Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture

Expanding the options for livestock producers

Back to Leopold Letter Fall 2007

By ANNE LARSON, special to the Leopold Center

The pace of change in Iowa agriculture has been dizzying in the past two decades, and nowhere more than in the livestock industry. Who produces and where livestock is raised have changed the Iowa landscape dramatically, concentrating thousands of pigs in confinement buildings in a handful of counties where herds of a couple hundred hogs once were distributed throughout all 99 Iowa counties.

Thanks to work made possible by the Leopold Center, however, the rural landscape continues to offer some options for livestock producers in the form of lower cost hoop house barns, alternative farrowing practices and more profitable niche markets for pork and grass-based systems.

In the realm of beef production, new efforts are underway that keep cattle in deep-bedded hoop barns to reduce the potential for manure runoff, addressing critical environmental concerns. Grass-based grazing and winter stockpiling of forage also have been a focus as researchers have been able to demonstrate profitable choices for raising beef. Similar opportunities exist in grass-based dairy operations.

Mark Honeyman, Iowa State University animal science professor and Research Farms coordinator, believes the Leopold Center has been a crucial catalyst in the options that have been developed for Iowa livestock producers. “None of this would have been possible with not only the funding support but also the ethical and philosophical leadership of the Leopold Center,” Honeyman comments. “The Leopold Center has been an incubator for turning ideas into viable alternatives in Iowa.”

Initiatives such as the original “Hoop Group,” developing alternative swine production systems in hooped structures; “Hoop Group II,” which is fine-tuning production of beef and dairy cattle in hoops; and grass-based beef cattle work done by Jim Russell and John Sellers are just some of the products of that incubator. A brief survey of these efforts shows the impact that alternative production systems have for Iowa agriculture and the citizens of Iowa.

Swine systems develop
In a span of 25 years – from 1978 to 2002 – Honeyman and Mike Duffy, ISU economist and former Center associate director, documented the 83 percent reduction in the number of Iowa farms raising pigs while pig numbers increased. Duffy, who often refers to swine production’s former status as “mortgage lifters,” and Honeyman have described the rapid changes in swine production over a quarter century in research appearing in numerous agricultural publications. They recount the early 1990s when industrialization of the swine industry became widespread and 1997 and 1998, when hog prices plummeted to historic lows.

Once considered a reliable and profitable mainstay of a farm operation, Iowa producers exited hog production in droves. There seemed to be few options other than entering into contract agreements with major pork corporations. In this milieu, Honeyman, Duffy, and others at Iowa State began exploring systems devised in Canada and Sweden using deep bedding and group housing of swine.

In 1997, the Leopold Center formed the "Hoop Group," a team of researchers focused on alternative swine production systems using deep bedding. The group generated more than $400,000 in funding, involving nine scientists and several extension staff. The group was awarded the ISU College of Agriculture Team Award in 2002.

Outreach in the form of conferences and publications spurred rapid adoption of the hooped barns for pig production. Honeyman says that since 1996, approximately 800 Iowa farmers have constructed more than 2,500 hoop structures for pigs, with the potential to produce 1 million hogs annually. Three conferences on alternative swine systems held in 1996, 1999 and 2004 attracted large and diverse audiences.

Use of the hoops is now gaining additional attention as major pork corporations and fast food chains have pushed for a phase-out of individual stalls for gestating sows, opting for group housing as a more humane form of most production. The Hoop Group’s research indicates that using group housing for sows is viable, in terms of both performance and economics. They found that sows in the hoop barns gave birth to more live pigs per litter than sows gestated in confinement stalls, and the group housing of gestating sows resulted in 11 percent lower weaned pig costs than that of the individual stall system. Work continues in fine-tuning alternative methods to meet gestating sow needs.

In 2004, the Leopold Center began supporting efforts to investigate the use of hoops for other livestock enterprises including beef cattle production. As a director's special project, the Leopold Center provided a grant to help construct a hoop barn at the ISU Armstrong Research Farm.

In a span of 15 years, Leopold Center-supported work on livestock alternatives resulted in nearly 100 extension publications, more than 50 presentations and papers, 30 abstracts, 20 scientific peer-reviewed journal articles and thousands of field day and conference attendees.

Pork finds its niche
Honeyman believes that ISU's hoop work laid the foundation for niche pork production, which likewise has blossomed nationally with Iowa as the focal point. That's where the Pork Niche Market Working Group (PNMWG) comes in. The group is a part of the Value Chain Partnerships for a Sustainable Agriculture project led by the Leopold Center.

Coordinated by Gary Huber of Practical Farmers of Iowa (PFI), the effort was created in 2002, in part an outgrowth of a September 2001 conference on niche markets convened by the Leopold Center and the Iowa Pork Industry Center. Through initial funding from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, work has continued to capitalize on opportunities for niche markets. The PNMWG works with more than 30 organizations and agencies and serves as a forum for exchanging information and sponsoring research and development projects addressing challenges in the niche pork supply chains.

Niche markets in the pork industry can be characterized by unique qualities such as breed specific attributes (e.g., Berskshire, Duroc and other heritage breeds); distinctive programs including no antibiotics, prohibition of animal by-products in feed, and food safety assurances through traceability programs; and those with practices such as being raised on family farms or adhering to environmentally friendly production techniques.

