Farm case study: PigSAFE

Below we hear from a farmer who has implemented the Piglet and Sow Alternative Farrowing Environment (PigSAFE) system on their 250-place sow breeding unit. They share economic, environmental and management details, as well as the views from the stockpeople working on the unit.

The family-run farm began in 1989, developing over time to expand onto an additional site in 2010, now housing a 250-sow herd.

They have always maintained high welfare standards on the farm, with the full-confinement system having solid flooring so that straw can be provided during the farrowing period.

In 2010, a retailer group was looking for a farm to undertake a Defra-funded project to explore whether the free farrowing system PigSAFE, developed by Scotland's Rural College (SRUC) and Newcastle University, was suitable and viable on a commercial pig farm.

The farmer saw this opportunity as a natural progression for their breeding units and worked in collaboration to build a 20-place PigSAFE system.

Then, in 2015, the business received grant funding from Defra’s Rural Development Programme for England (RDPE) and a retailer scheme to install 60 free farrowing pens on one of their newer breeding sites.

The project provided a varied premium via RSPCA Assured, starting at 15p/kg which rapidly reduced to 8p/kg, then another further reduction

Since this report was written, the farm has invested in two additional temporary flexible farrowing houses, offering self-designed pens of 8.9 m², in the hope to future-proof for any future guidelines on farrowing housing systems.

The farm find the pens to be a good size. The flexible system provides improved KPIs than of the free farrowing houses in preweaning mortality and weaning weight; with the ability to keep the milk cups cleaner.

The management of the new houses is in line with other early adopters, with the sow confined for a few days after farrowing before being released into her pen.

Table 1. Farm performance data 2021

¹Farm data from 2021

²AHDB pig performance trends 2021 (produced 2022)

³No milk cups

⁴Milk cups installed

Table 2. Overall mortality breakdown in 2021 for first four days of life in PigSAFE system

1. Entry to farrowing pen: Acclimatised 4–5 days pre-farrowing
2. Farrowing period: Sows have unrestricted movement, allowing natural farrowing behaviour
3. Post-farrowing: Sow movement remains unrestricted
4. Day four post-farrowing: Piglet mortality is recorded pre- and post-vaccination

Farrowing takes place in five-week batches with two six-week batches per year.

Sows are introduced to the PigSAFE system four to five days prior to farrowing to acclimatise.

Gilts and sows are interchanged between full confinement and the PigSAFE system as and when they need replacements.

The farm owner said:

“When we started, sows were being moved between both systems and were interchanged successfully.

"The same sow behaved completely differently in the standard crate compared with the free farrowing pen, but they do adjust well in minimal time.

"However, gilts that farrowed in the PigSAFE system and that were subsequently moved to the conventional system were difficult to get into the full confinement system and settle.

"Therefore, we no longer interchange systems, but they are introduced to and remain within the same housing system.”

There was a clear difference between sows’ behaviour when farrowing in a free farrowing system versus a conventional confined system.

“Sows are more motherly in the PigSAFE system than in the crates – they are very quiet and more relaxed.”

The farmer did not have to change genetics to select for improved temperament; however, he did change the genetics across the whole herd to improve milk production.

This helped to combat some of the drawbacks with the system design and pen size of 8.51 m², with 19.7% of mortality happening at four days old or younger due to starvation.

Mortality due to starvation is monitored within the PigSAFE pens, along with ensuring good sow condition.

More recently, piglets receive supplementary feed by milk cups, which has benefited piglet survival and health, “although milk cups are difficult to keep clean due to the straw”.

The farm is pleased to see pre-wean mortality has also improved since the report was written.

“Sow feed intake and condition are not an issue as we have found the sows are fitter and eat more in the PigSAFE pens compared with the conventional crates.”

Sows are wet fed at certain times of the day via a computerised system.

Straw is provided upon entry to the farrowing house so that sows can begin nest building behaviour.

“We see little difference in stress levels between the units. The sows actively nest build, and we believe straw and nesting play a part in reducing stresses in all our systems.”

Straw is cleared and replenished daily; however, it does cause some issues with a build-up of substrate within the slurry pits, which can result in blockages.

“Looking back, we shouldn’t have put a scraper system under the slats as the straw causes too many blockages and you can’t clean it very well.

"This results in remnants of straw and a build-up of dirt, and we do get concerned about bacteria thriving here. Ideally, we would make the outer area of the pen solid.”

To combat this, the farm has since built two flexible farrowing systems on a fully slatted floor with a preference to proving paper as nesting material.

In 2013, the cost to install the PigSAFE system, inclusive of pen and building costs, was £7,200 per pig place.

“The total cost of the 60 places was around £432,000, with the retailer group contributing £40,000 and the RDPE grant contributing between £35,000 and £40,000.

"It would not have been financially possible to install this type of system without the grant and the additional premium.

“Ideally, to continue to farrow in a flexible farrowing system, a premium would need to be reinstated. It’s not financially viable without it, and we’re losing money.

