1. Meet the Pig

2. Physical Characteristics of the Market Hog 270+ lbs. Low center of balance Square on all 4’s Selectively bred for lean growth efficiency over the last 20+ years

3. Give it Up! You’ll Lose!!!

4. Pig’s Eyesight Not so Great at Times

5. They Can See Movement

6. Pig’s Range of Vision is 300º

7. Floppy Eared Hogs Have a Harder Time Seeing

8. Pig’s Personality CURIOUS

9. Pig’s Personality Social – They like to be around other pigs

10. Pig’s Personality CAUTIOUS

11. Pig’s Personality SMART

12. Pig’s Personality If you hurt them, they don’t forget it Long Memories

13. Flight Zone and Point of Balance (Photo courtesy of the National Pork Board’s TQA Handbook, 2004) National Pork Board. 2004. Trucker Quality Assurance Handbook. C. Stahl, ed. National Pork Board, Des Moines, IA.

14. Understanding the Flight Zone Pigs that moved forward after a tap or shock at certain locations. McGlone, J. J., R. L. McPherson, and D. L. Anderson. 2004. Case study: moving devices for finishing pigs: Efficacy of electric prod, board, paddle, or flag. The Professional Animal Scientist. 20:518-523. Most effective area to tap or shock a pig is on the back

15. Common Pig Handling Devices At the FarmAt the Plant (Photos courtesy of www.qcsupply.com and www.grandin.com)www.qcsupply.comwww.grandin.com Sorting Board Livestock Paddle Electric Prod Flag Livestock Paddle Witch’s Cape

16. Handling Device – Evaluation of moving pigs with a sorting board, an electric prod, or a paddle. – Concluded that a sorting board is the single most effective handling device – Therefore, all handlers should use a sorting board when moving pigs McGlone, J. J., R. L. McPherson, and D. L. Anderson. 2004. Case study: moving devices for finishing pigs: Efficacy of electric prod, board, paddle, or flag. The Professional Animal Scientist. 20:518-523. a b b

17. Handling Intensity Comparison of moving pigs with aggressive or gentle handling Aggressive: pigs moved rapidly with hot shots Gentle: pigs moved at their own pace with plastic cane Benjamin, M. E., H. W. Gonyou, D. J. Ivers, L. F. Richardson, D. J. Jones, J. R. Wagner, R. Seneriz, and D. B. Anderson. 2001. Effect of animal handling method on the incidence of stress response in market swine in a model system. Journal of Animal Science. 79(Suppl. 1):279. (Abstr.) Measurements Gentle Handling Aggressive Handling Lactic acid, mmol/L 4.0 a 25.2 b Fatigued pigs, % 0.0 a 20.4 b a,b,c Means with different superscripts differ

18. Handling Intensity Elanco Trial #AF7CA0101. Data on file.

19. Proper Handling Intensity It is essential to move pigs at a slow and calm pace If pigs are moving good on their own do not tap the pigs to encourage them to move faster Use a calm and steady voice or noise when moving pigs Yelling, shouting, and other load noises may frighten pigs and make them more difficult to handle Do not lose your cool when handling pigs If you become frustrated, take a deep breathe and count to ten

20. Electric Prod Use Moved pigs through a course with 3 different handling intensities: Gentle Moderate Intense Blood ParameterGentleModerateIntense Lactic acid, mmol/L7.58 a 13.38 b 18.83 c Blood pH7.29 a 7.17 b 7.09 b Base-excess, mmol/L3.67 a 0.80 a -12.00 b Bertol, T. M., M. Ellis, D. N. Hamilton, and F. McKeith. 2002. Effect of handling intensity on blood acid-base balance in slaughter pigs. Journal of Animal Science. 80(Suppl. 2):86. (Abstr.) a,b,c Means with different superscripts differ

21. Minimal Electric Prod Use? Elanco trial # T2F170606. Data on file.

22. Change in Use of Prods Electric prods were used extensively not very many years ago. Now, with the understanding of the metabolic consequences, many packers have totally forbidden the use of prods on their premises. Many producers have eliminated the use of prods for all hog handling in the production units even including loading of the hogs for market. Many truckers/transporters have also quit using prods totally or except in extreme circumstances.

23. Group Size Pigs that wedge or jam in the aisle during handling are more susceptible to becoming fatigued To minimize stress during loading, move pigs in small groups of 4 to 6 pigs Optimal group size is dependent upon: – Aisle width and pig weight – Need to be able to reach the first pig Anderson, D. B., D. J. Ivers, M. E. Benjamin, H. W. Gonyou, D. J. Jones, K. D. Miller, R. K. McGuffey, T. A. Armstrong, D. H. Mowrey, L. F. Richardson, R. Seneriz, J. R. Wagner, L. E. Watkins, and A. G. Zimmermann. 2002. Physiological responses of market hogs to different handling practices. Pages 399-400 in Proceedings of the American Association of Swine Veterinarians, Kansas City, MO.

24. Handling Summary The single most effective handling device is a sorting board The most effective place to tap a pig is on the back behind the point of balance Stress responses are minimized when pigs are: – Moved at a slow and calm pace – Moved in small groups – Moved with paddles or boards

25. Transport factors – Trailer design, mixing unfamiliar pigs, floor space on the trailer, transport time Plant factors – Waiting time to unload, lairage time Environmental conditions – Season, temperature, relative humidity Causes of Fatigued Pigs Ritter, M., M. Ellis, M. Benjamin, E. Berg, P. DuBois, J. Marchant-Forde, A. Green, P. Matzat, P. Mormede, T. Moyer, K. Pfalzgraf, M. Siemens, J. Sterle, T. Whiting, B. Wolter, and A. Johnson. 2005. The fatigued pig syndrome. Journal of Animal Science. 83(Suppl. 1):258. (Abstr.)

26. Transport Losses Multi-factorial Problem People Factors Handling Pig Factors Genetics Facility Design Factors Pre-sorting Transportation Factors Floor Space Plant Factors Wait at the Plant Environmental Factors Season Growers, loading crews, truck drivers, and handlers at the plant can impact transport losses! Ritter, M., M. Ellis, M. Benjamin, E. Berg, P. DuBois, J. Marchant-Forde, A. Green, P. Matzat, P. Mormede, T. Moyer, K. Pfalzgraf, M. Siemens, J. Sterle, T. Whiting, B. Wolter, and A. Johnson. 2005. The fatigued pig syndrome. Journal of Animal Science. 83(Suppl. 1):258. (Abstr.)

27. Free Monthly E-Newsletter To subscribe go to: www.hoghandlingupdate.comwww.hoghandlingupdate.com

28. Pig Transportation: Early 1900s Ensminger, M. E. 1952. Page 326 in Swine Husbandry. The Interstate Printers and Publishers, Danville, IL

29. Pig Transportation in the 1930s Smith, W. W. 1937. Pages 452 in Pork Production. The MacMillan Company, New York, NY.

30. Non-ambulatory Pigs at the Plant Ensminger, M. E. 1952. Page 334 in Swine Husbandry. The Interstate Printers and Publishers, Danville, IL

31. Questions? Comments?

32. TM A Big Thanks to Elanco for providing these slides!