocol. After completion of farm visits, observers scored up to 50 sows independently but at the same day and farm in order to assess inter-observer agreement. Parameters were collapsed into binary variables. We calculated Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance (W) across all observers and Prevalence Adjusted Bias Adjusted Kappas (PABAK) for observer pairs as measures of agreement. Agreement across observers was not acceptable for skin problems and lameness (W 0.60 (N = 26 sows for skin problems, and 31 to 34 sows for other parameters). Pairwise agreement was not acceptable for skin problems and dirtiness (mean PABAK <0.41) and acceptable for injuries shoulder and side (mean PABAK between 0.41 and 0.60). Agreement was good for hindquarter injuries and animal too thin (PABAK = 0.66 and 0.65, respectively), while obesity and lameness had mean PABAK of 0.84 and 0.95. Observer pairs scored 40 to 50 sows per parameter except for skin problems (36 to 49 sows). Results for lameness and obesity should be interpreted with care, as average prevalence across observers were only 3 and 8 %, respectively. Determination of whether a sow was too thin was the parameter with best agreement. The poor agreement for skin problems and dirtiness can be explained by misunderstandings regarding the parameter definition (e.g. inclusion of mud soiling). Extensive practical experience with pigs was of highest benefit for inter-observer agreement. Average PABAK was 0.70 (STD = 0.19, N = 24 scorings; 3 observer pairs, 8 parameters) for experienced observers but ranged between 0.49 and 0.56 (STD range 0.32 to 0.40) for all other combinations of experience level. The level of experience with clinical scoring of pigs did not have obvious positive effects. Average PABAK for all experience combinations ranged from 0.51 to 0.61 (STD range 0.32 to 0.40). By way of explanation, general experience with pigs helps to score an animal because observers will know a wider range of possible scenarios. By contrast, scores of observers who have already learned a scoring system will tend to be biased by their experience. As a conclusion, our data emphasize the importance of intensive observer training before data collection and the need for inter-observer agreement tests before and after data collection

Incorporation of conventional animal welfare assessment techniques into organic certification and farming

Providing assurances to consumers on the adherence to certain animal welfare-related standards is an important element of organic and farm assurance schemes. This project has ensured that preliminary welfare assessment protocols developed in a conventional farm assurance system (RSPCA Freedom Food scheme) are available for incorporation into organic (& conventional) certification schemes. The final system (available at www.vetschool.bris.ac.uk/animalwelfare) is an assessment tool that can provide credible (repeatable, valid & feasible) evidence for assessment of compliance with welfare standards in organic and conventional farming systems. For issues identified as causing potential concern the assessor is encouraged to conduct further investigations. This promotes a consistent thorough assessment of relevant resource standards, and where appropriate, management requirements concerning appropriate preventive and corrective action that should be contained within written health plans. Furthermore the assessment tool should enable certification bodies and relevant third parties to monitor the ability of schemes to deliver good welfare outcomes, which is useful for policymakers and consumers wishing to assess the welfare assurance associated with membership of a scheme. Finally it should provide a mechanism for assessing the farm’s own management of health and welfare parameters with their health planning systems which is now a requirement or recommendation of many welfare standards. This should enable farms to both identify their own strengths and weaknesses with respect to welfare and then to monitor any improvements resulting from husbandry changes. This is important as many of the welfare observations also have a significant influence on a farm’s profitability

Assessment of animal welfare and environmental impact

During this presentation the CoreOrganic2 project ProPIG was introduced and methods to assess animal welfare and environmental impact were presented. Furthermore some examples were given and models to relate animal welfare and environmental impact were discussed. It was concluded that selected aspects of animal welfare and environmental impact can be assessed on farm, however, it remains to discuss how to relate them to each other- a concrete hypothesis and specific, measureable outcomes are required. The high influence of management makes the variation within systems larger than across systems, allowing to identify solutions

Gesundheit, Wohlergehen und Umweltauswirkungen von Bioschweinen: Ist Freilandhaltung besser? - Das ProPIG-Projekt

Von 2011 bis 2015 wurde in acht europäischen Ländern das Forschungsprojekt ProPIG durchgeführt. Ziel des ProPIG-Projektes war es, auf europäischen Betrieben Gesundheit, Wohlergehen und Umweltauswirkungen von Schweinen in verschiedenen Haltungssystemen zu vergleichen und Werkzeuge zur Verbesserung dieser Bereiche zu entwickeln

Wegweiser für Bio-Schweinehalter

Gesundheitsplan - In England längst Pflicht, sollen nun auch in Österreich eigene „Tiergesundheitspläne“ für Bio-Schweinebetriebe erprobt werden. Die von den Briten gemachten Erfahrungen werden bei der Erstellung solcher Pläne berücksichtigt