“There are increased production costs for a flexible farrowing system compared with, for example, temporary confinement systems, due to the additional straw and labour and increased mortality rates.”

The largest cause of pre-weaning mortality on this farm was overlays, at 64.2%; this is a result of the increased movement capability of the sow.

The PigSAFE pen is designed to reduce overlays with sloping boards, bars on the creep and a large creep area with pop holes in the back wall that act as escape route for piglets.

However, the data from this trial indicates that losses through overlays are still the main cause of pre-weaning mortality.

Another key consideration is the climatic conditions in farrowing rooms, which require attention.

“The sow laying pattern is particularly difficult to control during the summer heat and 19.7% of pre-weaning mortality is due to starvation.

“The large pen area increases the risk of a piglet being too far away from the sow to suckle, resulting in starvation over a period of time.”

Poor milk production was highlighted and rectified early on in the trial with improved genetic selection across the herd.

Other causes of loss during the early stages were small piglets (11.4%).

Mortality from starvation or small piglets could be a combination of low viability from birth and poor milk intake, with the farm’s policy of keeping all ‘smalls’.

There was no sow savaging during this trial.

There were noticeable improvements to sow fertility, fitness and condition, with calmer-natured sows displaying more maternal behaviour, suggesting higher standards of indoor welfare.

However, the producer said:

“There is no financial benefit for the business, and it has been financial suicide since 2018. Our premium was reduced to 3p in 2018 and remained at that level until it was removed completely in May 2019.

“We have tried to find other retailers who would take our pigs for a premium, who seemed to appreciate the concept but who favour outdoor-born pigs for a premium price.

“Mortality in this system is higher, and we need more man hours and straw. To continue to use the PigSAFE farrowing system, we would need a higher level of financial return of at least 15p/kg.”

Despite there being no initial hesitation among stockpeople when the flexible farrowing system was suggested, all stockpeople do still prefer working with the full-confinement system.

Speaking about the conventional system, one stockperson commented:

“It’s easier to manage, its more practical, it’s easy to provide good husbandry and achieve good results, and I think sows are just as happy in the crate.”

With few commercial users of the PigSAFE farrowing system, staff and owners had to learn on the job how best to operate this system.

However, they could have benefited from some formal training with regard to the behaviour of the sows, for example:

• The importance of a good awareness of the sows’ behaviour
• How sows react at different stages
• The best way to move and handle sows in different types of pen
• How to prevent overlays

Acknowledging the increased risk of staff injury with this system, the farm owner said:

“I do worry about the risks because sow handling certainly changes when working with flexible farrowing systems.

“To prevent overstimulation of sows and litters during piglet handing, additional care and attention to handling techniques are used to reduce piglet vocalisation, which would otherwise stress sows and increase the risk of staff getting bitten.

“It also reduces stress and movement after vaccinating; we previously found this activity resulted in a spike in mortality rates, specifically caused by laying on piglets.”

Finding the root cause to why a sow has laid on multiple piglets and managing this is key.

“We notice the age, condition and lethargy of the sow can contribute to her laying on piglets. We also regularly check for signs of mastitis or litter rejection.

"If it’s an older sow, we reduce the litter, foster and replace with calmer piglets, or try to find some other (e.g. bigger) piglets she may be happier with."

Initial investigations to view the system in practice were held at SRUC.

Some aspects were reviewed and adapted for this commercial unit, such as changing the SRUC model, which was set up for dry feed, to accommodate wet feed. The creep space was also increased.

The PigSAFE system has produced weaned pigs 1.4 kg heavier than from the full confinement system, possibly because piglets remain with the sow on average three days longer and are provided with supplementary milk.

However, the PigSAFE system has increased the piglet mortality rate by 6.1% in comparison to the full confinement system; this is predominately a result of increased overlays and starvation.

“The PigSAFE system requires more attention to detail, such as reading the sows’ behaviour, alerting her of our intended movements and changing how we handle the sows to ensure they are calm and not stressed.

“The lack of restraint can be a worry when dealing with aggressive or defensive sows.

"We often have to use the gate in the pen to momentarily confine the sow while working with the piglets, and we ensure a stock board is always to hand.”

There are ambitions to wean at least 13 piglets per litter, decrease mortality to 14% at most and continue to improve milk production.

There are concerns among the group of early adopters of adaptive farrowing in the UK that their systems and specifications may not meet the requirements of any new legislation and that costly alterations might be required.

However, this farm is confident that their free farrowing site will remain compliant.

Despite this, the farmer is concerned about investing and replacing the pens on his other farm, which has a more standard farrowing set-up.

“We would like to just replace like for like, keeping the full confinement system, as we are unhappy about losing the premium.

"The cost of the free farrowing system has been phenomenal. With the premium, it was economically viable, but without it, it is financial suicide.

"We would need to receive a 15p/kg premium to make the business viable again.”