Huber notes that some PFI farmers were expressing interest in these systems in the mid- to late 1990s. Niman Ranch and Eden Natural were among the first niche operations, and the number of niche pork companies in Iowa has multiplied to nearly 40. The impact is considerable – Niman Ranch, for instance, works with more than 400 producers in Iowa and neighboring states. Nationally, the U.S. pork niche market has blossomed, now producing 500,000 to 750,000 pigs annually with Iowa at the center of production.

Huber says companies involved in PNMWG are still looking for producers who can meet the demand from food service and retail outlets for differentiated pork products. Research has been conducted and Huber says new information will be rolled out in coming months to provide outreach and educational opportunities for producers. “We need to be able to grow the number of farms and supply from both new and existing farmers,” he explains. “We hope that the niches may be attractive for small producers as well as those wanting to return to farming with less risk in terms of capital,” Huber adds.

The planned workshops will focus on areas in which research has shown niche farmers can do better:

  • reproduction management,
  • keeping pigs alive birth through weaning, and
  • managing operating costs (such as feed).

Huber feels that the collaboration created by PNMWG has been very productive. “A fair amount of trust has been built between the companies involved, helping them to look at one another as potential partners rather than competitors,” he comments. Huber cites a recent case where two Iowa niche companies collaborated by sharing transportation to markets on the west coast.

The challenges for niche markets will continue to change as time goes on, and Huber feels the working group will help address the new challenges that arise. For instance, the recent rise in corn prices has a significant effect when 80 percent of niche pork rations depend on corn. “Good management can help producers ride through these ongoing challenges,” Huber says.

A study released early this year identifies areas where Iowa niche pork companies may be able to collaborate to further meet the challenges ahead. Among the top areas identified are carcass utilization, less than full-load transportation, sourcing and procurement of live hogs, market intelligence/competitor information, and coordinated market access to larger markets.

With the continued innovation of Iowa livestock producers and the support of organizations such as the Leopold Center, PFI and ISU Extension, producers have the potential to continue Iowa’s historic leadership in the livestock industry.

Other efforts boost production potential

The introduction of hoop structures and cultivation of niche markets have been important developments in the Leopold Center’s support of animal agriculture, but other efforts have been underway that offer promise for keeping sustainability in the livestock production picture.

Jim Russell, ISU department of animal science, has partnered with the Leopold Center on countless projects over the Center’s history. From 1990 to 2002, Russell led the Center’s interdisciplinary Animal Management Issue team, coordinating research that involved scientists, farmers and conservationists in developing and demonstrating profitable forage-based beef production systems that sustain or enhance environmental quality.

Among the team’s efforts were evaluation of summer systems that use legume forage species and intensive rotational grazing to optimize animal production, thus reducing inputs for fertilizer and herbicides, and evaluation of winter systems that reduce costs toward stored feeds by extending the grazing season with stock-piled hay crop forages, corn crop residues, and small grain cover crops.

More recently, Russell has been coordinating multi-year work evaluating grazing cattle and water quality. One of the projects involves use of stream crossing technology to reduce environmental impact.

Jeri Neal, leader of the Center’s Ecology Initiative, is collaborating with John Sellers, Jr. of Corydon on a Grassland Agriculture program aimed at addressing barriers to development of grass-based systems in Iowa agriculture. Potential benefits to the development of such systems include improved income opportunities, restored wildlife habitat, hunting, erosion and flood control, renewable energy, groundwater recharge and carbon sequestration.

In November 2004, the Center and its Grassland Advisory Committee selected Sellers to coordinate activities that will identify and support development of new opportunities for Iowa grass agriculture farmers. Among the projects currently underway: delivery systems for distillers grains in forage beef systems, breeding forage and biomass corps, grazing to retain southern Iowa grasslands, grazing/fire for grassland reserve management, nitrogen uptake in native grassland species, birds in rotationally grazed warm and cool season grasses, quantifying the role of riparian management to control nonpoint source pollution of pasture and cropland streams, forage double-cropping demonstration and leafy spurge biocontrol.

Competitive grants. The Leopold Center also has sought special projects that focus on livestock issues. In 2007, three competitive grants were awarded as part of a special focus on grass-based dairy systems. A similar call for preproposals that would set up a grass-based livestock systems work team was issued in the latest RFP. The Center expects to fund at least one work team in this area beginning in 2008.

New alternative swine handbook available

A new guide, Managing for Herd Health in Alternative Swine Systems, draws on the knowledge of veterinarians and experienced producers who are successfully working in alternative production systems. The guide balances veterinary science and practical management tips with real-world examples and producer profiles. Chapters cover biosecurity, pig flow, breeding, farrowing, diagnostics, vaccinations and other references.

Production of the 50-page guide was supported by a major grant from the USDA's Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) program and funds raised by the Value Chain Partnerships project led by the Leopold Center and the Pork Niche Market Working Group.

ISU faculty and staff also are working on a Niche Pork Production handbook on managing specifically for production, which is not covered in detail in the herd health guide.

The herd health guide is available from PFI and the Leopold Center, or can be downloaded from the web at: www.pfi.iastate.edu/pigs.htm.

 

Back to Leopold Letter Fall 2007